What I see and hear around me is a miniscule fraction of the outside world. To have a shared understanding of reality, of what is happening in my town, my city, my state, my country, my continent, the world, requires much more than what is available in your immediate environment.

In the grand scheme of understanding the world at large, our immediate senses are not particularly valuable. So we _have_ to rely on other streams of information. And the trend is towards more of those streams being digital.

The existence of "fake news" and "alt facts", doesn't mean we should accept a further and dramatic worsening of our ability to have a shared reality. To accept that as an inevitability is defeatist and a kind of learned helplessness.

Have you seen the Adam Curtis documentary "Hypernormalisation"? It deals with some similar themes, but on a much smaller scale (at least it is smaller in the context of current and near future tech)

One absolutely should not trust what you see and hear around you. One cannot trust the opinions of others, one should not trust faith, one can only reliable develop critical analysis and employ secondary considerations to the best of their ability, and then be cautious at every step. Trust and faith are relics of a time now gone, and it is time to realize it, to grow up and see the reality.

Yeah I think it's a real possibility that people will disconnect from the digital world. Though I fear the human touch will become a luxury only afforded by the wealthy. If it becomes a point of distinction, people will charge extra for it. While the rest are pleaing with a brainless chat bots

No it's not. We are not at the stage where reality is completely indistinguishable from fiction. We are still in the uncanny valley. Nothing is inevitable

The naturalistic fallacy is weak at best, but this is one of the weirdest deployments of it I've encountered. It's not evolution, it's nothing like it.

If it's kill or be killed, we should do away with medicine right? Only the strong survive. Why are we saving the weak? Sorry but this argument is beyond silly

We have evolved to trust our senses as roughly representative of reality. I'm not convinced we are able to adapt to that kind of rapid shift.

I have not heard of Timber Sycamore until this comment. A quick look at Wikipedia I'm struggling to see the relevance here. Can you elaborate?