5 ms·

“They end up in a closed ideology echo chamber,” I cannot deny I often find myself pigeon-holed into this category, the derision poured upon me to "fix" someth

by tunap 10y ago

“They end up in a closed ideology echo chamber,” I cannot deny I often find myself pigeon-holed into this category, the derision poured upon me to "fix" something has been consistent & unwavering. Problem is, I was always more interested in books/work over socializing before the netz, I don't hear voices in my head besides my inner-monologue(hopefully=not-schizo) and my 'echo chamber' is anything but... I am drawn to alien, re-framed & unique perspectives of the world I live in. My solitude is a result of not being current on the TV shows, my choice to avoid Web2.0 style social(sic) media and a very low consumption fueled lifestyle... all these are past-times for the mass majority. Good for them, if that is what people choose. Good for me for not choosing to do the same. My outlier mentality has subsequently been reinforced by the writings/works of some very smart people. A few examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragons_of_Eden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragons_of_Eden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demon-Haunted_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demon-Haunted_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan_%28Taleb_book%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan_%28Taleb_book%2... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis edit:added conclusion, 3rd and 2nd to last sentences.

coldtea 10y ago
>My solitude is a result of not being current on the TV shows, my choice to avoid Web2.0 style social(sic) media and a very low consumption fueled lifestyle... Which might make you an obsolete example of a sane social citizen unable to function in a changed bizarro anti-social society.
rboyd 10y ago
see also Terrence McKenna "Culture Is Not Your Friend" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-tY6hmKcms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-tY6hmKcms Still, there's seeing a culture for what it is and then there's running from invisible monsters. I think we can agree that most of the folks from the article need some healing.
- tremon 10y ago
  While I can definitely agree with the point he is making, I want to add a counterpoint: culture is you. Whatever is fed to you through the tubes is at most "someone else's culture"; and while you may choose to identify with part of it, it's never yours.
  - tunap 10y ago
    I tend to disagree. While it has historically been true(and still holds on a micro level), mass, repetitive exposure to ideas tends to make people co-opt those ideas as their own. The crowd is easily swayed by FUD, the 'four F's'(fight, flight, food, reproduction) and repetition. These triggers have been proven to get eyes on content, sell product and sway opinion. Hence, this is what I see when I do get a glimpse of current popular media. Bad programming, IMO.
MawNicker 10y ago
Thank you. I'm social enough that people give me strange looks when I describe myself as a loner. I've been accused of posing. As if being a loner is "in" now or something. Everything in my reality is telling me to be more social. But there's a truth that I simply know which apparently has no voice: It feels amazing to spend time alone. Like a lot. I wish more people would speak up about it. Shamelessly. Also, people make the worst faces when I tell them I don't watch TV. I suspect they're concerned that I'm judging them. In both cases people just seem clueless as to how to handle the situation. I guess, compared to the opposite, it is harder to identify with loners and people who don't watch TV...
- lovemenot 10y ago
  From what you've written, I believe the issue you face with others' perceptions of you is your tendency to proselytize. It comes through even in this short comment. When you are truly comfortable in yourself, you won't feel the need to convince others that this is so. And they won't find anything odd about you. In fact they'll be drawn to you, since you have obviously got something they lack.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - MawNicker 10y ago
