The internet is not a place for people who lack critical thinking skills.
Me? I admit getting caught up in some of the dramas of the British Royals while still thinking "Leave them alone!"
For me, the internet is The Encyclopedia Brittanica, The World Book Encyclopedia, a Dictionary and sources of trivial information. The TRICK is to be able to discern what's accurate and truthful information!
Agreed. Unfortunately, the Internet is nothing BUT a place for people who lack critical thinking skills. I'm not sure how much of that is just the limitation of youth (I certainly was no Einstein in that department when I was young--kneejerk cynicism isn't the same thing as critical thinking.) But I'm afraid the line between real and virtual is bleeding, making a Madras cloth out of the life we all have inside screens.
Yeah...I DO believe one has to consciously develop critical thinking skills. For at LEAST 40 years, it's been the corporate media's mandate to entertain and distract while the machinations of those who enrich themselves (with power, money, influence) work quietly (sometimes) in the background.
Now, we see the results of the dumming down of 'murica.
Sep 28, 2022·edited Sep 28, 2022Liked by Stacey Eskelin
I read to the end of your article with anticipation, wanting your "five ways" to drive inspire me to action, to go to the ramparts. But, I was, I must say, a little disappointed because the advice would fail, methinks, to penetrate the mind of those who grew up in the digital ecosystem. Those of us who had a life before smartphones get it, but, we are a dying breed, and we're probably doing most of what you advise anyway.
What we need here is an "anti-Vietnam" movement. There was a war; there was a rationale to getting the hell out; there was a generational divide; there was a moral dimension to the movement; there were leaders and heroes on the protest side, and real villains in opposition, there was a supporting cast amongst musicians and artists. And so on.
So, where's our Vietnam when we need one? Well, it ain't found in geography. I think it's hyper-capitalism. There is an interlocking symbiosis of giant corporations who, with massive computer power, diabolical algorithms and quarterly profit objectives have seized control of our minds with a kind of hypnotic incrementalism that has us in the grip of their matrix.
The Vietnam protest movement did not start as a mass movement. It started when a few started to articulate the outrageous "anti-communist" nonsense that evolved since the end of WW2 and shaped the politics of the 20th century and resulted in the Cold War and then arrogant barbarities that America imposed on Vietnam and elsewhere. It was during the 20th century that American style capitalism became the prime mover of the American empire. Eisenhower had anticipated it by his identification of the military-industrial complex, but the corporate complex was much more complex than that.
Going to museums, reading books in print form, dressing differently etc cannot overcome the power of hyper-capitalism. An honest to god revolt might do it, if it catches fire.
I feel you, Vian. And yes, it is hyper-capitalism that's driving this. We Gen Xers and older Millennials are the only ones (in my estimation) that can spearhead a movement away from the digital and into either a hybrid system (digital and analog) or something more than analog but not digital. But we are all of us headed in the wrong direction here. I can't just fault Zoomers. They will have to come to their own wisdom on this issue. We can't do it for them. But if status drives artistic innovation, and it does, then we oldsters must make unplugged art a "thing" again. We must make it attractive by recreating a culture that (I believe) pushes violently against Internet monoculture. This is why recent doings with AI in the art world give me the cold terrors. It's everything we must unite to oppose.
We may, collectively, be facing something like addiction withdrawal...a tough slog for many if not most. One place to start is in primary school, continuing on through high school with education about the impacts of tech on young brains. Obviously, with reinforcement on the home front.
Plato in the Phaedrus(? not actually too sure. I realize it is a crime against god and reality to say this, but I despise Plato and spend no more time on him than I must. I'm with Thackeray and his evaluation of Socrates: The more I read about him, the less I wonder that they poisoned him) expresses his despite for paper books, because they weaken the memory. This feeds my educated distrust of those who would condemn eBooks as inferior. The fact is, they are too recent an invention to really know what the long term differences might be (if any.) (A professor of my acquaintance said he preferred dead-trees because he remembered his annotations by "seeing" where they were in the book. Trouble is, he was no better at finding his notes than I was at finding *his* notes. On my kindle, I simply scrolled through the list or did a text search.)
