Social interaction and isolation

[Dissonance]

I have a friend who, on a semi-regular basis, gives me flack about what I do with my spare time.  "Why would you waste all your time inside staring at some sort of screen," he'd say while waving his arm toward two billowing curtains draping a large window with a bluer-than-blue sky and greener-than-green grass with a big yellow smiley face sun and a bunny hopping behind a bush, "when there's a whole world out there?"

Now because he's my friend, I generally don't feel anything threatening by it.  However my parents, when I still talked to them, made the same criticisms of my life, and when I was still totally dependant on them (as well as being a good lil' girl) I found them to hold a bit more weight.  But this time, I decided to look back on the subject a little closer, as my friend brought it up again and we got into the topic a bit more this time.

Now I expect the average response from the symposium to be "Well if you like doing it, and you can afford to do it, why not do it?"  Another individual I've met, a nursing student now off on her final year placement, mentioned once that "an addiction is medically classified a hobby that you begin to do instead of essentials, like sleep/eat/work/etc.  So if you're doing everything you need for survival, and then spending every other waking moment on one activity, you're not an addict."  Which is fine, really.  These two responses are the same things I use to justify spending most of my recreational time playing video games, surfing the net, and watching television/movies/anime. 

But what if there's a bit more to it than that?

Here let me frame this with a portion of our conversation as my thoughts are a little jumbled:

Him: Why not go out there and experience life?
Me: I've seen your list of things you call "life" (it consists of hanging out with friends, being sociable, going to movies or concerts or bars or parties, attending interesting lectures or book readings at university, etc) and none of them interest me, I would rather forge my own definition of "life" based on my own hobbies and preferences.
Him: Well what do you consider "life" then, I mean you don't seem to care about self-improvement and your only form of self-gratification is gained by retreating into games.  You're a shut-in.
Me: The words we use code underlying meanings, like the fact that you believe I "retreat into games" rather than the more positively worded "Exploring games" or just "playing games".
Him: You retreat into games specifically because you're hiding from the rest of the world.
Me: What if i'm not hiding, I just have no interest in anything that goes on out there?

You can kind of get the idea.  His argument is that there's a whole lot of interesting stuff out there and that I'm throwing myself away by simply staying inside - sure ultimately I can say "fuck off sonny it's my life" but he IS my friend and I can't help but feeling like he's warning me about something I've overlooked.  However on the other hand my argument is that I HAVE been outside, I HAVE participated in a lot of social events (from drama to sports to dorm-room style get-together activity house point bullshit to outdoorsey hobbies like fishing or rock climbing or hiking or whatever,) and found NONE of them to be appealing whatsoever.

Me: Your issue with what I do is that all the things i derive pleasure from, be they computers, games, internet, books, etc, are all indoor and solitary activities... what's wrong with that
Him: All things in moderation.
Me: But what's the point of having them in moderation if I've already explored other options and found them to be unenjoyable?

In the end this invariably leads back to his vague definition of "enjoying life", which generally means (for him) social interaction with others.  I go to school and I work (though not at the moment.)  I have profs I don't like, classmates I don't like, roommates I don't like, and when I'm employed, coworkers I don't like, and customers I don't like.  I almost invariably find other people to be hell - just things I need to deal with so I can go the fuck home and do what I like to do.  However, he (and he is in the vast majority in our society) hold up this social interaction as one of the greatest of life's experiences.

Him: Life is comedy between pals, fighting and rivalry friendly-style between them, the same with enemies as well, though to a lesser extent.
Me: I don't find this to be appealing, I've only experienced it a rare few times and it's nothing special.
Him: But those rare few times are what you should be living for!  You should be looking back at the end of your life thinking of those moments and saying "That was the best experience of my life!"
Me: I don't want to live stringing together snippets of "best time evar" memories together on a cheap plastic Bratz do-it-yourself necklace kit.  Maybe other people can live their life like that, but I can't.

I don't want to have a life where I force myself to like a group of people so I can create memories with them and constantly relive those memories when those people aren't around.  People like this, these socialites end up marrying the first person they find that can stand them not out of any kind of love but out of sheer loneliness and fear of being alone at death.  They have children that walk all over them with a mate they didn't like, and spend the rest of their years looking back on the "hight of their life" with a heaving sigh.

I don't want that.  And I've found that immersing myself in other worlds than the "real" one - video games, shows, movies, anime, books, novels, the INTERNET - I am constantly bombarded by new experiences, new ways of thought, new ways of viewing reality... Why should I give this up for a few "timeless memories" that I can pine away for as I grow old and crusty?  It's like an old grumpy saggy titty woman looking at her high school yearbook photo of her being a cheerleader.

