4 ms·

<< present evidence that individuals may engage in geek culture in order to maintain narcissistic self-views (the great fantasy migration hypothesis), to fulfil

<< present evidence that individuals may engage in geek culture in order to maintain narcissistic self-views (the great fantasy migration hypothesis), to fulfill belongingness needs (the belongingness hypothesis), and to satisfy needs for creative expression (the need for engagement hypothesis) >> I agree with the above being the main apparent drivers of engagement for most of geeks. However, one big blind spot in the above is the desire to acquire knowledge thru intellectually rooted, rational debate (analysis and counter-analysis) Geeks are not entirely a bunch of narcissists who want to belong and be creative. Sometimes, and I would say most times, the underlying motive is knowledge acquisition. Geeks tend to acquire knowledge constantly and tend to avoid activities that don't contribute to knowledge acquisition. So beneath all the narcism, desire for belonging and creative output there really is a much stronger and much more persistent need for knowledge acquisition... The authors of this study went for the outward qualities rather than the implicit knowledge acquisition motivation. me thinks :)

brian-armstrong 11y ago
What does convention going have to do with knowledge acquisition? I don't see how they're related.
- drumdance 11y ago
  Seriously? Learning was part of the reason conventions were created in the first place.
- ilostmykeys 11y ago
  They've picked a very narrowly defined behavioral model (convention going) for their generalized observations about geek culture, so the basis of the analysis is wrong, which makes your question somewhat inconsequential. We don't engage primarily because of some narcissistic need, need for belonging or need for showing off. We engage mainly because of our much more essential and more persistent need for grater knowledge and deeper understanding.
  - cbsmith 11y ago
    Non-geek conventions are also for "greater knowledge & deeper understanding". Geeks aren't unique in that regard.
    - ilostmykeys 11y ago
      They picked a narrowly defined behavioral model (that of convention going) to derive conclusions about a much bigger sub culture. That's what I mean by the basis of their analysis being flawed.
      - cbsmith 11y ago
        Actually, they picked a narrowly defined behavioral model (that of convention going) to test hypotheses about a sub culture that obviously exists outside that behaviour model. I'm not sure what else you expected them to do. While it is far from conclusive (and the paper is very clear about that), the idea of testing out a hypothesis in an artificially defined context is kind of how empirical science is done. As you get more confident in the hypothesis, you make predictions about more and more varied contexts.
        ilostmykeys 11y ago
        Making behavioral hypotheses about athletically inclined people based on a behavioral model of the crowd in live sport events is not simply empirical science but bad science. You are confusing the spectator (the convention going crowd) for the spectacle (the otherwise normal human behavior that conventions tend to focus on and amplify)
        cbsmith 11y ago
        ...but that's not at all analogous to the study. Dragon*Con isn't a convention where the general public goes to be entertained by geeks. The people who attend are just as important, if not more, contributors to the culture. By their definition of geek culture is "a subculture of enthusiasts that is traditionally associated with obscure media", The difference between the control group and the study group was in how they were recruited (an offer that encouraged geek participants/discouraged others, and one that was generically inviting), and they even made an effort to measure engagement with geek culture along with the personality traits.
sridca 11y ago
> Geeks are not entirely a bunch of narcissists who want to belong and be creative. Sometimes, and I would say most times, the underlying motive is knowledge acquisition. Underlying? Nope. Selfism, belonging and the like are way more deeper/pervasive (human/animal) attributes than any such superficial (human) motive of knowledge acquisition. Everyone -- be they a 'normal' or a 'geek' -- seeks to belong. And belonging drives much of human activity, be they 'normal' social activities or 'fringe' geek activities.
- mercer 11y ago
  > Underlying? Nope. Selfism, belonging and the like are way more deeper/pervasive (human/animal) attributes than any such superficial (human) motive of knowledge acquisition. While probably not the norm, I suspect a decent portion of 'geeks' might not be able to pursue belonging, or might perceive this to be the case, so they elevate 'knowledge acquisition' and/or other pursuits that don't require other people. This can apply to kids that don't fit the norm and/or were outcasts or bullied in school, for example. I've met quite my share of solitary figures who while I'm sure they would probably be happier 'belonging', nonetheless prioritize knowledge acquisition or other activities and appear to find quite a bit of happiness in this. And then there are the significant number of people who just are not like other people and do not or barely seek to belong: (some) autists, the solitary figure living in the woods, spiritual seekers ('wandering the desert', sometimes literally). It's quite possible that in a roundabout way, through the internet, a number of these people who do or did not prioritize belonging suddenly find themselves belonging anyways. Arguing that everyone seeks to belong is a bit like arguing that everyone deep down is straight, or wishes to have a partner or children, or any other prejudice we've had throughout the ages based on what is 'common'. If there's one thing I think we should've learned by now is that there's an incredible variety in what makes humans happy, and working toward a society where this can be pursued, rather than assuming that outliers need to be fixed, is a good thing.
  - sridca 11y ago
    I never said 'pursue belonging.' One can choose to not pursue an already existing feeling of belonging, as is evidently the case with many bullied geeks. But that doesn't contradict the fact that all humans harbour feelings of belonging (and selfism, etc.) in their bosom. It is human (animal) nature after all. There actually are quite a few hints about this subject in this essay by a nerd: https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c

brian-armstrong 11y ago

What does convention going have to do with knowledge acquisition? I don't see how they're related.

