How Philosophy Can Help With The Endless News Cycle

Forbes

25-04-2025

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 30: U.S. President Donald Trump calls on reporters during a press ... More conference about the collision of an American Airlines flight with a military helicopter near Ronald Reagan National Airport in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on January 30, 2025 in Washington, DC. Officials said they believe that all 64 people on the commercial jet and the three service members on the U.S. Army helicopter perished when they collided in midair and crashed into the Potomac River airport outside Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. (Photo by)
In the relentless chainsaw coming out of Washington, every headline, opinion, and policy decision seems more polarizing than the last.
Each of these events and decisions have vast implications. If you hope to accurately understand an issue, then you must widen your view beyond just that issue. For example, to fully form an opinion on recent tariffs, then you need to have at least an elementary grasp of international relations, supply chains, employment, and the financial markets, as well as the more immediate areas of trading and taxes.
While this is not distinct to the current administration - now nearing its first 100 days - the sheer barrage of news does seem unique. It leaves you without much time to focus on anything else if you do want to form a thoughtful opinion on current events.
Is there a dependable way to not get overwhelmed? Is keeping up with current events even worth it?
These questions become even trickier for people in leadership positions. A leader who is well-versed on the issues of the day can back up her own decisions with real world examples, relate to others with topical conversation, and more generally have a better understanding of the world. However, it is likely not necessary to succeed. Furthermore, the current political and market volatility can become distracting, or even isolating.
Philosophers are in a unique place to solve this riddle as current events are largely trivial in their work. Let's look at three notable philosophers and how they might address the never-ending news cycle. We will find out that you can't know everything, you can't control everything, but you can't ignore the most significant issues of the day.
What may be the most famous quote in the history of philosophy appears in Plato's Apology. In response to an overly confident interlocutor claiming he can define whatever metaphysical concept thrown his way, Socrates says, 'the only thing I know is that I know nothing, and I am not quite sure that I know that.'
The two ideas behind this famed Socratic statement are that you can never fully understand anything, and there is always more to know. By this logic, an authentic opinion of current events is only possible by first acknowledging how little you know. This will take some pressure off. Stream the news to learn more, not to look for some confirmation of bias.
Another philosopher who shares values similar to Socrates is Seneca, born in Ancient Rome about a half century after Socrates was put to death. Along with Marcus Aurelius, Seneca is likely the best known of the Stoic philosophers, and his Letters From A Stoic continues to be a relevant essay almost 2,000 years after publication.
The crux of the argument for Seneca and the Stoics is to understand what you can and cannot control. Having this frame of mind can be a shield against the constant panic in the news.
Most of us have no material influence over the swirl of current events. Stoicism in action means it is foolish to think otherwise and get distressed over them. Importantly, this does not mean they should be ignored. Instead, by digesting current events through the lens of a Stoic is to remove feelings from your response.
Why are you doomscrolling? Is it just to elicit certain emotions? Self-reflection can be beneficial for those unable to pace themselves on social media, cable news, and podcasts.
For a different point of view, we turn to 96-year-old philosopher and linguist Noam Chomsky. According to Chomsky, removing emotions from current events is objectionable. It is necessary for anyone who can form an opinion to do so and let it be known.
For Chomsky, it is a question of morality. He has frequently and harshly criticized the U.S. throughout his career, and has actually implied that he would have preferred to have written less on this topic but felt he had a moral compulsion to do so. 'It is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies,' he wrote in a 1967 essay.
None of the ideals that these philosophers have set forth are right or wrong. It is a personal decision on how you confront the polarizing events of the day. When making the choice, it is beneficial to know that whatever you choose, you will be on the side of some of the greatest thinkers in history.