Think about it, we've probably all done this one before.  Ever sat at the computer at maybe 7 PM and opened an interesting wikipedia link, and read, and thought it was really intriguing so you opened related topics and read them, and kept absorbing more information, and being genuinely entertained on a semi-intellectual level by reading all of this neat stuff, and suddenly holy crap it's 3 AM I have work in four hours oh shit oh shit oh shit.  We've all done that, we all know what it's like.  This is a prime example of the kind of thing I'm talking about.  You'll probably never remember the stuff you read about, but while you were reading you were, on some level, being intellectually stimulated.  If you could constantly do this, be exposed to new methods of thought, new philosophies, new theories, new stories, new ways of being entertained... would you give it up?

Is it so bad that I enjoy isolation from other people?  I still go to school, get decent grades, pay my bills - do everything required to fill survival needs and any other responsibilities concerning school/work.  Any time, money, energy etc I have left over when those tasks are accomplished I can do with what I want, so why is there such a massive push to be social, especially on those who have no desire to be?  Why should I force myself to attend events I'm not interested in to see people I don't like?  How did the 'unhealthy' label even get applied to people living this way?  Is it because they don't have any friends or they don't go out?  But if they WILLINGLY have no friends and have no desire to go out, is that unhealthy?  Why is the 'unhealthy' label slapped to people who simply want to do what they need to do to live and then be left to their own devices?

tl;dr - Is it so bad to avoid social interaction and isolate yourself from others?  If you willingly do it, derive pleasure from it, enjoy your life, and still manage to not act unadjusted when you DO go into public, can you still be labeled psychologically unhealthy?

 

[FlippyD]

No it's not. You sound like an introverted person, which is completely fine.

The problem is extroverted people gain insight and pleasure from being around other people most of the time, while introverts are satisfied being by themselves most of the time. Extroverted people have a hard time understanding this, as introverted people don't see the appeal in being around others.

If you wanted company you'd go out to keep company, and if you wanted to be around other people more often you'd do that to. The fact that you don't isn't a big deal, you're doing what you want and it satisfies you.

The problem is you sound really sarcastic in the way you're talking to your friend, you see social interaction as some kind of grand and vapid optimistic experience while your friend fails to understand that not everyone seeks group involvement for self-fulfillment. Social interaction is a fun and sometimes rewarding experience, but you shouldn't knock it just because it doesn't interest you as your friend should stop trying to run your life. You both should probably spend some time in the others shoes. It won't be rewarding but it'll give you some insight into just what the other person requires to feel complete.

 

[zenotic]

I just had this entire post talked over IRC, but I decided to share my guiding light with the rest of you (term meant endearingly) fuckers.

There is a TL;DR section at the bottom.

The Backstory
Two people meet in some undisclosed medium. In talk, they acknowledge eachothers different lifestyles. One is your, excuse the terminology, Average Joe. Average Joe works, goes to school, checks his email/myspace once in a while to see what's going on with friends (sometimes, he checks it hourly), plays some sports, whatever.

The other is Digital Dave. Digital Dave works, goes to school, hangs around IRC, perhaps plays (insert popular MMO here, I'll use WoW for now), posts regularly in forums.

Now, these two people are living VERY different lifestyles, yet both are the same in MANY aspects.



1) The Major Difference

Average Joe hangs out in real life. Bars, driving around, meeting people (at places), whatever. He exists in the physical world almost exclusivly.

Digital Dave hangs out on the internet. Playing games, surfing the web, meeting people (online), whatever. He (almost) excuslively exists in the digital world.

Section 1: The Outlook on Eachother
Average Joe sees Digital Dave as a complete social outcast. He views his ways as obscure, a shut in, hiding behind fantasy.
Digital Dave sees Average Joe as, for lack of better terminology, average. He does things the way they've been done forever.

Reasons? Average Joe and Digital Dave grew up a bit differently. At least in the current generation (the 15-24 gap, "the iGeneration"), there definitely were two distinct paths. For starters was their availability. Digital Dave might have lived far off, couldn't really "hang out" with the people he knew at school (early schooling is DETRIMENTAL to all of this). He might have lived in a bad 'hood, whatever. Point is, "hanging out" wasn't readily available, or if it was, was not beneficial at the time. Average Joe might have lived in a poorer environment. He didn't have SNES/Dreamcast/PS3 to entertain him. The internet? Existed only in the school library. He played stickball out back, met the neighborhood kids.

Now, overall, you might identify with one of these backgrounds, but I highly doubt it's Average Joe. Here you are, reading this.

Over the course of time, each forges relationships based on their original "destiny", if you will. Average Joe grew up with Frankie from around the block, stayed in the same schools (for the most part), and overall had the opportunity to forge those long lasting physical friendships, hatreds, whatever. He grew accustomed to social norms, they became a part of his life. Now, in Local High School, it becomes a major point. HS is the very epitome of early child hood. It's the break point from child to adult. What you do here generally determines what happens for the next 40 or so years of life.

