3 ms·

> On the Internet, we're all psychopaths. That might be the best one-line summary of the problems with social media I've ever seen.

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
Nearly. In Internet debates we're all sociopaths. People can be very empathetic online, but not when they're disagreeing about fundamental values. But let's not pretend this is exclusively an online phenomenon. One-to-one debates can be civilised in person. But as soon as you get more than a handful of people involved there's a real possibility of violence - even if it's only ridicule and condescension. The odds of physical violence scale quickly as the numbers increase.
- sph 4y ago
  > In Internet debates we're all sociopaths. People can be very empathetic online Psychopaths can be empathetic. I had a nice discussion with a self-professed psychopath here on HN and that was my take away. Instead of feeling bad in the gut like you would if you were to insult a stranger face to face, a psychopath would learn that some actions are not OK even if it's hard to imagine the impact they're having. Same with Internet discussions. I'll try not to be an arsehole online, but it's much harder to connect with a person through text, whereas in person I loathe the feeling of making somebody feel bad. It's a visceral emotion that's completely absent when chatting through text.
ilaksh 4y ago
Except that it's not. The concept most people don't fully understand here is that of worldview. On the internet, people often are honest, and say what they really think. This reflects their (often divergent) beliefs about the world. Again, in the context of meta-discussions like this, most people do not know what a belief is. For example, it does not mean only religious belief. It does not mean "a false idea that someone else has". Beliefs are actually foundational concepts and viewpoints in everyone's brain. And the most core beliefs are generally reductionist regardless of who you are. Think about looking off into the distance. You can't have an infinite concept of what's out there so it all fades to a point. A big part of the problem in many of these online conflicts is that the opposing parties are effectively occupying different realities. But even more difficult is that each is 100% certain theirs is the correct version. And even more difficult is the fact that as I said, they don't understand this concept of worldview or realize that no worldview is perfectly accurate. Actually most don't understand the difference between a worldview, a normal viewpoint, and a true fact about the universe. Even more difficult is the fact that worldviews are closely linked to group identity. So much of the behavior is raw tribalism (trying to protect/promote your own group subconsciously) attached to worldviews, but the people think they are just defending true facts about the world.
- UmbertoNoEco 4y ago
  They still have a point though. I have had some friends, co-workers or acquaintances who from time to time express what there are to me very outlandish opinions, but most of the time I just let them slide or jokingly counter them because I know, that in the great scheme of things it does not matter very much. Had the same opinions being expressed by some faceless person in social media I would have reacted very differently. I dont think of myself as especially different from the average user and the experience using social media reinforces that point.

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago

Nearly. In Internet debates we're all sociopaths. People can be very empathetic online, but not when they're disagreeing about fundamental values. But let's not pretend this is exclusively an online phenomenon. One-to-one debates can be civilised in person. But as soon as you get more than a handful of people involved there's a real possibility of violence - even if it's only ridicule and condescension. The odds of physical violence scale quickly as the numbers increase.

sph 4y ago
> In Internet debates we're all sociopaths. People can be very empathetic online Psychopaths can be empathetic. I had a nice discussion with a self-professed psychopath here on HN and that was my take away. Instead of feeling bad in the gut like you would if you were to insult a stranger face to face, a psychopath would learn that some actions are not OK even if it's hard to imagine the impact they're having. Same with Internet discussions. I'll try not to be an arsehole online, but it's much harder to connect with a person through text, whereas in person I loathe the feeling of making somebody feel bad. It's a visceral emotion that's completely absent when chatting through text.

ilaksh 4y ago

Except that it's not. The concept most people don't fully understand here is that of worldview. On the internet, people often are honest, and say what they really think. This reflects their (often divergent) beliefs about the world. Again, in the context of meta-discussions like this, most people do not know what a belief is. For example, it does not mean only religious belief. It does not mean "a false idea that someone else has". Beliefs are actually foundational concepts and viewpoints in everyone's brain. And the most core beliefs are generally reductionist regardless of who you are. Think about looking off into the distance. You can't have an infinite concept of what's out there so it all fades to a point. A big part of the problem in many of these online conflicts is that the opposing parties are effectively occupying different realities. But even more difficult is that each is 100% certain theirs is the correct version. And even more difficult is the fact that as I said, they don't understand this concept of worldview or realize that no worldview is perfectly accurate. Actually most don't understand the difference between a worldview, a normal viewpoint, and a true fact about the universe. Even more difficult is the fact that worldviews are closely linked to group identity. So much of the behavior is raw tribalism (trying to protect/promote your own group subconsciously) attached to worldviews, but the people think they are just defending true facts about the world.

UmbertoNoEco 4y ago
They still have a point though. I have had some friends, co-workers or acquaintances who from time to time express what there are to me very outlandish opinions, but most of the time I just let them slide or jokingly counter them because I know, that in the great scheme of things it does not matter very much. Had the same opinions being expressed by some faceless person in social media I would have reacted very differently. I dont think of myself as especially different from the average user and the experience using social media reinforces that point.