There's a group I'm a part of that meets about once every month (virtually) called "Socrates Salon." The central theme is conversation, bring folks together over a topic and allow everyone to have their say, and then respond. Living where I do (the asshole of Southern Illinois, where dreams go to die) over any given month, this is often the only real conversation I ever have. (I don't count talking to the checkout clerk at the grocery. "Your total comes to ... " is not a conversation.) I've studied the problem long enough to know that there simply is no solution. I can't afford to move, I can't afford to get out more; and the people down here are almost universally Christian Dominionist neo-Fascists who believe God the father, the son, and the holy spirit, are Trump, Don Jr., and Ivanka.
I almost didn't look up "Thirst Trap." I felt a little like Sean Bean in The Martian: "I typed it into Google. Don't."
Finally: I have a flip-phone. I will never have a Smart Phone. Internet access is through a dedicated device. Reading is through a dedicated device. Using the phone is through a dedicated device.
LOL! Being in a non-English-speaking country, I have little choice but to buy ebooks. I feel the loss. I'm a texture-sensitive, feely-touchy type. Not having binders' glue and a sturdy cover in my hand is a hardship. And I absolutely have a harder time retaining what I've read when it's digital. I think it's because on some level I know I can always "just look it up," which means I'm making less of an effort to remember information.
You gotta tell me though. What do you hate about Plato? I don't know enough about him to form an opinion, but I certainly respect yours.
I find him pompous and tedious. His "arguments" consist of Socrates making an assertion and then everybody else agreeing with him. This is, in many respects, a problem endemic to the dialogical approach, which is moved more by rhetorical flourish than logical coherence.
Once or twice Plato is actually honest, and Socrates gets his ass kicked. But mostly its just, "Yes, Socrates!" "That's true, Socrates!" "Without doubt, Socrates!" Never once, "Shut the fuck up, you strutting, arrogant, condescending punk!"
There are a few dialogs that I like. The Euthyphro does about as good a job as you could wish of undermining the idea that values and The Good require God. (If the Good is rational, then we don't need God. If Good depends on God, then it is not rational and that makes God a tyrant.) The Symposium is always fun to teach, because I always got the question, "Dr. Herstein, were these men all homo-sek-shewals?" (Plato also slips in a not very sly slander of Aristophanes, who gave an unflattering picture of Socrates in his comedy "The Clouds.") But the structure of The Symposium is the most interesting part: it is a spiral of stories that are always approaching, but never quite reaching, an understanding of "Love." Iris Murdoch also saw this ("Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals"), and it was a minor thrill reading her analysis long after I'd formed my own, and seeing that she agreed with me.
Plato himself despised art even as he practiced it.
Yet another aside, I believe the term "Conspicuous Consumption" was originally coined by Thorstein Veblen in his (free for the download) book, "The Theory of The Leisure Class." https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
Absolutely. We primates are shameless status seekers. We all do it, too, each in his or her own way and in his or her own milieu. I'd like to think I don't do this, but I TOTALLY do. Trumpers' horrific spelling and grammar, for instance. In my heart, I despise them for it. I can think of fifty ways to justify my disdain, but boil it down, it's just snobbery. So, I have no leg to stand on.
Loved THEORY OF THE LEISURE CLASS. And I know you've referenced Jardine's WORLDLY GOODS before, too.
Oh, one of the reasons I am skeptical about the claims regarding the inferiority of eReaders is that I've yet to see a single study that differentiates between an ACTUAL eReader, and reading on a Smart Phone, or a tablet, or a computer. As I've said, I do not have an SP, but I have the latter two, and I find the effort of trying to read on them profoundly different from reading on my Kindle. The Kindle is light enough, has a long enough battery life, and is not backlit, so that I can adopt any reading position I choose, and never get a headache in the process.