Digital Dave grew up with BigFr4G1040 from aroundtheblock.com. He probably switched schools a lot in his life due to a lot of reasons (moving, kicked out, whatever), or perhaps he did run the course of the local school district, wound up in Local High School, but his years of online friendships (and thus, Digital Change), eventually grew on him. Now at the breakpoint, his decision is made. He is generally looked upon as the "social outcast", mostly due to the overwhelming numbers against him in the general area. Especially at Local High School, where most people are from Average Joe's background.

Section 2: What They Made, and Why They Won't Change
Average Joe befriends a lot of people. He deals with some of those jock fucks who stole his lunch money, gets in fights occasionally, dates that whore prom queen, picks on Little Timmy for throwing the wrong pitch, works with Sexy Sammy who he's been trying to tap since 8th grade, etc, etc. So, he's forged a name for himself.

Digital Dave befriends a lot of people, too. He deals with some of those fucking hackers who just nailed his CS server, gets in those (retarded) arguments online, dates the local IRC whore, picks on Tim2Man for letting the Terrorist team go 5-0 in a tournement round, maybe designs some websites for SexySammy220 who he's been trying to get nudes of for the last 4 years, etc etc.

So, both are in the same relative standing at this point, just different mediums. Both have their fair share of events to keep them occupied (watching the big game/playing in a MMO, hanging out with friends/hanging out on IRC(forums, whatever)), and both have the same relative social interaction*.

Now, each side looks at the other. Suddenly, Digital Dave sees Average Joe's life as completely inane. He does the same damn things, and his activities don't really entertain Digital Dave. Average Joe sees Digital Dave's life as completely insane. He does the same damn things, yet views Dave as a "shut in", an "outcast".

Both have settled into their current lifestyle quite well.

*Your Mileage May Very.

Section 3: Why?
So now you have the story of Digital Dave and Average Joe (DD and AJ from now on, my hand hurts from a Stickam Session). Why does each view the others lives as out of the ordinary?

The biggest reason is how relationships are managed.

1: Lying
Lying on the internet is fucking easy. Seriously. DD understands this, and is able to fend for himself when it comes to it. He learns to trust some people, not to trust others, etc. His relationships are timebased. Everything he forges, even from Day 1, comes from information fed from those who are telling it. Catching someone e-lying is usually quite hard initially. That's the beauty of it: even if they're lies, you'll still believe them. It might be a negative overall, but if the liar and listener are on the same page, what's the problem?

Lying in real life is fucking easy. Seriously. AJ understands this, and is ALSO able to fend for himself. Sometimes, he has to bullshit to Best Friend Bob where he REALLY was last night (We'll say hookers and blow for now.) Everything he forges, from Day 1, is based off what he sees in general social interaction. Sure, Jake may claim to know all about karate or some shit, but he sure didn't see that arm bar coming in (an arm bar is an intermediate Jiu-Jitsu/grappling move for you not-so-savvy). Evidence mounts up quickly IRL. Jake said he worked at the Subway down the block. The other day you popped in for a turkey club, asked the counterchick "Where's Jake?", and she looks at you like you're an idiot. Busted.

However, in the reverse view, both understand the others worlds, somewhat.
DD knows that people probably bullshit daily (God, I hate this term, but fuckit,) IRL. He hates dealing with it, but also, can't do it. He's asked where he works. Some people might bullshit this to make themselves look better (we'll get into that momentarily). Dave? All too trusting, Dave says "I'm a janitor at McDonalds."

AJ knows people online bullshit daily. He doesn't trust those fuckers. Last time he asked "asl" and got a serious hardcore whacksession on aim, it turned out to be a guy in Germany doing the same thing. He doesn't trust ANYONE. He runs into BillGates on a Microsoft help forum, and when a response to his "WINDOWS SUX" question is answered by BillGates, who replies "Noted, will make sure the Dev team fixes it next build", calls bullshit. Suddenly, AJ is looking at being not trusting enough.

Lying, in general, makes the world go fucking round (politics, religion, general nightlife). It also makes it fucking explode (court, Enron, relationships). AJ and DD understand this, but both take seperate views on this. DD trusts HIS society (after forging relationships), AJ doesn't (after investigating).

So, this section comes down to this: Do you trust too much, or not enough?

2: Adjusting
DD's friend Fr4gM4ster44, their best sniper or whatever, vanishes one day. DD knew FM for a good time, and doesn't quite understand his dissapearance (we'll say CP for now), but doesn't fret. He might be on tomorrow. DD meets JesusShot22 in the match, realizes his skills are roughly the same, and the two talk. A new relationship is forged.

