6 ms·

> I don't agree with that. As someone who has communicated primarily online since childhood, I feel as though I > am much more attenuated to some group of peopl

by lcuff 8y ago

> I don't agree with that. As someone who has communicated primarily online since childhood, I feel as though I > am much more attenuated to some group of people's emotional state through text, whereas in person, I fee > like my emotions are obvious to everyone besides me, which makes them feel like they are much more able to be > subject to manipulation. Interesting. Thanks for saying this. I didn't communicate online until relatively late in life (it wasn't an option when I was young). My own sense of what you are describing though - 'my emotions are obvious to everyone besides me' is what I'm thinking of in my original statement. The-in-the-moment experience is in public view. This may be uncomfortable, or you may not like the ensuing dynamics (yes, being manipulated sucks), but the irony or humor or hurt or whatever we are feeling that people might miss in text is somewhat more noticed in person via tone of voice et al.

s-shellfish 8y ago
> but the irony or humor or hurt or whatever we are feeling that people might miss in text is somewhat more noticed in person via tone of voice et al My point is just that, not everyone is good at processing this kind of information. I tend to learn people's vocal intonations as I retain relationships with them. They don't map from person to person for me, specifically. They are unique and individual. It's a magical thing I can manage to understand comedians, but humor has always been much more of an intellectual thing for me, as are most emotions. I can see an emotion on a face, body language, but that data must be aggregated with listening to a person, and not trying to predict how that person feels dependent on previous interactions with different people. When people are socialized in relatively 'static' environments, it is easy to take all of this stuff for granted because people tend to develop habits that are reflective and resonate of another - thus perpetually reinforcing, convergent - the appearance of 'known constants'. If you've grown up with and have lived a lifestyle where you are constantly moving, interacting with different people, always in different places, always open to what is new - then these things are much more variant. But that also has to map back to some base foundation of socialization you have, because that's where you get the 'reflection' of understanding that continues to enforce a sense of consistency and stability. I look at all components of a social system to be aware of this, coupled with the modular/analytical/functional mentality of a computer scientist. I'd rather people call it aspergers than anything else, I personally have had far too many labels applied to me in the past, labels that continue to be heavily stigmatized. Invisible pain, humor, irony...
- lcuff 8y ago
  > My point is just that, not everyone is good at processing this kind of information. It's a really good point. One of the things that concerns me as I hear about people (not necessarily you) who have grown up with cell phones and are spending less time f2f is that the f2f skills will diminish. I personally found it very difficult over the course of my career to interact with people who disagreed with my point of view. Often got angry inside and had to back away from the discussions in order to stay professional.
  - s-shellfish 8y ago
    If I find myself dramatically diverging from someone's perspective, I make it a point to internalize exactly what they are saying to the point it makes sense to me. The worst that can happen is the next time we disagree, I understand both sides. It's sometimes emotionally destabilizing to do such a thing, but it sure is nice to understand almost every person no matter what walk of life they come from. I've picked up on doing this from some very smart people, and the hilarious thing is, when you get used to it, it's like you can't recognize people from 'that tribe' of thinking directly. I miss socializing, I feel lonely often. But the level I understand people, shrug. Sparse connections between people. Sparse, but very strong ones.

by lcuff 8y ago

s-shellfish 8y ago

> but the irony or humor or hurt or whatever we are feeling that people might miss in text is somewhat more noticed in person via tone of voice et al My point is just that, not everyone is good at processing this kind of information. I tend to learn people's vocal intonations as I retain relationships with them. They don't map from person to person for me, specifically. They are unique and individual. It's a magical thing I can manage to understand comedians, but humor has always been much more of an intellectual thing for me, as are most emotions. I can see an emotion on a face, body language, but that data must be aggregated with listening to a person, and not trying to predict how that person feels dependent on previous interactions with different people. When people are socialized in relatively 'static' environments, it is easy to take all of this stuff for granted because people tend to develop habits that are reflective and resonate of another - thus perpetually reinforcing, convergent - the appearance of 'known constants'. If you've grown up with and have lived a lifestyle where you are constantly moving, interacting with different people, always in different places, always open to what is new - then these things are much more variant. But that also has to map back to some base foundation of socialization you have, because that's where you get the 'reflection' of understanding that continues to enforce a sense of consistency and stability. I look at all components of a social system to be aware of this, coupled with the modular/analytical/functional mentality of a computer scientist. I'd rather people call it aspergers than anything else, I personally have had far too many labels applied to me in the past, labels that continue to be heavily stigmatized. Invisible pain, humor, irony...

lcuff 8y ago
> My point is just that, not everyone is good at processing this kind of information. It's a really good point. One of the things that concerns me as I hear about people (not necessarily you) who have grown up with cell phones and are spending less time f2f is that the f2f skills will diminish. I personally found it very difficult over the course of my career to interact with people who disagreed with my point of view. Often got angry inside and had to back away from the discussions in order to stay professional.
- s-shellfish 8y ago
  If I find myself dramatically diverging from someone's perspective, I make it a point to internalize exactly what they are saying to the point it makes sense to me. The worst that can happen is the next time we disagree, I understand both sides. It's sometimes emotionally destabilizing to do such a thing, but it sure is nice to understand almost every person no matter what walk of life they come from. I've picked up on doing this from some very smart people, and the hilarious thing is, when you get used to it, it's like you can't recognize people from 'that tribe' of thinking directly. I miss socializing, I feel lonely often. But the level I understand people, shrug. Sparse connections between people. Sparse, but very strong ones.