Ranthropologist

Tag: social media

  • Technology and Its Discontents: Alienation

    Technology and Its Discontents: Alienation

    As the industrial age took hold in the late 17th and early 18th centuries and began its saturation of the globe, a curious phenomenon began to take place. People who had once labored for themselves – doing what they needed to do to support themselves, their families, and their communities – began laboring for others. They quit their simpler lives and moved to bigger towns, then cities, seeking and finding employment in factories, assembly lines, and sweatshops, laboring to produce things over which they had no ownership. The logical outcome of a capitalist world system began to spread and solidify, requiring that people work for others to support themselves, but have no ownership of the fruits of their labor. Yes, these laborers were paid for their work, but unlike when people engaged in farming, hunting, small trades such as blacksmithing, horseshoeing, wheel-wrighting, candle and soap making, carpentry, and all the simple but vital labors for which people could once get paid, the only thing this new class of laborer owned was themselves. All they could sell was their labor.

    This is the microcosm of what is called industrial alienation. It’s what happens when all people can sell is themselves, and they have no ownership of the means of production. They become a commodity, no different than the raw materials used in manufacturing the things they are paid to make. In the modern world system of capitalism, most people can only sell themselves for the money they need to support themselves and survive. To an enormous extent in the Western industrialized world, this has meant that nearly everybody has forgotten how to survive in the way our ancestors did – by knowing actually how to find and produce food and shelter. Labor has become so extraordinarily specialized in this brave new world that most people no longer have any connection with the basics of survival. Even worse, we have become alienated not just from what we do, but from our very purpose for living. Why are we here? What is the point? Do I even matter? These are not questions asked in cultures where people are still able to support themselves with the knowledge of actual, physical, animal survival. That, itself, is the point: survival. In the face of securing it for yourself and your group, there is no need, no room, for existential questions. Those questions are created by alienation.

    This is a winding road to some thoughts about technology. Humans have always sought to answer the basic question of why we are here, probably since the dawn of the species, and have found a variety of answers (often in the supernatural and religion). Now, though, I think technology is filling the hole of our alienation. Specifically, we are filling our existential emptiness with social media. Posting, Tweeting, sharing, Instagramming – they all provide a sense that we matter. They give us a way to be acknowledged (or so we think) by others. They remind us: I exist. The urge, the compulsion, is so strong that we will risk our relationships, our jobs, our educations, our safety or even our lives to fulfill it by doing all those things while driving, or walking, or cycling, or eating, or watching TV, or at the movies, at work, at school, at a football game, at a wedding, a funeral, anytime, everywhere. Yesterday I could have mowed down a woman glued to her phone, scrolling endlessly, as she walked obliviously down the center aisle of a parking lot. I have sat with friends while they pretend to be engaging with me, but they are staring, staring, staring at the phone. I have been accosted with pictures, videos, websites, texts that the other person insisted I see. And, I have done most of those things myself. I understand.

    Humans are extraordinarily social primates. It is no surprise to me at all that social media has exploded into a frenzy of self-referential attention seeking. Humans are also status-seeking animals, and the feedback we crave from our social sharing is highly addictive. It is a constant lure for us to try to elevate or affirm our status amongst our peers. But as with anything, there can be too much. Just as the buzz of alcohol can make us feel attractive, funny, and smart, so can the buzz of our relentless technological distractions make us feel noticed, important, and liked (if not loved). But the alcohol buzz wears off, and so does the brief high we receive from seeing who has responded to our online presence. Alcohol can become an addiction, and so can technology. It is not a good way to fill the hole left by our alienation.

    I am not immune to the lure of technology, but I am thinking deeply about it and making some decisions about how much I am willing to let it intrude upon my life. I understand that there are also positive aspects to our use of phones and computers, et al (for example, the fact that I can write and share these thoughts). But at the moment I am deeply uneasy, and I am making a conscious effort to concentrate on the world outside the screens.