AJ's friend Ricky Racer got FUCKED up last night in a car accident. The hospitals a couple hundred miles away, so visiting is out of the question. AJ, facing the next couple of months without his best friend, is sort of lost. He meets some people at (bar/sports event/class/work), but he still misses the way Ricky used to fuck around in his Honda.

Both DD and AJ have lost someone important to them for the time being. The circumstances are drastically different, but both have to learn to adjust. AJ can't replace. DD can.

Now, before you fags get all hyped up about your BFF OL/IRL, I don't mean entirely replace. The concept of having someone similar around is imperitive to online survival. It's a blessing in the real world.

Without someone to be DD's game buddy, DD turns into something darker (that's for another TLDR post, folks). AJ, without Ricky, struggles on for now. He's still sort of loathing, might turn to some darker habits (AGAIN, ANOTHER TOPIC), but in general, he's going to fight on for survival through thick and thin.

I'm not saying you fuckers can replace EVERYONE to the EXACT DETAIL online, but it's a hell of a lot easier than it is to find someone even similar in real life. You also can't FORGET everyone in real life, but you still move on (unless you're an emo kid, in which case, die pl0x).

Adjusting to a situation is where each personality differs the MOST.

Examples, from personal history.
1)My good friend S got a woman. I'm fucking happy for him. The fuckers never around anymore though. For 5 years, we've been best friends, through it all, and what not. Now? I see that fucker twice a week, if I'm lucky. However, I started hanging around my good friend E a lot more. He's actually a cool fucking guy, like this other night (blah blah blah here). Still wish S would hang out a bit more, I miss those old days. Especially after last week, god damn, I have to tell him.

2)My good friendandmore A dissapeared without a trace. Logged off one day, bam, gone. Looking at a future without A sort of sucks, but J was always pretty cool to talk to. So I transferred what knowledge A had of me to J. Now? I'm looking at a mirror, personality wise, of A, with the same understanding. Wish A would log on, but I'm OK for now.

Both of those are TRUE FUCKING STORIES that happened to me. Granted, I live a bit of a in-the-middle ground, but both are relative (though slightly off) of what happens in each scenario.

Now, why does each do what they do?
If you can adjust over time, and face up, the digital life is it.
If you can adjust quickly (or not at all and just face the facts), IRL is it.

Why?
Destructivness.

3: CRUSHKILLMAIMDESTROYARRRRRRRGH
So, this brings us to my final point for the night.
IRL relationships take a lot more to forge, usually last a lot shorter times (moving, new job, womans (mans), whatever) can change IRL drastically quick. When they end, it's usually harder to accept. If they end on a bad note, BAD shit happens, ie: car windows busted out by Ex, shit talking like mad leading to bad work performance, whatever. IRL relationships are riskier, but to some, seem more rewarding.

OL relationships take TIME to forge. They don't have as many quirks as an IRL relationship. Moving, womans, whatever might change some availibility, but the overall connection is still there. Change doesn't come easy with IRL relationships.

EXAMPLE: A and myself were completely different people 4 years ago. We entirely changed since then, yet, here I am, still talking to her the same as I ever was.

The change ITSELF happens, but changing an online relationships BASIS is truly hard to accomplish. However, when something does end, it's quite easier to "move on". They don't have the same reprocussions as IRL relationships. They might talk shit, but there's always more forums/irc networks/guilds/clans/servers/whatever. Same can be said about IRL, but it's alot easier to meet people when all people in the party have the same general idea (easier to find Necrophiliacs online than it is within a 10 block radius). So, while KillMaimBob might have been awsome for a while (especially at being your main tank [important position in wow]), you can find someone to replace him a lot easier, and thus, forge a new relationship.

Overall?
If it's risky, but rewarding, IRL is for you.
If it's "safer", and can be built upon time, OL is for you.



The COCK Bottom Line
OL and IRL seem quite alike, but once again, differ heavily.
OL relies on truth, risk, and adjusting heavily.
IRL relies on (grain of salt here), truth AND lies, safety nets, and adjusting QUICKLY.

I personally believe that those who look at OL life as "outcast"ish aren't trusting enough, have dug themselves into the social "true" life too much, and don't rely on the mental aspects of a relationship as easily. On the otherhand, they also go through a LOT more bullshit in general, and have more risks.

Those that look at the IRL life as a bit "wasteful" and "risky" are too trusting. They've burried themselves into what COULD be a realm of lies, and they focus on the long term relationshops they build through those possible lies/truths. They can adjust easily (not QUICKLY) in general, and overall risk level is quite low.


As for lying? It's simple. AJ lies to fit in, to avoid trouble. DD does it to become something different (sometimes). AJ is more affected by the social groove he's forged than DD has (once again, the beauty/curse of ADJUSTING), therefore, each one has to rely on different methods.

