Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
It’s worth noting that illiteracy isn’t simply a pass/fail test that depends on if you can read individual words. Literacy is largely determined by critical thinking skills and the ability to intuit things that aren’t directly stated.
For a good example, a large part of higher literacy is based on being able to see a piece of work, (a news article, video, book, song, etc.), and identify who the intended target audience is. Usually, the answer is not “me”. But I mention this specific example because people have become accustomed to laser-focused algorithms that only show content that is directly relevant to themselves. TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, etc all have finely crafted algorithms that are designed to keep you engaged. And they do so by serving content that is directly aimed at you.
As algorithmic media feeds have become more common, people have literally lost the ability to identify when something is not meant for them. People used to see an irrelevant piece of media, and they would just go “oh it’s not for me” and move on. But now they tend to be surprised that they’re seeing the media, and they tend to get angry when something doesn’t directly confirm their lived experience. And they tend to take it out on the creators. We have literally seen content creators start changing the way they make their media, to avoid people getting angry when something isn’t directly relevant to themselves.
For instance, maybe I make a TikTok about the proper way to throw a football. Pretty basic stuff, right? Previously, if I left it at that, anyone who wasn’t interested in throwing a football would just move on. But now, I’d inevitably get angry comments about “but I’m in a wheelchair, what about me”, “why is this on my feed, I hate football”, “I have a torn rotator cuff, why are you excluding me” types of comments.
Now, content creators literally add disclaimers in their content, to directly state who the intended audience is. To go back to that same example, I’d probably have step 0 of the tutorial be something along the lines of “okay so this is obviously just for the people looking to check their throwing form. If you don’t like football, can’t throw a ball, or have some sort of disability that stops you from doing so, you can obviously move on.” Because if I don’t have that disclaimer somewhere near the start, I’ll inevitably get some angry comments. And those comments are being left by functionally illiterate people, who have lost (or never had) the ability to determine an intended audience.
Yeah. Thanks for this comment. This is true, insane, and the problem on so many ways.
I get so many 'drive bys' on my comments these days form angry miserable people who can't understand what I'm saying and are offended by it, or offended on behalf of someone else. Being offended by things not intended for them, not talking about them, or do them, is a badge of moral righteousness these days for many people.
In real life I'm also seeing this bleed into people approaching me to tell me how stupid I am for reading in public and/or the book that I'm reading is insulting to them how dare I be in their visual field!
It's insane.
Agreed. The person who was talking about it referenced media literacy and being able to discern valid sources from, effectively, propaganda.
Critical thinking skills were more to the point of the "functional illiteracy" label.
And god damn that example hits home because the worst of social media posts are exactly that. The Reddit "um akshually" guy who wonders why a simple statement post doesn't include every possible extrapolation because it has to be a one-upmanship game instead of a clarifying question.
Critical thinking skills aren't completely dead in America, but they are on life support and I'm not sure it'll survive.
Our university system is hell bent on eradicating it the past few decades. It used to teach them.
Now critical thinking is considered dangerous and offensive and harmful, and the students who are suppose to be learning it, are opposed to it because it 'hurts' them to have their raw emotional pre-conceptions about things challenged.
Anti-intellectualism has always existed in the US but I'll take your word about universities since I haven't been in one since the 90s.
But honestly kids back then weren't much better.
There has been a major cultural shift in the past decade, starting in the early 2010s towards creating 'safe spaces' at universities, and students refusing to learn critical thinking skills and replacing them with quasi religious dogma, of a leftist political bent often. It is very new that this type of thing is going on at universities.
Relatedly, grade inflation is also rampant again. 60% of Harvard undergrads get straight As last year. in 2005, 25% of of them did. Failing or getting bad grades is basically impossible at universities these days unless you are deliberately negligent. Showing up and making minimal effort usually gets you a B or higher. Because being lazy and getting a C would 'traumatize' a student these days, so it's not allowed.
There are some great books about it. Coddling of the American mind is probably the most popular.
Also students don't study anymore. Average study time is like a dozen hours a week now. It used to be 30+ 2-3 decades ago.