BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Laboratory >

Real life vs. Virtual Life

  
 
tSuibhne
13:59 / 03.04.02
Ok, an expansion of this thread

Let's take it beyond just EQ, and throw out the question, is a virtual existance a valid life style? Or is it just a bunch of social misfits who're afraid to deal with reality?

As stated in the other thread, I think the question is what people feel to be important in life. If physical interaction is important to the individual, then the virtual world will never replace the real one. But, if the individual puts a higher price on mental interaction and information, the virtual world can become more important then the real world.

NOTE: for purpose of clear discussion. Virtual world is meant to refer to all network based communication. Be it through a video game, message board, web page, newsgroup, chat program, whatever. If you need to narrow, or expand, the description, please warn us.
 
 
sleazenation
14:12 / 03.04.02
Well this question pre supposes that the two are completely seperate entities... In reality there are many strange degrees of 'virtuality' that occur between them, especially once even some participants have met IRL...
 
 
bitchiekittie
17:24 / 03.04.02
I agree - seems to me that any form of communication with other people is a valid extension of the social aspects that would comprise a "life style" (I guess that narrows it down a bit to exclude at least video games). I dont see how communicating exclusively via the internet (or any other electronic means) is any different than the old fashioned long distance friendship/relationship, the only connection there being via letter writing or telephone contact.
 
 
Fist Fun
08:54 / 04.04.02
As Sleaze says there is an overlap, I think virtual reality is an obvious advance, and a potential evolution in the human way of life. What do I mean by that? Well I'm not just talking about virtual reality games, although these are an incredible evolution in leisure time.
I'll give you two examples from my life. Work and study. A lot of the work I do is purely virtual. It involves moving a mouse to send electronic signals to different parts of the world to carry out tasks and solve problems. Much of the RL component of my work isn't really necessary, the core is carried out in a virtual space. This virtual reality is an evolution in working life carrying with it massive increases in efficiency.
I do some study with the open university. The course I do is heavily computer and e-learning based. This focus has turned the traditional role of campus based learning into a virtual one. This results in great time and cost savings for me.
These two 'concrete' examples show the potential for virtual environments. The way they can extend human possibilities. Isn't that evolution?
As technology develops I can see work, study, leisure becoming increasingly virtual simply because it can extend human abilities. Think what a worldwide university open to all could do to unleash human potential. Would this be possible anywhere else but a virtual environment?
 
 
Naked Flame
11:50 / 04.04.02
I think the 'validity' (itself a fuzzy term) or otherwise of the virtual experience depends entirely on the details of the experience. For example, Barbelith has opened the door for some great, transcendent happenings for me, and helped my thinking evolve beyond recognition. On the other hand, Barbelith is interesting to me because it references RL in a variety of ways that are outside my personal experience: for me, it would be meaningless without a set of outside referents.

Futhermore, present technology requires the participation of the physical body and the machines that we use to access the virtual, all of which demand maintenance paid for with RL beer tokens. Even if some hypothetical technique were to be developed that made consciousness independent of the body, the machine would simply replace the body as the primary object requiring maintenance. In a sense, this is a side issue- it's a purely technical objection to an exclusively virtual existence. I don't think a 'virtual existence' is as yet a possibility.

I'd agree with Sleaze that a binary opposition is simplistic here. I'd also argue that balance is extremely important. I have distinct RL and a virtual lives, but there's a great deal of crossover. Some of my RL friends don't understand my virtual life (epitomised by 'you have friends you met on the internet? Riiight.') and others don't know squat about my RL existence (some Barbeloids, and most of those who knew me in EQ.) Those who know and understand both personas are precious to me in that they resolve my virtual superhero self with my clark kent life.

Isn't the biggest question 'what are you using it *for*?' Which is a question one might equally ask about any mode of existence. Fundamentally it comes down to this: are you a living breathing free individual or are you allowing all your energy to be leeched away from you in service to the Spectacle?
 