Adjusting? DD can find similarities in personality quicker, and do what would be called a transfer. AJ cannot, he must rely on what he has around him to fill the void.

Destructiveness? AJ carries more risk, DD carries less. DD relies on time to build his relationships, AJ relies on current events. Both WILL take time, but AJ is a lot quicker (easier to trust someone you've met for the last 3 weeks at a party than it is to trust someone who's ran the flag in a CTF game for the last 3 weeks).


Proof?

Fine.
Gather an equal amount of people who live each life. Ask them for 20 dollars, and in return, in 4 hours, they'll recieve 40. I guarentee the DD's will be more trusting than the AJ's.

Another?
Same principle of people, then bring one stranger into the room, and a PC with a live person at the other end. Each tells a story that's not outrageous. I guarentee the DD's will trust the internet man over the IRL man, and visa versa.

MOAR?
Perhaps a little more unethical, but find a DD and an AJ. Go to AJ's boss and tell him a bad story about AJ. Guarentee AJ ain't gonna be happy for a while. DD? Find some online buddies. DD might be unpopular, but he'll reforge quicker. Hell, that clan sucked anyway.

EVEN MOAR?
DD and AJ both might lose someone close to them. AJ requires others for entertainment, DD does not. DD can carry on his usual activities, and meet new people doing so. AJ? Hard as fuck to party by yourself, bro.


I'll get into the whole entertainment values, the social groove, and some other topics a bit later. For now, this should keep you guys busy.






Like I said, that's my views.

As for myself? I'm middleground. I've got several friends from IRC dating back almost 10 years, some of my most trusting friends exist on irc.slacked.org (shameless plug for #rmxp/#slackers), I've had people from WoW I've actually met and partied with. I've also had my fair share of IRL contact, from weekend keggers in the woods, to ballgames, to poker games, etc. I have some best friends IRL that I'd give my life for. There's not many others who I know live such a double life, so if you're out there, I'd like to talk.






TL;DR VERSION HERE
Read if you lazy fuck, you've got nothing else to do. If you so HAPPEN to have something important to attend to, bookmark, and come back later.

 

[zenotic]

No it's not. You sound like an introverted person, which is completely fine.

The problem is extroverted people gain insight and pleasure from being around other people most of the time, while introverts are satisfied being by themselves most of the time. Extroverted people have a hard time understanding this, as introverted people don't see the appeal in being around others.

If you wanted company you'd go out to keep company, and if you wanted to be around other people more often you'd do that to. The fact that you don't isn't a big deal, you're doing what you want and it satisfies you.

The problem is you sound really sarcastic in the way you're talking to your friend, you see social interaction as some kind of grand and vapid optimistic experience while your friend fails to understand that not everyone seeks group involvement for self-fulfillment. Social interaction is a fun and sometimes rewarding experience, but you shouldn't knock it just because it doesn't interest you as your friend should stop trying to run your life. You both should probably spend some time in the others shoes. It won't be rewarding but it'll give you some insight into just what the other person requires to feel complete.

You're so fucking wrong it's not even funny. Introverted and Extroverted applies to how one projects themselves ideally. Both the IRL and OL lives have aspects of these. Going online vs going offline is NOT a matter of expression. Read the fucking post to find out why you're stupid and should get a clue.

SRY FER TROLLINS BUT I WIN THE INTERNET ^^

 

[arbiter]

;D

 

[zenotic]

SRY FER TROLLINS BUT I WIN THE INTERNET ^^

I'M STILL A HOMO

Actually, like I said on irc...

[03] <+mog> i was gonna do a well constructed response to his misuse of kearsey terminologyy
[03] <+mog> but i don't have the time right this second
[03] <+mog> but he is wrong on the entire use/situation
[03] <+mog> he's looking at des as though all he does is sit and play halo
[03] <+joshisme123> Halo?? Were??
[03] <+mog> whereas if he knew a damn thing, he's more leading into a digital vs IRL life of socializing
[03] <+mog> not to mention the whole I VS E situation ixis brought up is completely irrelevant and refers to how people express
[03] <+mog> ie: is the person more likely to paint a picture, or write a book
[03] <+mog> not to mention
[03] <+mog> a good trollpost after something THAT fucking long might get people to read

I'll get into this a bit further when I'm not zonked out on... erm, some things.

 

[Yaxor]

In my honest opinion, you should do whatever you find right. You should try both things: living socially, and then, you can judge the way of living you like more.

There is nothing wrong to isolate yourself, obviously if you like it.

