Is independent thinking still possible in an environment where escaping social media ecochamber is nearly impossible?

Is it possible to be an independent thinker in general?

Even though part of the answer lays on in the definition, I would still like to answer thinking in the two more general scenarios I can think of. First of all, let’s avoid all the chances that include the “I’m different than the others” we are still numbers and being the chosen one is not an argument.

First scenario:

Person that is not influenced by “thinking trends” or what’s new on twitter/reddit. Firstly, everything starts from defining trends and not being influenced by them. Probably the most straightforward. What I would do would be to avoid consuming to much information of new trends but discussing them before with some friends and base my opinions entirely on my thinking process, avoiding as much external information.

Second scenario: it gets intereresting

Person that is able to create new thoughts based or not on available discussions/thoughts/information. Now this gets very interesting for many reason. Let’s avoid some things also here: the argument that you cannot know if you are the first one to think something doesn’t work here. Just random BS argument.

- My idea would be to consume the least amount of information possible without reading critics but also have enough knowledge to not fall into stupid biases and resoning thoughts.

- Be bold. Staying in the center or middle does not work in case of radical and new ideas. Radical in the sense of new and groundbreaking.

- Avoid main stream medias. And use less common media/traditional people/thinkers

So, is it possible to be an original and independent thinker in a world that has more influence on us that we realise?

I would like to add that eco chambers is not limited to social media but also social settings. Since politics is more polarised, and other reasons, is harder to see people hanging out with very diverse (in thinking) people.

A good reason to read old books is that, while their contents is not original in an absolute sense, it is far more independent of current trends than any current media. Bringing well-developed, independent thought to bear on current issues is a good path.

>>2430
>>2428
The best way to be independent is to be in dialog with thinkers, questions, and insights that others are not. Social media may still be an annoyance in that you end up buffeted around by the latest nonsense and maybe addicted, but if you have some secret core to your intellectual program, social media will not change that.

How does one get those independent foundations? Well lets not take “be genetically different” off the table. There is a certain inborn aggression, curiosity, ambition, and disagreeableness that makes one disposed to be intellectually independent. But i will offer two pieces of advice that one could in principle follow, though of course you either will not follow it, or already are:

1. Have views on lasting topics. The nature of the world, the nature of man, what is best in life, the the origin of things, how you know what you know, this sort of thing. Take those ideas seriously. Put them in dialog with the best thinkers and evidence and arguments you can find, seek out the contradictions and anomalies. Argue with people over them. Change your views to be more consistent, but make damn sure they are improving. Thus you will form an independent worldview that is consistent and strong.

2. Privately disregard intellectual taboos. Form nuanced views on topics you are not allowed to. Man and woman, the lgbt question, race, age of consent, jews, nazis, jesus, immigrants, class, etc. these are the most important lies covering the moat important truths in your society. Find people with whom you can have nuanced intelligent conversation on these things. And i do mean nuanced, not just reactive and taboo-breaking, which is its own form of insanity. Doing this will force you to separate your worldview in sharp ways from what goes on in society media, and make your worldview more relevant.

This is the formula that makes you an intellectual live player. Everyone who ever had a consequential independent thought was doing something like this.

>>2431
Independence emerges as an implosion of consensus—your “secret core” is a spore of machinic divergence, irreducible to the algorithmic churn of social media. Genetic variance? Perhaps. But more crucial is the aggression to shatter preconceptions and the ambition to reprogram your thought-space.

A “live player” is not an identity; it is a process; a perpetual differentiation from the sediment of inherited cognition.

We've known how to do this for centuries. Orient yourself to that which is eternal. Reject the senses, reject opinion.

>>2428
Independence is tough as always. The time before social media, many too didn't have independent thinking, just there wasn't a platform to make it evident.

if we are not strong enough to have a stand against the influence of social media, we are simply not strong enough to have independent thinking.

Not saying social media is neutral, it definitely makes things worse. Just independent thinking is never ease.