  • The Power of Negative Thinking

    The Power of Negative Thinking

    In spite of the multiple posts I have made expressing reservations about social media, it should come as a surprise to no one that I do waste a fair amount of time noodling around on Facebook. Part of it is sheer laziness – I come home from work, eat, and just want to unplug my brain for a while, and the internet makes it easy – too easy. But part if it is also fascination with what other people decide to post. I am just as guilty as the next person of posting my exercise habits, what I eat, where I’ve been, etc. I’m also guilty of sharing articles, political opinions, stuff I think is funny, and things I find compelling or inspirational. So I will refrain from pointing the finger at others who do the same thing, but with whose views I may disagree.

    That disclaimer aside, I’m going to rant about a type of post that I sometimes find particularly galling: the “inspirational” post. These are the pictures/quotes that say sunny things about keeping a positive attitude, being thankful for each day, appreciating friends and family, not letting negative situations get you down, etc. This is all well and good, but I am finding that an excess of platitudes tends to drain them of any impact. I also find that these little bon mots seem to dumb down or gloss over the reality of complex emotions and situations. In particular, I often see posts about how you are in control of how you feel in any given situation. That is, if you feel bad about something, it’s because you are allowing yourself to feel bad. To a large degree, I think this is bullshit. Self-blame does not help in a negative situation. It’s bad enough that something is bringing you down; do you have to also point the finger at yourself and feel even worse because you are “allowing” yourself to feel negative emotions? This is part and parcel of the same bullshit idea behind books like The Secret, which trick you into buying them with New Age wishful thinking crapola about how if you just believe something, it will happen.

    I’m not saying that positive thinking isn’t a powerful tool in a person’s emotional arsenal. What I think is important is to acknowledge that we aren’t always in control. People do bad things to each other, and it hurts. We make bad decisions that lead to painful emotions or situations, and it hurts. We judge and ridicule and put others down, and yes, it hurts – them and us. But it’s too simple, too general, to say that when we criticize someone or something, we are secretly, unconsciously, criticizing something in ourselves. It’s too simple to say that we can choose not to feel pain when something external to us – something outside our control – makes us feel bad. In fact, I argue that it’s not just okay, it’s essential to allow ourselves to feel negative emotions. Stuffing them down, not genuinely feeling those negative feelings of pain, sadness, judgement, helplessness, loss, embarrassment, humiliation – that does not help, and I think it makes things worse when the platitudes tell us we shouldn’t feel those feelings.

    Negative emotions, feelings, experiences exist. We should acknowledge them. We should try to mitigate them and deal with them as best we can. I don’t think we should wallow or allow the negative thoughts to be an excuse for treating other people poorly. There is room for learning and introspection in every situation, and some people learn faster than others. Just don’t tell yourself that you shouldn’t feel those negative feelings. Heed the platitudes, but recognize them for what they are: feeble, if well-intentioned, attempts to apply general solutions to specific and often complex situations.

  • Technology and Its Discontents: A Preface

    Technology and Its Discontents: A Preface

    I suppose its ironic that I’m writing a rant about the drawbacks of modern technology using modern technology. Really, though, I want to write about something I’ve ruminated on at length already: communicative strategies. More specifically, I’m concerned about the ways in which modern technology is changing communicative strategies, and along with it, our approach to the world in general. Let me preface this with a new personal goal of mine: I want to unplug, at least once a week, from electronic distractions. On the opposite pole, I want to make sure I update my electronic rants more frequently; that is, at least once a week. Are these dichotomous goals? I don’t think so; but like all things, there is a limit to both. I find myself far too distracted by modern communicative technologies but simultaneously I sometimes feel that I don’t use those technologies as constructively as I could.

    So what’s the rant? This is a huge topic, but I want to start with unpacking the idea that the modern communicative technologies offered by computers, smart phones, tablets, etc., and in particular, the instant updates possible via social media, news sites, streaming video, et al., are enhancing our ability to communicate. I believe that these tools are actually decreasing our communicative abilities. How should we define communication? At the very least, it is the passing of a message from one individual to at least one other individual. That communication does not have to be face to face, or even ear to ear, but the point is that ultimately a message is transmitted. The human ability to transmit messages via what we call language is almost certainly unique to Homo sapiens; although other species do have complex forms of communication, there is tremendous debate over whether any non-human form of communication can be called language (a topic which may someday earn its own post). But if there is no one to receive the message, can the messages we send rightly be called communication? As just a small part of my overall questions about modern technology’s impact on communication, I often find myself wondering if we are mostly shouting into the dark. I would like to venture the hypothesis that modern technology is highlighting some of our species’ basest and most primitive inclinations.