 

[Despain]

mog i really liked the beginning of your post but when you started getting into the INTERNETBUDDIES CAN BE REPLACED i felt like i got slapped in the face. then you tried and go WELL OBVIOUSLY I DONT MEAN TO OFFEND LOL but still you're missing on some really important things.

some internet friends aren't internet friends. they're friends period. my best fucking friend in the entire world who i LOVE VERY VERY MUCH (actually there are TWO PEOPLE WHO FIT THIS AND GUESS WHAT i know them both on the internet) they're both irreplaceable. one of them is still here with me and we have grown even closer since teloch went away but really man. teloch and wumpi aren't people i met and hung out with in some internet game and i am closer to them than anybody. when teloch stopped coming on i started having a SERIOUSLY ROUGH FUCKING TIME in my life because a VERY BIG PART OF ME was just gone and i am really glad that lately i've been able to talk to him on phone and text message because otherwise shit would suck pretty bad. he's a lot more than just OH A REPLACABLE INTERNET GUY he's a friend who i TRULY LOVE and while i can fill up the TIME by talking to other people online they're still not the same person and iwould very seriously say that my love for teloch is so much deeper and stronger and has a much more impact on my life than any AJ football jock buddy. and I have plans to have a future with them and fuck man i'm going to be spending a thousands bucks to get wumpi here for a SINGLE WEEKEND.

yeah so those are a lot bigger than your casual E-FRIEND but shit.

imo i think your big post really does nothing but enforce the very stereotypes that you were trying to argue down.

 

[Despain]

also since you mentioned it yourself the whole IRL shit is SO FUCKING ANNOYING I DONT GET IT i mean jesus christ i am sitting here and i can feel my finers pounding at my fucking keyboard so why isnt this REAL LIFE????

 

[Despain]

There is nothing wrong to isolate yourself, obviously if you like it.

also what? ISOLATE? i can GUARANTEE that i have MUCH MORE CONTACT with the "ouitside word" than your average person who doesn't spend so much time on the internet. the very REASON that the internet is so fucking important to me is because it's the EXACT OPPOSITE of isolation.

 

[Despain]

i REALLY LIKE this topic because it's making me think about my own life and stuff (not that i don't do a lot of thinking anyway ohoohoh) but for real. i mean yeah i'm acting all offended and shit because it's easier and more fun (and a hell of a lot more entertaining for you fucks to read) when in write that way but know that i'm not actually a massive fag acting like this shit is personal attacks on me.

analysis of my social life. thanks to this topic i see that all my "oh i'm not social at all" stuff is ENTIRELY INCORRECT and dissonance and mog thanks for that because you've opened my eyes to something that has been true for a long time but i just haven't really thought about it in this way. like yeah i've thought about it but i haven't really said it out loud to myself or whatever and that is that i am INCREDIBLY FUCKING SOCIAL and i have SO MANY FUCKING FRIENDS AND ACQUAINTENCES ITS DISGUSTING. you can go up to narly anybody on my campus and they'll be like YEAH MAN I GOT BUDDIES AT A KEGGER but when you go to me i can be like YEAH THRE ARE 25 PEOPLE IN MY IRC CHANNEL RIGHT NOW CHILLIN WITH ME.

on top of that i have my CORE CREW of buddies both online and offline. i have like two or three good friends offline and a number of people who i play amgic with pretty regularly and that's pretty cool. but my CLOSEST AND DEAREST friends i have enver met face to face. wumpi and teloch and kav and hibernate and dissonance and rexxz and HELL even TREG and shadow and atemu i consider very good friends because i know them all SO WELL. so yeah i have a lot of friends and they are very good to me and i think i am very good to them and because of that i have a INCREDIBLY RICH AND ACTIVE SOCIAL LIFE i spend more time with my friends than most people do (like seriously how many hours out of EVERY SINGLE DAY am I in irc just chillin on my second monitor while i do other things) and this is an awesome thing.

so Mr. Average Joe you can suck a dick because for all of your "lol your friends are behind a computer screen you loser" i KNOW that my friends no matter where they are physically will always fucking be here for me and that's what matters so eat my chode.

peace bros i'm out

 

[JoshieBoy]

I hate people who try to change who you are. They try to make their way of living seem like the right way of living which is wrong. You should do whatever feels right to you. Do not let him persuade you to do what you don't want to. Just tell him that If you ever want to become more social, he will be the first person you will come to and leave it at that.

 

[FlippyD]

I haven't read the rest of the thread (since there's a giant fucking wall of text), but I'll go back and read it, then respond to the other points but...

Mog, I wasn't talking about the internet... So...

Way to be an asshat.

 

[Venetia]

@_@

jesus

I'm a Digital Dave I guess, but I'm always plagued by the feeling that I'm missing out on life. I'm not very happy with spending my life as a Digital Dave, but I'm too broke and too antisocial to do anything about it.

It's hard to go out and party and have fun when you have no friends and you suck large, sweaty asses at making them.

