What is the most uninformative statement that people are inclined to make? My nominee would be “I love to travel.” This tells you very little about a person, because nearly everyone likes to travel; and yet people say it, because, for some reason, they pride themselves both on having travelled and on the fact that they look forward to doing so.

The opposition team is small but articulate. G. K. Chesterton wrote that “travel narrows the mind.” Ralph Waldo Emerson called travel “a fool’s paradise.” Socrates and Immanuel Kant—arguably the two greatest philosophers of all time—voted with their feet, rarely leaving their respective home towns of Athens and Königsberg. But the greatest hater of travel, ever, was the Portuguese writer Fernando Pessoa, whose wonderful “Book of Disquiet” crackles with outrage:

I abhor new ways of life and unfamiliar places. . . . The idea of travelling nauseates me. . . . Ah, let those who don’t exist travel! . . . Travel is for those who cannot feel. . . . Only extreme poverty of the imagination justifies having to move around to feel.

If you are inclined to dismiss this as contrarian posturing, try shifting the object of your thought from your own travel to that of others. At home or abroad, one tends to avoid “touristy” activities. “Tourism” is what we call travelling when other people are doing it. And, although people like to talk about their travels, few of us like to listen to them. Such talk resembles academic writing and reports of dreams: forms of communication driven more by the needs of the producer than the consumer.

One common argument for travel is that it lifts us into an enlightened state, educating us about the world and connecting us to its denizens. Even Samuel Johnson, a skeptic—“What I gained by being in France was, learning to be better satisfied with my own country,” he once said—conceded that travel had a certain cachet. Advising his beloved Boswell, Johnson recommended a trip to China, for the sake of Boswell’s children: “There would be a lustre reflected upon them. . . . They would be at all times regarded as the children of a man who had gone to view the wall of China.”

Travel gets branded as an achievement: see interesting places, have interesting experiences, become interesting people. Is that what it really is?

  • will stedden@slrpnk.netOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d argue that the absolute shift in biases aren’t the measure of open-mindedness, and it’s the rate of change that determines how open-minded you are. From that regard the second half of the 20th century was fairly close-minded about the unmitigated correctness of our institutions and our place in the world. I’d say the year 2020 was one of the most rapid periods of open-minded inquisitiveness in my lifetime and that was when everyone was stuck at home.

    • VenDiagraphein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t particularly agree with that, as it would essentially require exponential change in biases for a population to be considered open-minded, which isn’t how societys work. But even so, the study did actually show an increased rate of change towards positive sentiment corresponding with the boom in travel. Perceptions shifted from trending negative to trending increasingly positive during the period of inflection they describe.

      My perception of the COVID years was… quite the opposite, at least outside of my immediate bubble. It felt like polarization and isolation increased more intensely that I’d ever seen. And the strong negative impact on conservative-leaning populations has been well documented.