I've found that the position in which one reads is a very significant factor in how the material is engaged. A dedicated eReader moves and handles like a book, and that places the reader in the position of authority: one is interrogating the text, rather than sitting passively before it. My experience might be wildly atypical, but the fact that no account is given to such differences, that no effort is spent even acknowledging that such differences exist, is no small part of my above mentioned skepticism.
"How then do we fight back? By clinging to the vestiges of a dying empire?"
EVERY generation rages against the dying light. It's the way of the world, which is going to Hell IN A HANDBASKET AS WE SPEAK.
I don't get, I'm not going to get it, and I'm not going to pretend to even try. It's a generational thing, and I'm clearly no longer the target demographic (Which is a WAY wordy way of saying, "I'M TOO F*****G OLD!!").
Strangely, I'm OK with that. Let the kids worry about all the superficial crap. They'll find out in good time that none of it matters. For now, I'm going to luxuriate in the knowledge that it really. Doesn't. Matter.
**Steps slowly off soapbox, mounts trusty steed, and rides languidly off into the sunset.**
FakeBook, credit cards, internet, and iPhones are all technological advancements of convenience, which in turn, has lead to this explosion of alternative realities of exploitative Plasticism. Real friends, or trolls? Cash or credit? Encyclopedia or internet? Flip phone or umbilicus that requires constant attention and upkeep? The convenience has replaced the reward of critical thinking to solve problems. It’s a love hate relationship like Jekyll and Hyde, everyone has become an avatar. It’s sensory overload navigating the seas of technological pollution. It seems as though terra firma has sunk into the abyss. Convenience is when you can actually talk to a live human being trying to dispute your bills over the phone without jumping through hoops like a seal.
The internet is not a place for people who lack critical thinking skills.
Me? I admit getting caught up in some of the dramas of the British Royals while still thinking "Leave them alone!"
For me, the internet is The Encyclopedia Brittanica, The World Book Encyclopedia, a Dictionary and sources of trivial information. The TRICK is to be able to discern what's accurate and truthful information!
Agreed. Unfortunately, the Internet is nothing BUT a place for people who lack critical thinking skills. I'm not sure how much of that is just the limitation of youth (I certainly was no Einstein in that department when I was young--kneejerk cynicism isn't the same thing as critical thinking.) But I'm afraid the line between real and virtual is bleeding, making a Madras cloth out of the life we all have inside screens.
That's a lot of words to say, "Twitter." 🤣
Yeah...I DO believe one has to consciously develop critical thinking skills. For at LEAST 40 years, it's been the corporate media's mandate to entertain and distract while the machinations of those who enrich themselves (with power, money, influence) work quietly (sometimes) in the background.
Now, we see the results of the dumming down of 'murica.
I read to the end of your article with anticipation, wanting your "five ways" to drive inspire me to action, to go to the ramparts. But, I was, I must say, a little disappointed because the advice would fail, methinks, to penetrate the mind of those who grew up in the digital ecosystem. Those of us who had a life before smartphones get it, but, we are a dying breed, and we're probably doing most of what you advise anyway.
What we need here is an "anti-Vietnam" movement. There was a war; there was a rationale to getting the hell out; there was a generational divide; there was a moral dimension to the movement; there were leaders and heroes on the protest side, and real villains in opposition, there was a supporting cast amongst musicians and artists. And so on.
So, where's our Vietnam when we need one? Well, it ain't found in geography. I think it's hyper-capitalism. There is an interlocking symbiosis of giant corporations who, with massive computer power, diabolical algorithms and quarterly profit objectives have seized control of our minds with a kind of hypnotic incrementalism that has us in the grip of their matrix.
The Vietnam protest movement did not start as a mass movement. It started when a few started to articulate the outrageous "anti-communist" nonsense that evolved since the end of WW2 and shaped the politics of the 20th century and resulted in the Cold War and then arrogant barbarities that America imposed on Vietnam and elsewhere. It was during the 20th century that American style capitalism became the prime mover of the American empire. Eisenhower had anticipated it by his identification of the military-industrial complex, but the corporate complex was much more complex than that.