Though I think all of this is more attributable to some psych disorder people keep trying to label me with. I honestly don't think I could ever stop seeing that the grass is greener on the other side, no matter what side I'm on ...


So far as I'm concerned, "Digital Daves" are fine, and they seem to be able to mesh with the "Real World", largely, with no problem. The average internet-guy isn't any big problem, and they're not the ones that "Average Joes" are quite as worried over. In this new era, the regular "internet-guy" is just like a casual drinker at a bar. The only problem ones are the alcoholics.

There have been some very noticeable changes in behavior from people as a whole since the "Digital Revolution", which I think will only become more severe with time. Things like people losing touch with proper etiquette, on the phone, and in person. Children "growing up too fast", since they have the world of unsavory knowledge readily available. Targetting of minors in pedophilia webs and underage prostitution rings. The deepening, broadening, and intensifying of strange, harmful fetishes. People losing all touch with "real life" (i.e. a broadening of agoraphobia and hermitism) altogether.

But you have to expect some negatives from something so different and progressive I suppose.

 

[FlippyD]

Ok, Zenotic, or Mog, you're wrong... And for many things.

I might have to work two shifts to cover all this wrongness.

1.) Dissonance was talking nothing about the internet, or internet versus real-life problems so... WTF?
2.) Introversion and Extroversion aren't just some stuff some people do sometimes for whatever reason. People mentally fall mostly into either category. These are scientific facts first theorized by Carl Jung and since then a lot of work and study has gone into the field of psychology concerning the intro or extroversion of human beings. It's not like the arm-chair made up bullshit you seem to spout on about. Here's some actual books and information you can actually read by people who actually know shit, you can find them at your local library and online (since you like it so much). MIND BOGGLING!!

• Jung, C.J. (1921). Psychologischen Typen. Rascher Verlag, Zurich - translation H.G. Baynes, 1923.
• Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 491-517.
• Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Thomas Publishing.
• Furnham, A., L. Forde and T. Cotter (1998). Personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences 24:2, 187-192.
• http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g ... 2602000328
• http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g ... 2602000236

3.) People act differently on the internet. This is because on the internet, due to anonymity, act without an ego (concerning the ego, superego and the id.) Here's a primer on basic psychology since you've convinced me you have no working concept of how the mind works! See, the id is your base animal instincts, think of him like a survival centered caveman. Say "ook-ook" to Mr. Caveman! lol. And the super-ego is your social driven construct that acts to supress the needs of the id when they clash with the pre-determined rules of your surrounding culture and society as you understand them. He's like a big police-officer man. The ego is in the center and works to find a happy medium between the two based on various stimulus. So when you hear the sarcastic tone in my voice and my condescending poise your id reacts in a rage fit because I'm talking down to you, but if your superego is strong enough it will work to suppress that rage because showing that is a tale-tell sign that you know I'm right and all you can do about it is make a fuss.

On the internet all you can use for inference is text. You can't use all your senses to tell just how I'm telling you this information. The speed, cadence, body language, and usually context are all stripped away. Because of this lack of information people must supplant the gaps in context with whatever scraps of personalization they can find. This also causes people to be freer to express their inner-id (or so they claim) and it makes it easier to create false identities and the fragile nature of code allows anyone with enough know-how to do almost whatever they please. In this right, you are somewhat correct in that the flexible nature of telecommunications affects how people react, but certainly not in concerns to real-life.

Because people have a different mental makeup in online societies you are essentially learning how to act in a different culture composed of different rules. And since those who use the internet are interspersed with both cultures at the same time you avoid the culture shock you might react to in normal culture changing situations.

It just so happens that those who use the internet heavily happen to be introverts, however with the advent of web 2.0 this is no longer true, as extroverts also use the internet to connect to one another for similar reasons.

Here's more actual facts that back up my claim, reading is fun!:

• http://www.amazon.com/My-Tiny-Life-Pass ... 0805036261
• Freud, Sigmund (1910), "The Origin and Development of Psychoanalysis", American Journal of Psychology 21(2), 196–218.
• Freud, Sigmund (1923), "Neurosis and Psychosis". The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XIX (1923-1925): The Ego and the Id and Other Works, 147-154

 

[zenotic]

Quoting Freud, who is the biggest fraud to psychology, is quite wrong. Form your own opinions, stop copypasting other peoples shit. Adding a bunch of sources like you're writing a college essay on a FORUM is fucking retarded as well. And the I vs E argument is still moot.

 

[FlippyD]

Quoting Freud, who is the biggest fraud to psychology, is quite wrong. Form your own opinions, stop copypasting other peoples shit. Adding a bunch of sources like you're writing a college essay on a FORUM is fucking retarded as well. And the I vs E argument is still moot.