 
Fist Fun
13:45 / 04.04.02

Isn't the biggest question 'what are you using it *for*?' Which is a question one might equally ask about any mode of existence. Fundamentally it comes down to this: are you a living breathing free individual or are you allowing all your energy to be leeched away from you in service to the Spectacle?


That is a life question rather than a virtual/real life question. Something that grabs me about that EQ-loosely-related-suicide is the idea that the lad "gave up everything quitting his job in the pizza restaurant". Now, I can imagine that someone might prefer devoting full-time hours to a virtual environment rather than devoting full-time hours to Pizzahut. Isn't that an escape from the spectacle?
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
16:15 / 06.04.02
No it's a total cop out. The answer is to attempt to improve your R.L not try and bury your head in the pixelated sand.

That these tools have "evolved" to make work and education easier, more accessible is a good thing. It's not a evolutionery moment, it's supposed to augment you RL existence, not replace it.

Originally posted by Naked Flame

"Those who know and understand both personas are precious to me in that they resolve my virtual superhero self with my clark kent life."

Are you saying that your on line existence any way shape or form is as important as your RL, in fact lets lose the R there and call it what is, your life.
 
 
Captain Zoom
17:16 / 06.04.02
That's tough. I'd have to say that a few aspects of my virtual life (VL) are easily as important as my RL. I hate to make the distinction. I can keep in touch with people the world over through a VL, but have hopes of interacting IRL with those people at some point. I think RL vs. VL is places these into separate camps when actually there should be no distinction. A person who immerses themselves completely in an online game (for example because my brain's not working today) is no different from someone who spends every night in a pub or club or reading a book or watching television. It just means that the balance has been lost between that obsession and the rest of life, virtual or otherwise.

The question of what are you using any part of life for is excellent. If the answer, regardless of what you're using, is "A crutch", then there's a problem.

As Naked Flame says, I too have friends who can't understand that I hang out here a lot, or that I have people I actually consider friends that I've never met IRL. But there's that distinction again. Why isn't a virtual existence a real one?

I feel I'm just re-iterating what's already been said. I have no distinction between RL and VL. It's all just a part of my life. It's been absorbed and processed and now I can't picture life without it, much as I can't picture life without going out and singing karaoke in a bar, or sitting at home and reading a really good book.

Zoom.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
18:30 / 06.04.02
I don't really think in terms of virtual versus real. My virtual life complements and enhances my real life. In the virtual world, I can learn, make contacts, flex my communication muscles, and explore ideas that I might not otherwise have come across.

I notice that when people discuss this topic there's an assumption that your virtual life is always lived at the expense of your real one. Not so; my online time is usually time I would otherwise have spent in front of the telly. I'm socializing more, not less.
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
17:52 / 07.04.02
Making the distinction is I think where the problem comes in, if you are thinking in terms of a dualistic, wish fulfilment other online persona and not that the virtual world is there as a way to augment your existing R.L then there is a problem. The internet is not an alternative lifestyle.

Amusingly, being involved with this discussion a old friend called me up last night. He was on his way for a second date with an apparently lovely lady. I asked him how he met her and he got very evasive. I asked him if he'd met her over the internet ahnd he had to give an affirmative. I asked what sort of web site it was and he got evasive again before admiting it was an online dating service.

Normally I'm quite scornful of this sort of thing and I think he's expecting shit from some of our other friends. Anyway I didn't take the piss for 2 reasons. First of all I know the guy and he is not socially maladjusted, he's a nice guy with no problems talking to peopel. Secondly and although I know it's not a competition, I've been without a girlfriend for some time and although not really a problem I'm begining to miss intimate female company.

So I told him I'd take the piss for being the sad, low-life internet geek he is when I can find a girlfriend through normal means.
 
 
wembley can change in 28 days
18:45 / 07.04.02
If the question were: would you rather lop off your RL or your VL, it'd be no question. My RL is way more important to me, although I find the VL a nice enhancer. I've noticed that I read more internet text than I do in books, which is IMHO a big problem, but on the other hand I like keeping in touch with others and meeting people with similar interests. My collection of bootleg recordings has been greatly expanded through my VL.