    > When you are truly comfortable in yourself, you won't feel the need to convince others that this is so. Maybe I'm an introvert or something. I'm not trying to say that spending more time alone is good for everyone. But as someone who is comfortable spending time alone I know it's looked down on by much of society. This is even implied by your comment... Why else would I be uncomfortable with it? I also smoke pot. I'm comfortable with it and I regularly tell people: Unlike they told you in DARE, it won't kill you. I am very averse to your line of thinking. Generalized and applied indiscriminately it implies that a person should never feel motivated to articulate any opinion they authentically possess.
    - tunap 10y ago
cortesoft 10y ago
Just so you know, you can live a non-solitary life and not stay up on TV, not be on social media, and live a low consumption life. None of those things preclude interacting with other people. There is obviously a spectrum between fully social and fully anti-social, and it is important to find out where you fit on that. There is always value, however, in avoiding being on the far end of the anti-social spectrum. Having our thinking challenged by real people, with real interaction, is important to our mental health.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- tunap 10y ago
  Hear, hear. Everything in degrees; spectrums. Too much of anything tends to be unhealthy.
ArkyBeagle 10y ago
Another title for your list is "The Hidden Persuaders". I don't know too many (3/5) of the things to which you link, and I love Adam Curtis dearly, but it seems like there's always a hint of paranoia to those things. Filtering advertising is something that just seems like a good idea to me.
- the_af 10y ago
  > it seems like there's always a hint of paranoia to those things. If you mean the reading list the parent post mentioned, I must disagree. Carl Sagan's books are about scientific divulgation. In fact, "The Demon Haunted World" isn't about conspiracy theories but about the scientific method and how it differs from pseudoscience, and how to avoid falling prey to tempting but irrational ideas (what he calls "The baloney detection kit"). The other book by Sagan is likewise about science, not about persecution or being "an outlier". Noam Chomsky's book is different. Of course, writings about the control of the media by the few and the manipulation of public opinion can, when looked through the warped lens of someone with a persecution complex, look like confirmation that "they" are after you. But Chomsky isn't paranoid, he is political. I'm less familiar with the rest of the books, but at a quick glance they don't seem to have a hint of paranoia to me.
  - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
    I've not read that Sagan book ( nor Dragons of Eden ) , but in general, you're absolutely correct - his are pure scientific storytelling. I maintain that Adam Curtis, Nassem Taleb and Manufacturing Consent are on a subject in which it's impossible to not be a teeny bit paranoid ( Bernays and propaganda/advertising ) but yes, Chomsky is in general just scholarly. This being said, his work does involve descriptions of systems in which he believes people abuse power.
    - mercer 10y ago
      > I maintain that Adam Curtis, Nassem Taleb and Manufacturing Consent are on a subject in which it's impossible to not be a teeny bit paranoid I see what you mean, and I find 'teeny bit paranoid' as a concept so intensely frustrating! We're using a word that by definition is extreme, and then use it in a situation where it doesn't really apply (on account of it being a 'teeny bit so'). It's basically 'guilt by association'. It's akin to calling someone's views a 'teeny bit mysogynic', or 'a teeny bit racist', makes as much sense as 'somewhat unique', but it basically removes any gray area from the discussion. I understand why and how this happens, but it's so frustratingly effective to shut down any kind of interesting avenue of discussion. (Edit: it gets worse when, in a conversation, an actual full-blown mysogynist or racist decides to come to your aid, although sometimes the resulting conversation is so farcical to be funny again) (Edit 2: that one guy with that blog with codex in it that is often posted to HN wrote about this quite eloquently, if I remember correctly)

