A conversation, simply. There’s no requirements for having a discussion. That’s what we do, we speak to each other whether for good or bad.
And just in case because I’m still not completely sure if you are actually asking something or just making a social comment on online media; The literal antonym to what you seem to describe would be a “subjective” or “speculative” discussion. There’s other antonyms but I’ll let you search those out to see which fits your need.
Sorry my man but you are not clear at all. I’m trying to understand what you do not understand about people talking with each other. There’s nothing more to it. It’s neither good nor bad nor strong or weak, it’s just a discussion. What happens afterwards with the information each gathered from the discussion is different but we need context. It’s what the discussion is ABOUT that is important not the discussion in itself.
So give us some context. Are you talking about journalism in media or are you also questioning whether we should discuss our hobbies with like minded individuals? Are you implying there’s something wrong with social media because it allow anyone to talk with anybody about anything?
WIthout answers to these your questions is pointless I’m afraid.
edit: Otherwise, if I try to answer your question as it was written: Yes it’s good, Yes it’s bad. More details are needed to judge beyond that.
My point is, this thing that we have here is unprecedented in its vast size and it’s profound disconnection from reality.
So no, not just “a conversation”.
A conversation where most of the talk refers to fantasy. Where any insanity can find a support group filled with the likeminded. Where the greatest powers are those that seek to manipulate us and control our attention. A dreamworld where matter is entertainment.
And everybody takes it so seriously.
If it was a person we’d put him in an asylum.
Yes, what is this thing?
If this were a fantasy novel we might call it a hell-realm filled with hungry hallucinating ghosts and promise-weaving succubi. Too much?
Ok thanks finally some insight on your thoughts. See how it gives better context than just saying “What is this” and gesticulating towards the internet. Your question was heavily influenced by prejudice.
Most of the talk does not refer to fantasy, that is a great example of some “unempirical evidence”. Some do, a lot don’t, you need to be able to filter that. Sure If you look for it, the worst will appear. But stop mindlessly reading what pops in front of you and make some active research and your worldview might change.
The rest is just you thinking out loud. Nobody takes everything so seriously all the time about every subject. Honestly I’m thinking you are falling for what you seem so concerned about. Look away from the endless stream sometimes. Search for your own source of news. Make your own change. The world certainly looks grim if we let rampant capitalism unleashed, but you are not proposing anything here. This here post is you disguising a rant into a question.
Or did you really only want someone to answer you “It’s hell”?
You really read like an angsty teenager who just had it’s first joint and 101 philosophy class.
Edit: Are you suggesting people shouldn’t have the right to debate with one another? Or that some should get it but not the others?
Give me an example of a better answer to whatever you wrote here. And I wasn’t trying to be insulting I’m sorry. It’s just very hard to understand what you are questionning beyond “society bad! Yes/No?”
Re this giant conversation… this collective linguistic technology-augmented hallucination…
It’s good because it ignores space. You can talk to anybody all over the world instantaneously.
It’s bad because it is dominated by the loudest
It’s good because we can render our ideas in a broad menu of options. Text, sound, video
It’s bad because it does not differentiate between levels of abstraction. First-hand accounts carry the same weight as fifth-hand acccounts.
It’s good because it’s convenient. Smartphones.
It’s bad because it exists entirely apart from the world. Asserting a world-ness of its own. And that’s a seductive argument.
It’s good and bad because it supplies infinite entertainment.
It is strong and weak the way all language is strong and weak.
That’s all that one person could come up with in 5 minutes. Theoretically the combined intellect of the internet’s billions might come up with a couple more.
Yet you asked “what is this”. Lol, you’re tripping balls mate. Plus who are you to decide what’s good, bad, strong or weak. Especially with some bullshit like “it’s apart from the world” (it’s not, it’s definitely part of it you aren’t transcending dimensions here). Anyway get some sleep.
A conversation, simply. There’s no requirements for having a discussion. That’s what we do, we speak to each other whether for good or bad.
