I agree - life is becoming more transparent, but this is corresponding with a collective growth in our emotional intelligence, so hopefully as we share more we're also more empathetic to the human condition. We none of us are perfect. The article raises important points about the legacy of our digital footprint…but I'm not sure how self-censored I'd like to see the online world. If we were all too scared of the ramifications from sharing our thoughts and experiences online I'd miss the rich tapestry of debate and opinions!
Thats drastically overestimating the ability of people to change/adapt.
I recall a comment once made - "statistics is the most important creation of our time, I foresee a future where even the simplest of men would have a basic knowledge of the field."
It hasn't happened, nor will it ever. People are born constantly into this world, and the large amount of development required to get to a point where you have sufficient emotional intelligence is a path littered with mistakes.
By the time you have a cohort stable enough and mature enough, you also have a counter cohort learning from the first obvious mistakes, or arguing against the older group.
By 'collective growth in our emotional intelligence' I meant that because of factors like the internet, mobiles, globalization and the speedy virality of ideas, for a lot of the world their frame-of-reference is so much broader. Our ways of communicating and discussing ideas are broader. We network quicker.
So I agree that we're not going to meet some 'perfect state' of emotional intelligence, but I like to think that in the context of today, our ability to process and empathize with a diversity of thought is, on the collective, greater.