Mind you, I used to work as an HTML code-pusher, sitting at a desk all day writing snippets of code and copy, creating webpages. It was a fabulous job in almost every sense of the word, but I realised after two months there was no way I could do that for the rest of my life. 'No sense of purpose' was the diagnosis or something. And I'm a physical person; I resent the time spent on the internet only because it means I'm sitting down, my posture sucks, and it's the fastest route for me to couch potatodom. Now if you'll excuse me, I love you all but I'm going for a walk.
 
 
Fist Fun
07:29 / 08.04.02
"The internet is not an alternative lifestyle.

Why not? Too alternative for you?
This recalls a little sketch I saw on tv the other night. It was from the uk comedy show goodness gracious me. An asian woman was taking her new black fiancée to meet her father for the first time. The asian father got all upset about the colour of his son-in-law to be. At the end he started having a heart attack, the future son in law came to help saying "It's ok I'm a doctor". At the word 'Doctor' the father leapt up with a huge smile and started welcoming him to the family.
Now, I know it is a bit silly but this made me think of the rl vs vl thang. A virtual existence comes bundled with a lot of preconceptions and ideas about worth. What if someone earned 50,000 pounds a year through a virtual existence though. Spending 40 hours a week in VR. Suddenly it would stop being a problem and start being a worthy occupation. A worthwhile job.
Crazy, but true. The point I am trying to make is that so many people spend their lives doing essentially worthless things which become valuable occupations purely due to their association with an income. What if the income doesn't matter to you, though?
If someone wants and enjoys a virtual life and isn't bothered about the things that they could lose through it then why isn't that an acceptable alternative lifestyle. I think any alternative lifestyle is going to take flak from mainstream society who just can't understand why people can't be like them.
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
17:36 / 08.04.02
Originally posted by Buk

" A virtual existence comes bundled with a lot of preconceptions and ideas about worth. What if someone earned 50,000 pounds a year through a virtual existence though. Spending 40 hours a week in VR. Suddenly it would stop being a problem and start being a worthy occupation. A worthwhile job."

I have decided to stay in my house and watch the Muppets for the rst of my life. I may venture out to pick up my dole but other than that I'm going to watch the Muppets and eat Mars bars. Can everyone please marvel at the alternativeness of my life style now.

Or even better yet heroin, I'll get to meet new and interesting people and my special alternative lifestyle will be a non-stop whistle stop tour of bliss.

Spending 40 hours a week in VR for living sounds like a pretty cool job, as long as I'm not watshing virtual dishes but that would be a job. How low would your self esteem be if you identified yourself by your job.

There is nothing alternative about ignoring your life, it's escapism, a refusal to cope with your situation. The only argument I've heard for it so far is what if the person's real life wasn't so good. Do something about it.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
20:51 / 08.04.02
I'm not sure where everyone sees "real" ending and "virtual" beginning. For some people, it seems that anything that isn't conducted 100% in meatspace is somehow cheap or fraudulent, a poor substitute only accepted by the foolish or the weak. But "virtual life" doesn't necessarily mean spending 18 hours a day pretending to be an elf called Rainbowbright Flaxenknees. I can imagine several scenarios in which the online world could become a valid part of the way a person supports and expresses themselves.

What if an individual happened to find themselves in circumstances that meant they couldn't always go out and enjoy Real Life the way we're all supposed to (if, say, they were disabled), and decided to invest their energies in finding some of the missing pieces online? In this way, our hypothetical person might establish freindships which could then be carried over into meatspace; they might find employment, and outlets for their talents.
 