by tunap 10y ago

coldtea 10y ago

>My solitude is a result of not being current on the TV shows, my choice to avoid Web2.0 style social(sic) media and a very low consumption fueled lifestyle... Which might make you an obsolete example of a sane social citizen unable to function in a changed bizarro anti-social society.

rboyd 10y ago

see also Terrence McKenna "Culture Is Not Your Friend" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-tY6hmKcms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-tY6hmKcms Still, there's seeing a culture for what it is and then there's running from invisible monsters. I think we can agree that most of the folks from the article need some healing.

tremon 10y ago
While I can definitely agree with the point he is making, I want to add a counterpoint: culture is you. Whatever is fed to you through the tubes is at most "someone else's culture"; and while you may choose to identify with part of it, it's never yours.
- tunap 10y ago
  I tend to disagree. While it has historically been true(and still holds on a micro level), mass, repetitive exposure to ideas tends to make people co-opt those ideas as their own. The crowd is easily swayed by FUD, the 'four F's'(fight, flight, food, reproduction) and repetition. These triggers have been proven to get eyes on content, sell product and sway opinion. Hence, this is what I see when I do get a glimpse of current popular media. Bad programming, IMO.

MawNicker 10y ago

Thank you. I'm social enough that people give me strange looks when I describe myself as a loner. I've been accused of posing. As if being a loner is "in" now or something. Everything in my reality is telling me to be more social. But there's a truth that I simply know which apparently has no voice: It feels amazing to spend time alone. Like a lot. I wish more people would speak up about it. Shamelessly. Also, people make the worst faces when I tell them I don't watch TV. I suspect they're concerned that I'm judging them. In both cases people just seem clueless as to how to handle the situation. I guess, compared to the opposite, it is harder to identify with loners and people who don't watch TV...

lovemenot 10y ago
From what you've written, I believe the issue you face with others' perceptions of you is your tendency to proselytize. It comes through even in this short comment. When you are truly comfortable in yourself, you won't feel the need to convince others that this is so. And they won't find anything odd about you. In fact they'll be drawn to you, since you have obviously got something they lack.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- MawNicker 10y ago
  > When you are truly comfortable in yourself, you won't feel the need to convince others that this is so. Maybe I'm an introvert or something. I'm not trying to say that spending more time alone is good for everyone. But as someone who is comfortable spending time alone I know it's looked down on by much of society. This is even implied by your comment... Why else would I be uncomfortable with it? I also smoke pot. I'm comfortable with it and I regularly tell people: Unlike they told you in DARE, it won't kill you. I am very averse to your line of thinking. Generalized and applied indiscriminately it implies that a person should never feel motivated to articulate any opinion they authentically possess.
  - tunap 10y ago

cortesoft 10y ago

Just so you know, you can live a non-solitary life and not stay up on TV, not be on social media, and live a low consumption life. None of those things preclude interacting with other people. There is obviously a spectrum between fully social and fully anti-social, and it is important to find out where you fit on that. There is always value, however, in avoiding being on the far end of the anti-social spectrum. Having our thinking challenged by real people, with real interaction, is important to our mental health.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tunap 10y ago
Hear, hear. Everything in degrees; spectrums. Too much of anything tends to be unhealthy.

ArkyBeagle 10y ago

Another title for your list is "The Hidden Persuaders". I don't know too many (3/5) of the things to which you link, and I love Adam Curtis dearly, but it seems like there's always a hint of paranoia to those things. Filtering advertising is something that just seems like a good idea to me.

the_af 10y ago
> it seems like there's always a hint of paranoia to those things. If you mean the reading list the parent post mentioned, I must disagree. Carl Sagan's books are about scientific divulgation. In fact, "The Demon Haunted World" isn't about conspiracy theories but about the scientific method and how it differs from pseudoscience, and how to avoid falling prey to tempting but irrational ideas (what he calls "The baloney detection kit"). The other book by Sagan is likewise about science, not about persecution or being "an outlier". Noam Chomsky's book is different. Of course, writings about the control of the media by the few and the manipulation of public opinion can, when looked through the warped lens of someone with a persecution complex, look like confirmation that "they" are after you. But Chomsky isn't paranoid, he is political. I'm less familiar with the rest of the books, but at a quick glance they don't seem to have a hint of paranoia to me.
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  I've not read that Sagan book ( nor Dragons of Eden ) , but in general, you're absolutely correct - his are pure scientific storytelling. I maintain that Adam Curtis, Nassem Taleb and Manufacturing Consent are on a subject in which it's impossible to not be a teeny bit paranoid ( Bernays and propaganda/advertising ) but yes, Chomsky is in general just scholarly. This being said, his work does involve descriptions of systems in which he believes people abuse power.
  - mercer 10y ago
    > I maintain that Adam Curtis, Nassem Taleb and Manufacturing Consent are on a subject in which it's impossible to not be a teeny bit paranoid I see what you mean, and I find 'teeny bit paranoid' as a concept so intensely frustrating! We're using a word that by definition is extreme, and then use it in a situation where it doesn't really apply (on account of it being a 'teeny bit so'). It's basically 'guilt by association'. It's akin to calling someone's views a 'teeny bit mysogynic', or 'a teeny bit racist', makes as much sense as 'somewhat unique', but it basically removes any gray area from the discussion. I understand why and how this happens, but it's so frustratingly effective to shut down any kind of interesting avenue of discussion. (Edit: it gets worse when, in a conversation, an actual full-blown mysogynist or racist decides to come to your aid, although sometimes the resulting conversation is so farcical to be funny again) (Edit 2: that one guy with that blog with codex in it that is often posted to HN wrote about this quite eloquently, if I remember correctly)