Thanks for the response, I think the echo-chamber idea is a bit like a safety blanket. We surround ourselves with agreeing opinions often because we feel safe in ourselves and in our ideas when we're not challenged. We all on some level or another want to feel safe and so it is easy to find you build up those agreeing arguments and look to them for comfort when challenged. There is also and algorithmic side to it where platforms will tailor the user experience to you interactions, so because we like/comment/view certain content the algorithm will consider into the model when determining how to set up our feed. The down side is that it can artificially create an echo chamber even though we're not looking for one.
I complete agree it seems odd to not want to be challenged, but then is it not also odd to always want to be challenged? I think the real art is in viewing content/opinions/ideas and having the introspection to be able to ask yourself 'why you agree/disagree with the content'. Self reflection should help us to determine if our initial reactions are justified and also what they are based on.
My pleasure. And I agree with your theory here, it's very likely to do with perceived safety.
Ultimately, ideas can't hurt people, so the more ideas the better. More ideas = more info = more perspectives = better informed choices... the 'safest move' is to gain as much perspective as possible, and use introspection to navigate those well... not run and hide from them.
Thanks again! 😁