6 ms·

Thought provoking on a lot of levels. I believe that the technology we're creating is cutting both ways. It has allowed us to become more connected, but it se

by gooseus 11y ago

Thought provoking on a lot of levels. I believe that the technology we're creating is cutting both ways. It has allowed us to become more connected, but it seems that connection is at the shallowest level and has resulted in a disconnection from our deeper selves as the added distractions take energy away from self-reflection and self-awareness. The opportunities that we've created that allow any given idea to go viral, become a killer app and make billionaires has distracted us from finding deeper ideals that could be shared to show us how to lead a more meaningful life and create a civilization worthy of stepping out to the stars. I don't know if what I'm saying makes any sense to anyone else, but something has definitely been bothering me for awhile and I think articles like this one are starting to help me articulate it and at least let me know that I'm not alone. I very much appreciate that.

kiba 11y ago
It has allowed us to become more connected, but it seems that connection is at the shallowest level and has resulted in a disconnection from our deeper selves as the added distractions take energy away from self-reflection and self-awareness. Distraction is what you allow. I hardly have any notifications on my phone or my desktop or do any kind of 'social networking' as related to going on facebook and twitter.
- _rpd 11y ago
  > Distraction is what you allow. Yes, the narrative that we are will-less slaves to our electronic devices is just as disrespectful as the conspiracy theorist shouting "Wake up Sheeple!"
Kalium 11y ago
You are echoing a notion that I see and hear regularly from a number of my more artistic, spiritually inclined friends. That technology is isolating us from one another, preventing people from connecting as we did in times past. Honestly? I think it's not true. In days of yore, people read newspapers or books to isolate themselves. Or whittled. Or knit. Or just looked busy. If anything has changed, it's that it is now possible to connect deeply to a person many thousands of miles away. Most of the connections in life are superficial, yes. That's true today and has been for centuries. My artistic and spiritual friends are, sad to say, mostly pining for a golden age that never existed.
- bargl 11y ago
  I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you've never been to a 3rd world country for an extended period of time. If I'm wrong I'd like to apologize for making this assumption to make the rest of my point, because you can easily step on the way back machine by moving someplace where only a few people have computers. During my time in Bolivia and Haiti I experience massive culture shock at the way people interact with their community. At night you can walk around the central plaza in the Okinawa Numero Uno (mind you this is a TINY town) and someone will find you to chat with you. In bigger towns (in Bolivia) people are friendly, because they have to interact to get directions, ask for a good place to eat, or just chat. There are community events ALL the time. Was it a golden age? No, I don't think so, but it was a time and culture where people KNEW their neighbors because if you want to stave off boredom you have to hang out with them to laugh, eat, drink, etc. I don't think technology has changed this per se, but instead that TV and the culture of entertainment that we have has changed this. I know that comparing the USA 30-50 years ago and Bolivia is an oversimplification, but there definitely was a culture difference before everyone had a cellphone in their pocket. It may not have been a golden age, but for some people it was a period where the risks were easier to understand. That said, I also think people were still able to find isolation who wanted it, the main difference is people who were seeking a way to fight boredom had much fewer ways to do that in their house by themselves 50 years ago.
  - Kalium 11y ago
    The difference you are describing is societies where physical mobility is possible and the norm versus societies where it is not. Places where it's possible to know all the people around you and places where it isn't. Places where actual cities exist versus places where they don't. There are parts of the US like those you describe. I've lived in some of them. People KNOW their neighbors. Very intensely. It's very rare to have a neighbor that you haven't known for at least a decade. They still have TV, a culture of entertainment, Facebook, and iPhones. There's a constant sense of community, and an apparently endless stream of events. And you know what? I can't stand life in those places. I found them incredibly insular. Stifling. Conformity-enforcing. It's not something I found to be beautiful, uplifting, or pleasant. They are not a thing I wish to encourage or would call a desirable model. Did you notice that the things I cited - newspapers, books, knitting, and whittling - are all at least several centuries old? That was not an accident.

by gooseus 11y ago

kiba 11y ago

It has allowed us to become more connected, but it seems that connection is at the shallowest level and has resulted in a disconnection from our deeper selves as the added distractions take energy away from self-reflection and self-awareness. Distraction is what you allow. I hardly have any notifications on my phone or my desktop or do any kind of 'social networking' as related to going on facebook and twitter.

_rpd 11y ago
> Distraction is what you allow. Yes, the narrative that we are will-less slaves to our electronic devices is just as disrespectful as the conspiracy theorist shouting "Wake up Sheeple!"

Kalium 11y ago

You are echoing a notion that I see and hear regularly from a number of my more artistic, spiritually inclined friends. That technology is isolating us from one another, preventing people from connecting as we did in times past. Honestly? I think it's not true. In days of yore, people read newspapers or books to isolate themselves. Or whittled. Or knit. Or just looked busy. If anything has changed, it's that it is now possible to connect deeply to a person many thousands of miles away. Most of the connections in life are superficial, yes. That's true today and has been for centuries. My artistic and spiritual friends are, sad to say, mostly pining for a golden age that never existed.

bargl 11y ago
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you've never been to a 3rd world country for an extended period of time. If I'm wrong I'd like to apologize for making this assumption to make the rest of my point, because you can easily step on the way back machine by moving someplace where only a few people have computers. During my time in Bolivia and Haiti I experience massive culture shock at the way people interact with their community. At night you can walk around the central plaza in the Okinawa Numero Uno (mind you this is a TINY town) and someone will find you to chat with you. In bigger towns (in Bolivia) people are friendly, because they have to interact to get directions, ask for a good place to eat, or just chat. There are community events ALL the time. Was it a golden age? No, I don't think so, but it was a time and culture where people KNEW their neighbors because if you want to stave off boredom you have to hang out with them to laugh, eat, drink, etc. I don't think technology has changed this per se, but instead that TV and the culture of entertainment that we have has changed this. I know that comparing the USA 30-50 years ago and Bolivia is an oversimplification, but there definitely was a culture difference before everyone had a cellphone in their pocket. It may not have been a golden age, but for some people it was a period where the risks were easier to understand. That said, I also think people were still able to find isolation who wanted it, the main difference is people who were seeking a way to fight boredom had much fewer ways to do that in their house by themselves 50 years ago.
- Kalium 11y ago
  The difference you are describing is societies where physical mobility is possible and the norm versus societies where it is not. Places where it's possible to know all the people around you and places where it isn't. Places where actual cities exist versus places where they don't. There are parts of the US like those you describe. I've lived in some of them. People KNOW their neighbors. Very intensely. It's very rare to have a neighbor that you haven't known for at least a decade. They still have TV, a culture of entertainment, Facebook, and iPhones. There's a constant sense of community, and an apparently endless stream of events. And you know what? I can't stand life in those places. I found them incredibly insular. Stifling. Conformity-enforcing. It's not something I found to be beautiful, uplifting, or pleasant. They are not a thing I wish to encourage or would call a desirable model. Did you notice that the things I cited - newspapers, books, knitting, and whittling - are all at least several centuries old? That was not an accident.