In a communications world where we are transitioning slowly back to more of an oral tradition, literalism becomes the bridge between ideas we want to discuss with strangers and concepts we can’t discern from those same strangers because we lack enough context clues.

Literalism means, of course, that “gray areas” in conversation become less and less valuable for people. Which makes sense. Think about it: Social media videos can show everything. Social media text posts can explain everything. And social media memes can substitute for deeper understanding of messages that used to rely on the presence of shared context clues–and a shared communication culture–to survive.

But we’re long past that now.

In a communication world where every little detail must be explained, teased out, and made obvious for a reader, a viewer, or a speaker who doesn’t–and can’t possibly– share context clues, nuance becomes an annoyance, shared understanding evaporates, and we all start to talk and eventually think in the ways that the algorithms like. Humans, of course, are not algorithms. Nor are humans large language models. Humans need nuance, subtlety, and even a bit of mystery to communicate well.

But in the journey we are on right now, it’s tough to be in the middle space between the end of all that nuance, subtlety, and mystery, and whatever comes after the tribes of literal people have won the day.