And just in case because I’m still not completely sure if you are actually asking something or just making a social comment on online media; The literal antonym to what you seem to describe would be a “subjective” or “speculative” discussion. There’s other antonyms but I’ll let you search those out to see which fits your need.
Your naming it sheds little light.
What’s good, bad, strong and weak about it?
Sorry my man but you are not clear at all. I’m trying to understand what you do not understand about people talking with each other. There’s nothing more to it. It’s neither good nor bad nor strong or weak, it’s just a discussion. What happens afterwards with the information each gathered from the discussion is different but we need context. It’s what the discussion is ABOUT that is important not the discussion in itself.
So give us some context. Are you talking about journalism in media or are you also questioning whether we should discuss our hobbies with like minded individuals? Are you implying there’s something wrong with social media because it allow anyone to talk with anybody about anything?
WIthout answers to these your questions is pointless I’m afraid.
edit: Otherwise, if I try to answer your question as it was written: Yes it’s good, Yes it’s bad. More details are needed to judge beyond that.
My point is, this thing that we have here is unprecedented in its vast size and it’s profound disconnection from reality.
So no, not just “a conversation”.
A conversation where most of the talk refers to fantasy. Where any insanity can find a support group filled with the likeminded. Where the greatest powers are those that seek to manipulate us and control our attention. A dreamworld where matter is entertainment.
And everybody takes it so seriously.
If it was a person we’d put him in an asylum.
Yes, what is this thing?
If this were a fantasy novel we might call it a hell-realm filled with hungry hallucinating ghosts and promise-weaving succubi. Too much?
Ok thanks finally some insight on your thoughts. See how it gives better context than just saying “What is this” and gesticulating towards the internet. Your question was heavily influenced by prejudice.
Most of the talk does not refer to fantasy, that is a great example of some “unempirical evidence”. Some do, a lot don’t, you need to be able to filter that. Sure If you look for it, the worst will appear. But stop mindlessly reading what pops in front of you and make some active research and your worldview might change.
The rest is just you thinking out loud. Nobody takes everything so seriously all the time about every subject. Honestly I’m thinking you are falling for what you seem so concerned about. Look away from the endless stream sometimes. Search for your own source of news. Make your own change. The world certainly looks grim if we let rampant capitalism unleashed, but you are not proposing anything here. This here post is you disguising a rant into a question.
Ugh. Forget it.
What do you think then?
Or did you really only want someone to answer you “It’s hell”? You really read like an angsty teenager who just had it’s first joint and 101 philosophy class.
Edit: Are you suggesting people shouldn’t have the right to debate with one another? Or that some should get it but not the others?
No man. I wanted something better than conventional, popular, obvious and literal.
And now I’m being insulting. Sorry.
Give me an example of a better answer to whatever you wrote here. And I wasn’t trying to be insulting I’m sorry. It’s just very hard to understand what you are questionning beyond “society bad! Yes/No?”
Re this giant conversation… this collective linguistic technology-augmented hallucination…
It’s good because it ignores space. You can talk to anybody all over the world instantaneously.
It’s bad because it is dominated by the loudest
It’s good because we can render our ideas in a broad menu of options. Text, sound, video
It’s bad because it does not differentiate between levels of abstraction. First-hand accounts carry the same weight as fifth-hand acccounts.
It’s good because it’s convenient. Smartphones.
It’s bad because it exists entirely apart from the world. Asserting a world-ness of its own. And that’s a seductive argument.
It’s good and bad because it supplies infinite entertainment.
It is strong and weak the way all language is strong and weak.
That’s all that one person could come up with in 5 minutes. Theoretically the combined intellect of the internet’s billions might come up with a couple more.
Yet you asked “what is this”. Lol, you’re tripping balls mate. Plus who are you to decide what’s good, bad, strong or weak. Especially with some bullshit like “it’s apart from the world” (it’s not, it’s definitely part of it you aren’t transcending dimensions here). Anyway get some sleep.