One thing that is getting really painful for me as I spend my time chronically online is the inability, or refusal of people to think for themselves. PAUSE! Did you just feel a rush of indignation as you read that line? Did you feel as if I was speaking to you directly? Attacking you and your entire livelihood with a sentence?

If you didn’t, great, I hope you enjoy this post.

If you did, then you have just proved my point! Thank you and read on.

Of course, as this is the no-nuance net (as I have so annoyingly lovingly dubbed it!), I must preface this article with several disclaimers. Those are as follows:

• This blog post is not meant to attack anyone. I cannot help it if you do feel attacked, but I hope that you would read through and learn something.
• This purpose of this post is to observe a phenomenon I see a lot of online and examine why it exists.
• I want to help people to think more creatively, curiously, and compassionately so you can navigate online situations more effectively.

Great? Great, let’s begin.

This ‘phenomenon’ specifically relates to people who for whatever reason, do not think things through before they comment, post, or ask questions. By ‘thinking things through’, I mean this: thinking about what the consequences or results might be for their actions. If you comment something, you must think about how others might perceive it, and what positivity or damage you might be spreading. It is as simple as that, and yet…

Look, it sounds kind of vague because it is hard to articulate this broad activity in such a succinct way. It is also complicated by the fact that it is difficult to glean almost anything from people when all I can see is their profile picture and user handle, with little indication about their life experiences, expertise, mental state and so forth.

The internet is a great democratiser in that sense, but this loss of individual personable-ness is part of the problem. People who can ‘hide behind their screens’ are not held accountable for their actions as they would be in a face-to-face situation. In these in-person interactions, one can immediately sense how their words are received and may understand that an opinion is not as welcome or ‘correct’ as they first thought. This is crucial to our development and growth as people, but that ability to get instant feedback on our actions is getting lost.

Further, as one can only see minimal details, it becomes difficult to recognise whether you are interacting with people in your demographic. As a book lover and bookish creator on Instagram, I am often interacting with people from a range of places, ages, and backgrounds. There have been times when a user has commented an opinion that I found juvenile or unfounded. As a person who prides herself on being intelligent, I often want to engage in these more nuanced discussions, and I enjoy helping others to see reason. However! A quick click on their profile reveals that the person is thirteen years old. (Side note: do not post details like this online please for the love of God).

I can always go ahead and tear apart their opinion if I want to be completely awful, or I can politely suggest that I disagree and leave it at that. They do not need some random woman on the internet ruining their confidence and halting their own growth. People need to have the time and space to develop, they need to be able to make mistakes and not be crucified for it.

However, I want to give you some simple tools that I believe will really help us all to have better discussions and interactions online. We’ll start with an example before I tell you the two methods and show you how they are practised.

‘House of the Dragon’ Example

One recent example of people not thinking ahead for themselves is from House of the Dragon Episode 3. If you aren’t a fan of the show, no worries, you will still be able to understand!

So, the character Baela spots one of her enemies (Criston Cole) on the ground below her while riding her fire-breathing dragon. Now before you immediately wonder why she shouldn’t burn them to an utter crisp, let me give you some more information!

• First, they are at the beginning of a civil war. Baela is part of the ‘Blacks’ led by her step-mother Queen Rhaenyra, who has been usurped by the ‘Greens’ led by her half-brother King Aegon.
• Second, Baela was sent to scout around and told NOT to engage directly by her Queen.
• Third, this is not the modern day where heroines do whatever they want. She is not in any position to disobey her queen because she is loyal and because Queen Rhaenyra’s position is already threatened – she should not undermine her anymore
• Fourth, as this is a TV show, we cannot forget the other important bits of information we have seen or heard and they are as follows:
  • ‘I would remind you only that when princes lose their temper, it is often others who suffer. ****The smallfolk, like me,’ and, ‘When dragons flew to war, everything burned.’ These are important themes to consider throughout the show.
• Fifth, Cole is running to hide in a huge forest that likely connects to other nearby farmlands and the small folk (regular people).

NOW, let’s play the game! Take three steps, simple as that. Think of these as thought exercises for you to grow your own ability to think for yourself! There are two ways you can do this, first is to do the ‘3-scenario outcomes’: best-case, worst-case and neutral-case scenarios. The second is the ‘3-steps further’ exercise.

