In my experience, one of the major problems in Cairo (in addition to the notorious traffic problem) is the prevalence of bullshit (from street, to school, to places of work and worship; and, quite naturally, it has extended to muck up the blogosphere.) And, just like the traffic problem, everyone knows of its existence, each contributes their share, and it takes either great luck or mighty discipline to miss it.
Growing up in such bullshit-filled environment, one can’t help but develop either a high tolerance for it, or an acute allergic reaction to it — or, as is common in Cairo, a schizophrenic combination of both.
The high-tolerance phenomenon is very intuitive — it’s almost an evolutionary necessity; the most adapted are the ones who survive. That is to say, in such bullshit-fogged-up atmosphere, individuals with a high tolerance threshold would be at an advantage, and would therefore thrive! Moreover, not only navigating through this fog, but also exploiting it to one’s benefit would be a favourable skill, and it is therefore no surprise to find it encouraged, even cultivated. We even have a name for individuals who are particularly skillful –fahlawy– which has become synonymous with “clever”.
No doubt it takes a certain cleverness to wade through the mazes of bullshit, but, almost as certain, it comes with the hefty risk of becoming desensitized to bullshit and accepting it as the order of the day. (This is not even going as far as suggesting that “clever” people might come to prefer the kind of environment in which they excel, and would therefore work to sustain the status quo, or even push in the downhill direction where truths are more immersed in bullshit.)
In such a society, it is no wonder then that many a decent truth-seeking individual is marginalized by this process of cultural-selection — some are even driven to commit suicide. But as tragic as this outcome is, it is not the gravest; the undermining of truth to the extent of complete obscurity is a much more serious danger.
On the other extreme, some individuals develop (what I like to call) bullshit-allergy, which (almost always) presents as unwavering (pathological) skepticism. The exposure to a high dose of bullshit, whether gradually over the years or in one lump, drives one to be highly suspicious (to the point of outright dismissal) of any new idea, or even new ways to present an old idea. Creativity is dismissed. Research is dismissed. Alternative ways are dismissed. So are “other” religions, “other” sciences, “other” beliefs, “other” cultures, and “other” peoples. All “other”s are dismissed. (Not to say that “dismissal” is exclusively a symptom of bullshit-allergy and not one of any of a multitude of other social diseases.)
Nature, words on a page, words on a screen, one’s teachers, one’s friends, talking heads on radio and television, and the rest of the world may cry wolf all they want! One already knows the answer, and one is only interested in tidbits of knowledge that confirms that answer. Thank you very much.
As with “cleverness,” and maybe more so, some skepticism is healthy. (Without a healthy amount of both, one goes on wild geese chases way more often than a lifetime can afford.) Too much skepticism, however, halts one in their footsteps. No exploring means no evolving; means no fact-checking; means no understanding. Means truth is compromised.
The interesting and mind boggling thing in Cairo is that you find people with high-tolerance threshold who are also allergic to bullshit! They tolerate the obscene amount of bullshit dumped on them by their government, their work bosses, their teachers, their religious leaders, the police, the media, theatre and cinema, waiters, parking attendants, airport personnel, pretty much all service industry personnel, etc.; just to “survive”. Simultaneously, and without batting an eye at the obvious contradiction, they dismiss any efforts from their government, their bosses, their teachers, their religious leaders, the police, the media, etc.
In most of these cases, whether to unconditionally accept what is being presented -truth and lie- or utterly dismiss it depends on a number of factors that have little to do with whether what has been presented is a truth or a lie. It has to do with other things like: whether it sounds like a truth or a lie; with the audience; with the situation; with the presenter; with the reaction one is expected to have. These determining factors are subjective, and in as much as this is true, either -accepting or dismissing- counts as nothing but the perpetration of bullshit.
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) 
Turns out 
If you’re a (normal) person who has (normal) trouble visualising all this hyper-dimensional speak that physicists are springing on us, claiming is essential to understanding our universe, maybe this 
