- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 49,614
- Reaction score
- 55,243
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
I just watched an interview of the kid who has become the face of the Florida school shooting and was struck bu a couple of things. First, he used quite a bit of profanity. I chalk that up to youth. We used quite a bit of profanity back in the day too. Granted, we didn't (as a rule) use it in interviews but it was something we used for shock value.
The other thing I noticed, and this was most striking, was an emphasis on the results of social media feedback. He specifically noted that he didn't care what people said about him because hit Twitter (or other social media) following had increased so much. Is this really something that kids track? Do kids know how many "followers" other kids have? I almost got the impression that, for these kids, social media presence was a primary, rather than a secondary or tertiary, feedback mechanism. Am I wrong in this?
For those that are teens/early twenties and those that have kids that age, what's your take on this? Does one's social media presence influence how much credibility they are perceived to have? Is a larger social media following more likely or less likely to lead to one's ideas being questioned?
The last thing I noticed was the kid's citing of "critical thinking" but I'm not sure he was using that term to mean what I was taught it meant. When I was in school we were taught that "critical thinking" was the ability to look at a concept from multiple perspectives and analyze those views from the standpoint of them being valid. We were taught to test those theories and discover what parts of them, if any, stood up to the test. What I heard this kid say, and I may be mistaken, is that "critical thinking" is a matter of being able to invalidate concepts that stand in opposition to your own. Am I interpreting his words incorrectly and, if not, how prevalent is that understanding of "critical thinking"?
For reference, this article contains the video I'm referring to. - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/03/23/david_hogg_our_parents_dont_know_how_to_use_a_fcking_democracy_so_we_have_to.html
The other thing I noticed, and this was most striking, was an emphasis on the results of social media feedback. He specifically noted that he didn't care what people said about him because hit Twitter (or other social media) following had increased so much. Is this really something that kids track? Do kids know how many "followers" other kids have? I almost got the impression that, for these kids, social media presence was a primary, rather than a secondary or tertiary, feedback mechanism. Am I wrong in this?
For those that are teens/early twenties and those that have kids that age, what's your take on this? Does one's social media presence influence how much credibility they are perceived to have? Is a larger social media following more likely or less likely to lead to one's ideas being questioned?
The last thing I noticed was the kid's citing of "critical thinking" but I'm not sure he was using that term to mean what I was taught it meant. When I was in school we were taught that "critical thinking" was the ability to look at a concept from multiple perspectives and analyze those views from the standpoint of them being valid. We were taught to test those theories and discover what parts of them, if any, stood up to the test. What I heard this kid say, and I may be mistaken, is that "critical thinking" is a matter of being able to invalidate concepts that stand in opposition to your own. Am I interpreting his words incorrectly and, if not, how prevalent is that understanding of "critical thinking"?
For reference, this article contains the video I'm referring to. - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/03/23/david_hogg_our_parents_dont_know_how_to_use_a_fcking_democracy_so_we_have_to.html