 
Fist Fun
07:28 / 09.04.02
One of my favourite reads is Walden : A life in the woods by Henry David Thoreau. Now most people have probably read this or are aware of the story. An account of a year (or was it 2?) in the woods, getting away from society, enjoying the pleasures of nature. Living a lifestyle outside of normality, a life some might have thought crazy.
Now the other day I picked up the biography of Linus Torvalds the creator of Linux. Now this guy really loves technology and computing. I mean really. He basically spent large parts of his life in a darkened room with his computer. He loved every minute of it.
Now were these acceptable lifestyles? Were they worthwhile? Well Thoreau gave us this great book and passed down his ideas on civil disobedience to generations. Linus gave us a great Operating System and gave a real kickstart to the open source movement.
These outcomes are inspiring but the thing I love the most here is that they were able to live the kind of lifestyle they wanted. Even if they hadn't created anything I would still applaud their decision to do what they did. To go against the norm and live a life they really enjoyed. Just as Thoreau discovered the wonder of nature Torvalds discovered the wonder of technology.
A virtual existence isn't always a substitute, isn't always an escape, isn't always a denial of responsibility. It can just be a different way of doing things.
 
 
tSuibhne
15:19 / 09.04.02
From Reidcourchie:

"There is nothing alternative about ignoring your life, it's escapism, a refusal to cope with your situation. The only argument I've heard for it so far is what if the person's real life wasn't so good. Do something about it."

And what if thier real life is fine, they just prefer a virtual one?

I'm with Buk on this. VL can be just as valid as a RL. It doesn't need to be escapism. True, it ussually is escapism. But, most people who are involved in alternative lifestyles, are refusing to cope with their situation. Hence why most seem to, "out grow it."

I think it was Zoom who said the problem is when it's a crutch. And I think that's where Reidcourchie is getting caught up. It doesn't have to be a crutch. It could be a valid decision.
 
 
bitchiekittie
16:09 / 09.04.02
my online time is almost exclusively when Im at work. my work doesnt suffer, and neither does my social life. I go out as much as, or more than my other friends. Ive met some fantastic friends and a couple of lovers (even my current boyfriend), most all of whom have ended up a part of my "real" life in very "real" ways. to me its just like any other social gathering

I think mordants right - it isnt a hindrance. unless you let it be - like any other social situation, you have to make balance. an overabundance of anything can be a drawback, but this can be integrated as a very real part of your life
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
18:17 / 09.04.02
Originally posted by Mordant

"I'm not sure where everyone sees "real" ending and "virtual" beginning. For some people, it seems that anything that isn't conducted 100% in meatspace is somehow cheap or fraudulent, a poor substitute only accepted by the foolish or the weak."

That's not what I'm saying, I'm not the one making the distinction, of course your computer should be used to enhance your life and should be just one part of your whole life.

Originally posted by Mordant

"What if an individual happened to find themselves in circumstances that meant they couldn't always go out and enjoy Real Life the way we're all supposed to (if, say, they were disabled), and decided to invest their energies in finding some of the missing pieces online?"

Have to take issue with this. The disabled people I know tend to be far more interested in having a life, than relying on simulations.

Originally posted by Buk

"Now the other day I picked up the biography of Linus Torvalds the creator of Linux. Now this guy really loves technology and computing. I mean really. He basically spent large parts of his life in a darkened room with his computer. He loved every minute of it.
Now were these acceptable lifestyles?"

One is an alternative lifestyle the other is an workaholic. If the guy was happy doing that then fine but lets not pretend he's special. If on the other hand he lost his wife, his kids, friends etc and found himself unable to socially interact with others then I would say he had a problem, not an alternative lifestyle.

Originally posted by tSuibhne

"I'm with Buk on this. VL can be just as valid as a RL. It doesn't need to be escapism. True, it ussually is escapism. But, most people who are involved in alternative lifestyles, are refusing to cope with their situation. Hence why most seem to, "out grow it."

So are you suggesting that internet addiction is just a phase? Maybe this is just a somantic misunderstanding, to me an alternative lifestyle would be something like spending your life just traveling from place to place to protest, like the people in Palestine at the moment. Now there may come a time when they decide to do something else (I would imagine because of the strain this must place on them). Nice to know that homosexuals who against the odds stacked against them are trying to have families, will eventually grow out of it. Nice to know that the Romany, with their several thousand year old culture, will eventually grow up a bit. It's not a refusal to cope with your situation, it's a choice to reject it or change it. And the sooner those damn anthropologists get their childish arses out of the rain forest and into an insurance office, where they belong the better we'll albe Yes you may change your mind or decide that some other way is right for you. But sorry you where talking about chat rooms and such.

