[_bfhp]

> At their very best, third places allow people of differing backgrounds to cross paths — to develop what are known as bridging ties. As opposed to our closest connections, bridging social networks encompass people who have varying identities, social and economic resources, and knowledge. “Studies have shown that just having a diversity of folks in your life … more informal and infrequent and unplanned, can be really protective for health and well-being,” Finlay says.

What is intrinsically valuable then: third spaces, diversity, or individual health? It feels like the first has the most value in service of the second, which is really just a supplement for the third. Almost like we stopped believing we can convince people to get on the same page about anything that looks like a shared value...

Also much respect to the persistence of patronizing Vox-speak in 2024: "to develop what are known as bridging ties" Known to who? "Studies have shown that" Studies where?

[cjpearson]

The article references four books including "The Great Good Place" which originated the term along with the classic "Bowling Alone", which documents the decline of social connections in the United States. Additionally they interview four university professors who have studied the topic and they link to at least five academic papers, three surveys and several more newspaper articles. It seems to me that the article offers quite a bit of information on where the studies are.

[howenterprisey]

"known to" isn't patronizing; it indicates jargon, and in this case likely indicates a scientific term used in those studies. I agree that it would've been nice to link to the studies.