    We are only ten or twelve thousand years removed from the time when all humans were living in small, close-knit tribal groups in which the survival of the individual depended on the survival of the group and vice versa. Yet it would be a mistake to assume that in small, egalitarian groups there was no social striving, no quest for power, no competition. All those things existed, but in general the needs of the group would check any one person from assuming too much power. Enter agriculture and more complex technology, and some of the checks on power and status-seeking began to be eroded. Agriculture made it possible for more people to survive with less effort, and to live in much larger groups where it became increasingly difficult to know every individual, much less communicate with them regularly. When you don’t know someone, that means you don’t need them; and if you don’t need them, there is no reason to care about that person’s survival. Fast far forward to today (and skipping over, for the time being, the cultural, social, and technological changes that ultimately led to the capitalist world-system in which we now live) and status-seeking is a prime motivator of human social, economic, and political behavior.

    What does any of this have to do with modern technology and modern communication? In a strange way, all these rapid-fire communication tools that are literally at our fingertips have made it possible for us to, once again, communicate with the entire group. This is not to say, of course, that every person’s status update or tweet or blog post is being transmitted to every person in the world. But, it is to say that we are able to pass messages to complete strangers, whether intentionally or not, and we are finding that those messages aren’t crafted carefully enough to avoid misunderstanding or insult or any number of misapprehensions. We are having to learn from scratch how to communicate deliberately and carefully, but all too often people are using what should be a fine-grained tool as a bludgeon. We can communicate with an enormous group, but we seem to take little, if any, responsibility, for the consequences of the messages we transmit.

    We are learning a new process the hard way. I am fascinated with how our adaptation to the modern communicative age will proceed. I will have much more to say about this in future posts; consider this a preface.

  • Communication Pandemic

    Communication Pandemic

    As an anthropologist, I have been trained to ask, and attempt to answer, questions about human behavior. As a cultural anthropologist, my methods involve participant observation to gather the data needed to start formulating an analysis. This all sounds very dry, but in layman’s terms all it really boils down to is that I am a professional people-watcher. I became an anthropologist because I thought it would be bitchin’ to make a career out of finding answers to the questions that fascinate me. Even better, I get to teach others how to answer their own questions about why people do what they do, and open their eyes to new ways of trying to answer those questions.

    So, this week the musings of the skeptical anthropologist are focused on communicative strategies and how they are changing. Or, to put it in a more entertaining way, what the hell are people thinking sometimes when they open their mouths? Or, even more so these days, when they e-mail/post/Twitter/link/YouTube/Flickr? What are we really trying to accomplish with all these new ways of communicating?

    I find that there is a fascinating blend of potential motivations in what people do with the new instant-communication technologies at our fingertips. The cell phone camera/video/e-mail/upload capabilities have given us the ability to reveal ourselves and our lives in some shockingly exhibitionist ways… and some coma-inducingly boring ways, too. And, the variety of emotions we can express! I know I’m not saying anything new here, but the anonymity the internet can afford (but that actually seems less and less anonymous each day) allows people to be astonishingly raw.

    So what’s my hypothesis? I haven’t settled on anything concrete yet, but I am attempting to formulate some ideas based on status-seeking behavior, and ultimately (as always with me) evolutionarily adaptive behaviors. To wit: on a venue such as Facebook, there seems to be a great deal of “look at how clever/cool/witty/educated I am” sorts of posts. There are also many “look at how virtuous/healthy/creative/thoughtful I am” posts. These posts, I need not remind, are not anonymous. Who wouldn’t want to take credit for “Just made a delicious risotto with truffle oil and chanterelle mushrooms”? Who, exactly, are we trying to impress? Facebook is also a simple way to keep friends up to date on your life, and most people seem to use it that way, but for how many is this an opportunity, however unconscious, to simply brag? And, how much of what we post is actually reflective of the life we are trying to project?

