we breathe critique and we're so bad at it

Meta-criticism is the way to go in ensuring that your critical thinking skills in this age of AI does not lose its luster. We have this truly astounding amount of data available in our grasp, in our phones, and they begin to look like we are naturally feeding off this similar trash that the algorithm forces down our throats. We like it and we yearn for it. We crave information regardless of its value. Just information is enough. Let me have it because I want to know. I do not need to understand. I just need to know.

This transition from desire to a false need is also the beginning of being desensitized by the type of value that we are looking for. And a lot of the times, we are always trying to critique an incomplete set of information: gossip, an ongoing celebrity trial, a feud that originated in a social media platform, a tragic accident, and the list goes on about the trivial things that we choose to care about in this age of a false perception of a voice, brought by one's own sense of self-importance.

At this point, an opinion is almost always labeled as a "critique." Not accepting an opinion becomes not accepting this "critique." Nowadays, everyone just assumes that everyone is expressing a point that should be taken seriously. It does not operate on the very basis and foundational function of critique, which is a rigorous synthesis and elevated understanding of an issue that can raise the discourse at a level that would allow us to gain a better perspective. Every critique these days (which are masked opinions) are half-baked thoughts and it seems like no one is willing to admit it.

The only way we can rise above this scenario is to become more so discerning and double our efforts in outlining our own thoughts online. I have been attempting to brainstorm a way to communicate in such a way that allows the other to have a clear understanding that their point is also echoed in mine. It is a kind of assimilation of ideas, that does not shy away from understanding the perspective of the other because of the fact that it is the very thing that furthers the divide of online community right now. Meta-criticism follows this same pattern of merging two seemingly unconsolidated bubbles of thought into a one cohesive, two sides of the same truth as a unifying tool for communication. Common ground will become a point of departure that would allow two disparate lines of thought to be framed into a single argument of the same thing. This is what we need right now to break the echo chambers and cut through the invasive and insidious desire for clout and attention.