And posting long ass irrelevant shit that has hardly anything to do with the topic is better?

Oh, and here's something: Frued theories on dream analysis was wrong, that and, y'know, FRUED ISN'T THE MOTHER FUCKING BE-ALL END-ALL OF PSYCHOLOGY!! That said, his theories on introversion and extroversion has been proven as true and continues to be a part of modern psychology. That and id, ego and superego are Carl Jung, who all psychologists follow since his theories still hold water... But you didn't read that far I guess. I'm sorry, I'll make up some lolcat signs next time so you don't have to waste your time.

anyway...

Holy shit, would you believe there are other mother fuckers out there who study the way we think. Yeah, and they've been working on this shit since Freud kicked the bucket and, will wonders never cease: actually make headway into the field.

I included those citations to show how baseline retarded your post was. You just made shit up. GODDAMN if that isn't convenient?

But I do apologize for writing a college level essay on a forum. You're right, you are to fucking stupid to actually understand what I'm talking about. Do you want me to read you good night moon and tuck you in for "beddy-bye" instead? You won't have to worry about thinking, reading and knowing what the fuck you're talking about anymore. Hell, I know it says this is the Symposium, but since you raised such a good argument we'll change it to "Mog's sleepy-nap-time nursery."

 

[___]

I would take the "big wide world" argument more seriously if most people's idea of "experiencing life" wasn't going to bars/clubs and getting stupid for a night. That's not "living" and what the denser among us don't understand is that some people require intellectual stimulation. I really, really love hiking, exploring, and generally doing things out there in the 'big world' that don't involve gaggles of people, and other "shut-ins" tend to have similar interests that are analogous to their interests in gaming and general online life (Des plays magic irl, for instance). It's just that we're intelligent introverts. It's normal, natural, and not difficult to understand.

For more of an understanding of why online socializing is more satisfying for many people, you have to understand the concept of the "long tail". Basically, in real life, your social sphere is limited to the people who are within reasonable distance. That necessarily limits the pool of interests and personalities you can interact with; in a small town you'll be lucky to find one individual who shares your interests precisely enough to become great friends, unless you are the type who conforms to the overwhelming social norm in order to meet your social needs (quality vs. quantity is a big part of the introvert-extrovert dynamic). Online, however, your social pool is limited only by internet connection and the likelihood that you'll wander into the right spaces, which grows increasingly high over time. So while there may only be one person who could potentially be a very good friend in a given small town, every one of those people from every town can potentially get together online and form a vast social network. Extroverts who stick to 'real life' encounters may find a large group people who are superficially similar, in that they like drinking and bowling, or golf, or whatever, but online you'll find people who are as exactly like you (or the type of person you want to meet) as you can possibly desire, so the quality of your relationships goes up even though the richness of interaction you get in real life is missing.

Telepresence will significantly mitigate that loss over time, leaving the only positive argument for 'real life' versus online relationships that in 'real life' you are more likely to be forced to interact with people you may choose not to online, which helps broaden your worldview and tolerance of others if you're not the kind of cockface who chases off or persecutes people who show a sign that they're different somehow.

 

[FlippyD]

Consider this Mr. N, it's true those in low-pop areas are limited to that social pool, however a great number of common interests among those people would be the same due to the fact that they live in a small community (ie, if you lived in Twin Peaks Washington then you can bet a good number of people will have an interest in One Eyed Jacks as it's one of the few "recreational" areas available). Though, there comes a point where you have so many people to allow a diverse number of interests, while at the same time not enough to have enough people for there to be a sizable group to facilitate the various sub cultures.

That said, I also think just having the internet opens people up to a larger variety of interests outside of what they would normally encounter on their own.

Lastly, in my opinion there will come a time when the internet and telecommunication will no longer be limited to a stationary computer. Soon there may be better virtual worlds that collide and mesh with our real life on a higher level, thus we won't even think about "online" and "offline" as two separate entities, but one singular experience. I think web 2.0 is the start of this.

EDIT:

Just realized my first paragraph doesn't make too much sense. Basically, in a small town you wouldn't get enough stimulus to gain interest in things not possible within that town (nor hear about them.) If all you've got is the diner, the bar, the other bar and the Black Lodge then your preferences in recreational activities will be limited to what's available in those small spaces. You can't get an interest in something if you don't know about it.

 

[Despain]

Lastly, in my opinion there will come a time when the internet and telecommunication will no longer be limited to a stationary computer. Soon there may be better virtual worlds that collide and mesh with our real life on a higher level, thus we won't even think about "online" and "offline" as two separate entities, but one singular experience. I think web 2.0 is the start of this.

i'm here already and it's a good thing imo i talk to offline friends about you guys just as "MY FRIEND" or whatever and dont even really think about it