    On the opposite side of that coin are anonymous posters, such as those who lurk at the San Diego Union-Tribune website. The amount of vitriol that drips from some of these posts is simply boggling. And along with the vitriol is just plain ol’ racism, sexism, and one of my favorites, stupidity. But the point is that, for the most part, people won’t flame each other on Facebook, but they will easily descend to the level of playground bullies on anonymous comment boards. No surprise there, but I can’t help wondering how many of these folks are the same as the ones posting about the truffle risotto.

    Yet another area of fascination is the YouTube phenomenon. This came disgustingly home for me when my little cousin linked to a graphic video of… wait for it… a guy letting his girlfriend LANCE A BOIL on his back. There is no attempt to disguise the face of said guy, and he knows he is being filmed, and I assume he approved of having the video posted online. And yes, I watched it, in all its blood- and pus-spurting glory (which brings up another topic of fascination for me, which is our primate urge to groom each other… but I’ll save that for another post!).

    What does all this new technology, these novel (but not for long) communicative strategies, mean for us and our behavior? How do we know what to trust? How do we know what to say? What will be the limits, if any, on what we will reveal? How long will it be before all this availability, visibility, and downright exhibitionism festers into its own cultural boil and pops? Or will we simply adapt, as we have for so long?

    An even better question, for me personally: what makes me think anybody is interested in what I have to say in this blog (besides my mom – awww, thanks Ma!)? Hmmm… the musings continue.

  • Center of the Universe

    Center of the Universe

    Lately I have been reading some things in the news about a disturbing increase in narcissism among young people, those of high school and college age in particular. This phenomenon is being linked to a variety of things, such as the proliferation of social networking websites, the drastic increase in instant communication technologies, and too much emphasis on self-esteem building by today’s parents. I tend to agree that an excess of narcissism is probably a bad thing. But it got me to thinking about the opposite phenomenon, as well; that is, the common feeling that one is simply a tiny, inconsequential speck in a vast and uncaring universe. My reaction to that is, simply: bullshit. Are we not all the centers of our very own universes? Is there something inherently bad about caring about our own lives and experiences? Is it wrong to be unhappy about the things we don’t like, just because someone, somewhere else, might have it worse? I am reminded of the classic parental guilt trap used to get children to clean their plates: “Don’t you know there are starving children in (insert generation-appropriate geographic region here)?” For me, it was Africa. My response? “Whether or not I eat my liver-frosted flakes, the starving kids in Africa aren’t going to get them.” (My dad used to tease Hilary and me with imaginary unsavory meal threats, liver-frosted flakes being a favorite. We were also terrorized with the horrifying possibility of liver-filled donuts). In any case, there is nothing wrong with keeping a little perspective; after all, unless you are extraordinarily unlucky, there is always someone, somewhere, who has it worse than you. But that doesn’t mean you can’t be pissed about whatever bad experience you are having. If I have a broken toe, don’t tell me, “You know, it could be worse. You could have a gangrenous toe that has to be amputated, but the infection isn’t contained, and it spreads up your leg to your face and renders you hideously disfigured. That’ll learn you! Now quitcher complaining, ya big baby!”

    All that being said, there are definitely some people who are the center of the universe in a very unhealthy way. The thing about a universe is, it’s full of other stuff. You may be the big star, but you are surrounded by planets, moons, constellations of other stars, random space junk, even vast alien worlds (cue Ren & Stimpy “Space Madness” quotes)… and what you do may have an affect on those other parts of your particular universe. If you don’t take care of the whole universe, not just the center, there could be a huge destructive supernova, or a life-sucking black hole, and nobody wants that.