3-scenario outcomes

Best-case scenario is exactly what it sounds like: what is one of the best outcomes that we could have here? Remember, this is based solely on what you (or the character) can actually do. You can consider other factors, but remember that these are out of your control.

Worst-case scenario is also similar: what is one of the worst outcomes that could occur? If you take an action, what might be the most catastrophic end?

Neutral-case scenario is about something in between. It is neither particularly good, nor is it bad.

Now, let’s apply this to our scenario.

Best-case ⇒ Baela burns Criston before he reaches the forest in a controlled blaze, thus removing his influence and assistance to King Aegon. (Downside to this is that he will simply be replaced, perhaps by a more competent person) Result = not ideal but not bad.

Worst-case ⇒ Baela burns the whole forest, destroying lives and resulting in the smallfolk hating her and Queen Rhaenyra whom she fights for. The Greens may weaponise this and turn their allies against them, hence the Blacks lose the war. Result = really bad, Blacks will be executed.

Netural-case = Baela leaves and reports her information back to Blacks. Criston survives to cause problems, but the Blacks have done nothing to cause problems for the smallfolk or their allies. Result = neutral, neither good nor bad.

Ultimately, Baela goes with the neutral-case, which is the most sensible. Now, there are hundreds of different choices to be made here, which could have changed the course of the war in a heartbeat. Either way, this is a good way for you to think about what her options actually were and what the consequences might have been at various levels. The reason I tell this is because I still see people claiming that she should have killed him when it is clear (to me) that the likelihood of this causing serious damage to her cause far outweighed the chance that it might do good.

3-steps further

The second method or exercise I like to call ‘3 steps further’ to pick a decision and then follow along three steps.

Let’s pick the burning down the forest to kill Cole option, because everyone thought this was such a good idea. If Baela burns the forest to kill him:

1. First the forest-fire might spread, leading to the injury or death of thousands as well as the destruction of numerous farmlands and houses.
2. Next, because of this damage, unrest among the smallfolk grows. Cole’s allies may (and likely will, as we have seen) use this damage to point blame at Queen Rhaenyra and Baela.
3. As such, Rhaenyra and Baela may lose any support on the mainland, and potentially lose the war due to their unpopularity. If Rhaenyra’s entire goal is to win the throne and bring peace, this decision seems pretty antithetical.

You can apply these methods to everything, pretty much all the time. Of course, while you may not always get it ‘right’, it is important to consider things in their entirety. The point is to think about it at all, not just to get it ‘perfect’.

For example, in the above instance, if she were to burn Cole, there is the chance that the forest fire didn’t spread completely. Perhaps she managed to burn exactly where he was hiding in the forest (which she could not see once he was hidden).

Best-case scenario is he and his soldiers die. With Cole gone, he simply gets replaced and the war continues.

Worst-case scenario is that Cole somehow survives or flees and comes back with a vengeance.

Neutral case is one of his men survived to tell the tale and Cole becomes a matyr to be avenged but he is still ultimately replaced.

If one of Cole’s men survived the small fire however, lets take it three steps further:

1. He escapes to Kings Landing and tells the king what happened. King is unhappy but appoints a new Hand in Cole’s place.
2. New hand may not be as willing to pick battles, or not as experienced in fighting. Hence Baela and Rhaenyra are given enough time to get soldiers on the mainland and win support.
3. War is inevitable but Baela and Blacks still have a chance of winning.

Obviously this may be a favourable scenario, but there are so many factors at play and so many ‘ifs’ that cannot be truly accounted for. It would be nice to have everything go perfectly, but that is rarely the case.

Real Life Application and Conclusion.

Of course, this doesn’t just have to be for television shows. You may use it in your workplace, school, and even in your writing! It is such an interesting thought exercise that I hope you will apply to more things.

I hope you’ll use this going forward in your interactions online, because it kills me every time I see it. You may ask questions later, but do try to consider things first! Use these tools, and try the three-step process more and more when you are considering things. You can even use it with your comments online.

If you comment to say that you hate a book someone is gushing about on a video, use this process to see if it will be received well. Use the ‘3 scenario outcome’ and ‘3 steps further’ exercises to gauge how your actions could be perceived and consider if it is worth it. Embrace the Machiavellian side and begin scheming by using this method to predict the future.

Remember: Best-case, Worst-case, Neutral-case AND take one of them 3-steps further.