It is devisive to have different ideas of reality, and one can often learn from a different perspective.
This is why I have decided to view and comment in places like /r/climateskeptics as someone who is heavily on board the /s/collapse climate change narrative; it allows me to see another perspective I may have missed, and helps, well, bring narratives closer together.
When groups are seperated, and refuse to talk to each other, it draws narratives further and further apart, making them more and more distrustful of each other, creating conflicting stories increasingly antagonistic to ideas of the other, reducing the ability for people to learn from each other. Pretty much any group will have both good and bad ideas, so one should learn from every group. When groups are not distrustful, it is easier for them to learn from each other, and find good ideas that they may have dismissed just from being in a different group. When outsiders discuss with a group, it is also easier to find bad arguments, as has often been seen on /r/libertarian, when innefective propaganda images will usually have someone debate them in the comments.
SaidIt is particularly receptive to differing groups interacting, due to the inherent nature of the system, where there are no downvotes, people see all subs by default, and people tend to be able to debate without being banned, unlike other communities. As SaidIt gets larger, however, it may get harder to debate without getting overwhelmed with bad arguments, so I suggest that we foster a culture of open-mindness and reconiling narratives especially while it is so easy to do so.