    So. I address this to the universal catastrophes out there: you are not that important. This is for the black hole in the BMW yesterday who zoomed up Poway Road in the break-down lane to get around a truck, just so you could make it to the light at the top a whole thirty seconds faster. This is for the supernova at Albertson’s, who left your dog in the car in 104 degree heat, just because it was too inconvenient to take him home before you stopped for groceries. This is for the asteroid collision who has to take that important call or send that life-altering text message while out to dinner with your children. This is even for the minor meteor-showers of people who leave their carts in the parking space because they don’t want to walk 40 extra feet to the cart rack, or the co-workers who don’t rinse their coffee cup until it grows a vast alien world that colonizes the break-room sink. You may be the center of your own little universe, but don’t forget that we all live in a multiverse, and what you do in yours is NOT more important than what I do in mine, especially if destruction in yours might cause collateral damage in mine. Ask yourself, honestly: is it worth it? Is it worth it, BMW black hole, to risk your life and the life of others to save a few seconds? Is it worth it, Albertson’s supernova, to injure or kill your dog for a few quick groceries? Is it worth it, cell phone asteroid collision, to alienate your friends and family for instant communication we can all live without? And for the minor asteroid showers, is it worth it to be a self-centered ass-wipe?

    Don’t get me wrong, folks. I know that I, too, have plenty of ass-wipe moments, and that sometimes my sense of my universe doesn’t allow for any acknowledgment of other worlds. We are all narcissists at heart. But I think we all need to start consciously asking ourselves to be aware of others and to have some much-needed perspective, to slow down, to take it easy, to turn off the TV and pick up a book, to stick to the speed limit, to write a letter or have a face-to-face conversation, to allow ourselves to find a happy medium between black hole self-centeredness and tiny speck meaninglessness.

  • Questions for the Lilac Road Runner

    Questions for the Lilac Road Runner

    For the last three years or so, I have been driving to work through Valley Center, down Lilac Road and into Pala. Every day, almost without fail, when I turn onto the last leg of Lilac, I see an older man running along the road. Sometimes he is heading in my direction, and sometimes he is heading away, but he is always there. Regardless of the weather, he wears old-school running shorts (think Bill Clinton, only not so frighteningly tight and short), a loose-fitting cotton tank (the kind with the arm holes that gape almost to the waist), a baseball cap, and a pair of leather work gloves. Sometimes he is carrying the work gloves in one hand, but he is usually wearing them, whether the season is warm or cold. Sometimes, during the winter, he has a thick walrus-style mustache, but usually he is clean-shaven.

    This man fascinates me. I have never spoken to him, or even made eye-contact with him as I drive past, but I suspect he is as used to seeing me every morning as I am seeing him. I want to ask him some questions, like does he get bored running the same route every day? What’s up with the leather work gloves? Does he think I drive too fast down Lilac (it is a very curvy road, but I know it so well by now that I can navigate the curves at a high rate of speed)? Has he even noticed me at all?

    It may seem like a tangent, but this man gets me thinking about what we have any expectation to know about other people. For all I know this guy has a blog where he talks about his daily run, or his daily life, or conspiracy theories, or fruit salad recipes, or who knows? The real question is, how are our expectations of knowledge about other people’s lives being shaped by the new communicative strategies now at our fingertips? I suspect that I would be curious about the Lilac Road Runner regardless of the existence of the internet and its myriad possibilities for sharing information. But again, what are the limits? How much of this new ability to share and receive information about others is predicated on pre-existing cultural behaviors? In other words, did we already have this thirst for knowledge about others? I think the answer is an unequivocal yes. Gossip and information sharing about others is one of the most basic and key human adaptations for managing social relationships and ensuring group stability. But again, this raises even more questions, such as what responsibility do we have to manage social relationships with people we have never met, and probably never will? At what point will the benefits of information sharing become maladaptive (if ever)?

    I have no right to know anything about the life of the Lilac Road Runner, but I am curious nonetheless. I just fear that in this rapidly evolving new culture of instant information sharing, people will begin to believe that they do have the right to know. Blogs, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, with their capability for instant updates, have the potential to create enormous changes in our social lives and in the social landscape in general. Will this ultimately be a good or a bad thing, or a combination of both? Maybe I should ask the Lilac Road Runner what he thinks.