Going to museums, reading books in print form, dressing differently etc cannot overcome the power of hyper-capitalism. An honest to god revolt might do it, if it catches fire.
I feel you, Vian. And yes, it is hyper-capitalism that's driving this. We Gen Xers and older Millennials are the only ones (in my estimation) that can spearhead a movement away from the digital and into either a hybrid system (digital and analog) or something more than analog but not digital. But we are all of us headed in the wrong direction here. I can't just fault Zoomers. They will have to come to their own wisdom on this issue. We can't do it for them. But if status drives artistic innovation, and it does, then we oldsters must make unplugged art a "thing" again. We must make it attractive by recreating a culture that (I believe) pushes violently against Internet monoculture. This is why recent doings with AI in the art world give me the cold terrors. It's everything we must unite to oppose.
We may, collectively, be facing something like addiction withdrawal...a tough slog for many if not most. One place to start is in primary school, continuing on through high school with education about the impacts of tech on young brains. Obviously, with reinforcement on the home front.
Did you see this in the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2022/artificial-intelligence-images-dall-e/
Plato in the Phaedrus(? not actually too sure. I realize it is a crime against god and reality to say this, but I despise Plato and spend no more time on him than I must. I'm with Thackeray and his evaluation of Socrates: The more I read about him, the less I wonder that they poisoned him) expresses his despite for paper books, because they weaken the memory. This feeds my educated distrust of those who would condemn eBooks as inferior. The fact is, they are too recent an invention to really know what the long term differences might be (if any.) (A professor of my acquaintance said he preferred dead-trees because he remembered his annotations by "seeing" where they were in the book. Trouble is, he was no better at finding his notes than I was at finding *his* notes. On my kindle, I simply scrolled through the list or did a text search.)
There's a group I'm a part of that meets about once every month (virtually) called "Socrates Salon." The central theme is conversation, bring folks together over a topic and allow everyone to have their say, and then respond. Living where I do (the asshole of Southern Illinois, where dreams go to die) over any given month, this is often the only real conversation I ever have. (I don't count talking to the checkout clerk at the grocery. "Your total comes to ... " is not a conversation.) I've studied the problem long enough to know that there simply is no solution. I can't afford to move, I can't afford to get out more; and the people down here are almost universally Christian Dominionist neo-Fascists who believe God the father, the son, and the holy spirit, are Trump, Don Jr., and Ivanka.
I almost didn't look up "Thirst Trap." I felt a little like Sean Bean in The Martian: "I typed it into Google. Don't."
Finally: I have a flip-phone. I will never have a Smart Phone. Internet access is through a dedicated device. Reading is through a dedicated device. Using the phone is through a dedicated device.
All you kids get off my lawn.
LOL! Being in a non-English-speaking country, I have little choice but to buy ebooks. I feel the loss. I'm a texture-sensitive, feely-touchy type. Not having binders' glue and a sturdy cover in my hand is a hardship. And I absolutely have a harder time retaining what I've read when it's digital. I think it's because on some level I know I can always "just look it up," which means I'm making less of an effort to remember information.
You gotta tell me though. What do you hate about Plato? I don't know enough about him to form an opinion, but I certainly respect yours.
I find him pompous and tedious. His "arguments" consist of Socrates making an assertion and then everybody else agreeing with him. This is, in many respects, a problem endemic to the dialogical approach, which is moved more by rhetorical flourish than logical coherence.
Once or twice Plato is actually honest, and Socrates gets his ass kicked. But mostly its just, "Yes, Socrates!" "That's true, Socrates!" "Without doubt, Socrates!" Never once, "Shut the fuck up, you strutting, arrogant, condescending punk!"
