I've noticed some insidious interaction on SG, but not just on SG, everywhere where in comments sections online.
I'd like to hear what everyone thinks about this.
To my mind, internet communication allows two things that "live" communication does not. It allows for people to really focus their thoughts (the delete button is a beautiful thing) and/or say anything with an artificial sense of "social exemption" as if one's actions online don't effect the real world.
What is the implication of having a "completely democratic" forum of communication? (I understand that the internet is not as egalitarian as, well, as much as I would like it to be.) But if we can really be witness to what we say, how we interact (positively and negatively), is there potential for the human race to step towards a more compassionate reality? Looking at it from a very very broad spectrum, I think technology "civilizes" humans, for example, in warfare. There is potential to be very specific with bombs so that civilians are less at risk (it's a broad example). We don't have to wipe out whole cities randomly with carpet bombing.
With technology, Nature's gravity becomes less and less.
To use a Trekkie metaphor..
Do you think we're like the Borg and Star Fleet, simultaneously? We think for ourselves and are autonomous (Star Fleet), but also interconnected (Borg).
So the questions are;
What does it mean to be part of the "civilized" world? What is civil? Where is civilization going?
What is the nature of human conflict? Is it necessary? Will technology obliterate it eventually?
I'd like to hear what everyone thinks about this.
To my mind, internet communication allows two things that "live" communication does not. It allows for people to really focus their thoughts (the delete button is a beautiful thing) and/or say anything with an artificial sense of "social exemption" as if one's actions online don't effect the real world.
What is the implication of having a "completely democratic" forum of communication? (I understand that the internet is not as egalitarian as, well, as much as I would like it to be.) But if we can really be witness to what we say, how we interact (positively and negatively), is there potential for the human race to step towards a more compassionate reality? Looking at it from a very very broad spectrum, I think technology "civilizes" humans, for example, in warfare. There is potential to be very specific with bombs so that civilians are less at risk (it's a broad example). We don't have to wipe out whole cities randomly with carpet bombing.
With technology, Nature's gravity becomes less and less.
To use a Trekkie metaphor..
Do you think we're like the Borg and Star Fleet, simultaneously? We think for ourselves and are autonomous (Star Fleet), but also interconnected (Borg).
So the questions are;
What does it mean to be part of the "civilized" world? What is civil? Where is civilization going?
What is the nature of human conflict? Is it necessary? Will technology obliterate it eventually?
Civilization is just another creation of a herd of people. As is compassion to a certain extend. And it is easy to use technology, or warfare or any other system as an excuse, while we are not only the cause, we are also the excuse and solution.
I have gone beyond.
And will keep going.
Vienna sounds awesome. I'll reply your message when I have slept some.