drumdance 11y ago
Seriously? Learning was part of the reason conventions were created in the first place.
ilostmykeys 11y ago
They've picked a very narrowly defined behavioral model (convention going) for their generalized observations about geek culture, so the basis of the analysis is wrong, which makes your question somewhat inconsequential. We don't engage primarily because of some narcissistic need, need for belonging or need for showing off. We engage mainly because of our much more essential and more persistent need for grater knowledge and deeper understanding.
- cbsmith 11y ago
  Non-geek conventions are also for "greater knowledge & deeper understanding". Geeks aren't unique in that regard.
  - ilostmykeys 11y ago
    They picked a narrowly defined behavioral model (that of convention going) to derive conclusions about a much bigger sub culture. That's what I mean by the basis of their analysis being flawed.
    - cbsmith 11y ago
      Actually, they picked a narrowly defined behavioral model (that of convention going) to test hypotheses about a sub culture that obviously exists outside that behaviour model. I'm not sure what else you expected them to do. While it is far from conclusive (and the paper is very clear about that), the idea of testing out a hypothesis in an artificially defined context is kind of how empirical science is done. As you get more confident in the hypothesis, you make predictions about more and more varied contexts.
      - ilostmykeys 11y ago
        Making behavioral hypotheses about athletically inclined people based on a behavioral model of the crowd in live sport events is not simply empirical science but bad science. You are confusing the spectator (the convention going crowd) for the spectacle (the otherwise normal human behavior that conventions tend to focus on and amplify)
        cbsmith 11y ago
        ...but that's not at all analogous to the study. Dragon*Con isn't a convention where the general public goes to be entertained by geeks. The people who attend are just as important, if not more, contributors to the culture. By their definition of geek culture is "a subculture of enthusiasts that is traditionally associated with obscure media", The difference between the control group and the study group was in how they were recruited (an offer that encouraged geek participants/discouraged others, and one that was generically inviting), and they even made an effort to measure engagement with geek culture along with the personality traits.

sridca 11y ago

> Geeks are not entirely a bunch of narcissists who want to belong and be creative. Sometimes, and I would say most times, the underlying motive is knowledge acquisition. Underlying? Nope. Selfism, belonging and the like are way more deeper/pervasive (human/animal) attributes than any such superficial (human) motive of knowledge acquisition. Everyone -- be they a 'normal' or a 'geek' -- seeks to belong. And belonging drives much of human activity, be they 'normal' social activities or 'fringe' geek activities.

mercer 11y ago
> Underlying? Nope. Selfism, belonging and the like are way more deeper/pervasive (human/animal) attributes than any such superficial (human) motive of knowledge acquisition. While probably not the norm, I suspect a decent portion of 'geeks' might not be able to pursue belonging, or might perceive this to be the case, so they elevate 'knowledge acquisition' and/or other pursuits that don't require other people. This can apply to kids that don't fit the norm and/or were outcasts or bullied in school, for example. I've met quite my share of solitary figures who while I'm sure they would probably be happier 'belonging', nonetheless prioritize knowledge acquisition or other activities and appear to find quite a bit of happiness in this. And then there are the significant number of people who just are not like other people and do not or barely seek to belong: (some) autists, the solitary figure living in the woods, spiritual seekers ('wandering the desert', sometimes literally). It's quite possible that in a roundabout way, through the internet, a number of these people who do or did not prioritize belonging suddenly find themselves belonging anyways. Arguing that everyone seeks to belong is a bit like arguing that everyone deep down is straight, or wishes to have a partner or children, or any other prejudice we've had throughout the ages based on what is 'common'. If there's one thing I think we should've learned by now is that there's an incredible variety in what makes humans happy, and working toward a society where this can be pursued, rather than assuming that outliers need to be fixed, is a good thing.
- sridca 11y ago
  I never said 'pursue belonging.' One can choose to not pursue an already existing feeling of belonging, as is evidently the case with many bullied geeks. But that doesn't contradict the fact that all humans harbour feelings of belonging (and selfism, etc.) in their bosom. It is human (animal) nature after all. There actually are quite a few hints about this subject in this essay by a nerd: https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c