There are a few dialogs that I like. The Euthyphro does about as good a job as you could wish of undermining the idea that values and The Good require God. (If the Good is rational, then we don't need God. If Good depends on God, then it is not rational and that makes God a tyrant.) The Symposium is always fun to teach, because I always got the question, "Dr. Herstein, were these men all homo-sek-shewals?" (Plato also slips in a not very sly slander of Aristophanes, who gave an unflattering picture of Socrates in his comedy "The Clouds.") But the structure of The Symposium is the most interesting part: it is a spiral of stories that are always approaching, but never quite reaching, an understanding of "Love." Iris Murdoch also saw this ("Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals"), and it was a minor thrill reading her analysis long after I'd formed my own, and seeing that she agreed with me.
Plato himself despised art even as he practiced it.
Yet another aside, I believe the term "Conspicuous Consumption" was originally coined by Thorstein Veblen in his (free for the download) book, "The Theory of The Leisure Class." https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
Lisa Jardine's history of the Renaissance, "Worldly Goods," shows just how not new the behavior is: https://www.amazon.com/Worldly-Goods-Lisa-Jardine/dp/0385476841/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2CPCDIGKJOM7U&keywords=worldly+goods+a+new+history+of+the+renaissance&qid=1664318598&qu=eyJxc2MiOiIwLjg1IiwicXNhIjoiMC42OCIsInFzcCI6IjAuMDAifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=worldly+goods%2Caps%2C2295&sr=8-1
Absolutely. We primates are shameless status seekers. We all do it, too, each in his or her own way and in his or her own milieu. I'd like to think I don't do this, but I TOTALLY do. Trumpers' horrific spelling and grammar, for instance. In my heart, I despise them for it. I can think of fifty ways to justify my disdain, but boil it down, it's just snobbery. So, I have no leg to stand on.
Loved THEORY OF THE LEISURE CLASS. And I know you've referenced Jardine's WORLDLY GOODS before, too.
Oh, one of the reasons I am skeptical about the claims regarding the inferiority of eReaders is that I've yet to see a single study that differentiates between an ACTUAL eReader, and reading on a Smart Phone, or a tablet, or a computer. As I've said, I do not have an SP, but I have the latter two, and I find the effort of trying to read on them profoundly different from reading on my Kindle. The Kindle is light enough, has a long enough battery life, and is not backlit, so that I can adopt any reading position I choose, and never get a headache in the process.
I've found that the position in which one reads is a very significant factor in how the material is engaged. A dedicated eReader moves and handles like a book, and that places the reader in the position of authority: one is interrogating the text, rather than sitting passively before it. My experience might be wildly atypical, but the fact that no account is given to such differences, that no effort is spent even acknowledging that such differences exist, is no small part of my above mentioned skepticism.
This hardly has the evidentiary heft of the many studies on the subject, but ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_M108B3mdY
"How then do we fight back? By clinging to the vestiges of a dying empire?"
EVERY generation rages against the dying light. It's the way of the world, which is going to Hell IN A HANDBASKET AS WE SPEAK.
I don't get, I'm not going to get it, and I'm not going to pretend to even try. It's a generational thing, and I'm clearly no longer the target demographic (Which is a WAY wordy way of saying, "I'M TOO F*****G OLD!!").
Strangely, I'm OK with that. Let the kids worry about all the superficial crap. They'll find out in good time that none of it matters. For now, I'm going to luxuriate in the knowledge that it really. Doesn't. Matter.
**Steps slowly off soapbox, mounts trusty steed, and rides languidly off into the sunset.**
FakeBook, credit cards, internet, and iPhones are all technological advancements of convenience, which in turn, has lead to this explosion of alternative realities of exploitative Plasticism. Real friends, or trolls? Cash or credit? Encyclopedia or internet? Flip phone or umbilicus that requires constant attention and upkeep? The convenience has replaced the reward of critical thinking to solve problems. It’s a love hate relationship like Jekyll and Hyde, everyone has become an avatar. It’s sensory overload navigating the seas of technological pollution. It seems as though terra firma has sunk into the abyss. Convenience is when you can actually talk to a live human being trying to dispute your bills over the phone without jumping through hoops like a seal.