Validity? This may be where we're having the problem. Can you define what you mean by a virtual life? Specificly how you could embrace it instead of real life?

Originally posted by bitchkittie

"I go out as much as, or more than my other friends. Ive met some fantastic friends and a couple of lovers (even my current boyfriend), most all of whom have ended up a part of my "real" life in very "real" ways. to me its just like any other social gathering"

Yes but presumably you see them in the real world as well, otherwise I'm going to have to say he's not your boyfriend and their not your friends.
 
 
Fist Fun
18:39 / 09.04.02
The validity point is a good one. What do I mean by that? Well, for instance, take a few different lifestyle options. The kind of things that a lot of people consider doing.
- taking some time off to write a book (perhaps in a cork lined room)
- travelling round the world
- living on a desert island
- working more than necessary for survival in order to earn money for luxuries
- doing voluntary work in a third world nation
- spending a year living in the woods away from society
- immersing in an online community

I would say all of these would be interesting, valid ways to live. Perhaps temporarily, perhaps long term.

One is an alternative lifestyle the other is an workaholic. If the guy was happy doing that then fine but lets not pretend he's special. If on the other hand he lost his wife, his kids, friends etc and found himself unable to socially interact with others then I would say he had a problem, not an alternative lifestyle.

Well, in the case of Torvalds it really wasn't work, it was just enjoyment. It was a "fulfilling lifestyle". In fact the idea of open source turns the idea of work on its head. The book is great. I highly recommend it for a bit of insight.
The idea of "wife, kids" is basically just the idea of family. Now I understand and would support anyones belief that the family is important to them personally but I don't accept the idea that the family has to be central to everyone. As I say, what if someone doesn't share your ideals about family, friends...do they automatically have a problem? What if their ideal lifestyle doesn't revolve around "wife,kids"?
 
 
bitchiekittie
18:56 / 09.04.02
well, yes, I see him and most of them.

however, Id never say someone wasnt my friend just because it didnt culminate into a physical interaction. like I mentioned in my first post, when there was no such technology people had friendships over mail correspondence or the telephone. how was that in any way more real?

Ive formed a very strong bond with a girl Ive never met, and only spoken to on the phone once. we both agree that if youd told us a year ago that wed feel this way about someone we had so little contact with, wed both have thought you were nuts. but why not? all the noise is removed, and its just me and her talking. weve gotten to know each other in a way we may not have, with the restraints of our lives - we are both rather busy, and its a hell of a lot easier to say what you have to say in an email

I think theres a hell of a big difference in hiding from life on the internet and using it to enhance it
 
 
tSuibhne
19:35 / 09.04.02
"So are you suggesting that internet addiction is just a phase?"

Possibly, it was for me. As for your other responces to what I said, nice way to try and change the subject. I never said alternative lifestyles were always phases. I said that for most people it is a kind of escapism. For many people, it's not.

Oh, and for the record, my definition of alternative lifestyles, is lifestyles that differ from the accepted norm of how people should live thier lives. In short, lifestyles that are attacked by the mainstream.


"Yes but presumably you see them in the real world as well, otherwise I'm going to have to say he's not your boyfriend and their not your friends."

And how exactly would you define what a friend is? The above gives the impression that you've got an extremly narrow view of the term.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
19:39 / 09.04.02
Briefly: My comments weren't aimed specifically at Reidcourchie, they were more about general perceptions in society and the media.

Have to take issue with this. The disabled people I know tend to be far more interested in having a life, than relying on simulations.

Good grief, do you think I don't know that? I'm a chronic epileptic myself, and I'd just love to see anyone try and keep me out of the pub.

I'm well aware that disabled people have the same drive to interact with the rest of the world that anyone else does; I would also point out that disability is a broad term and that I was thinking specifically of someone with a severe enough problem that they couldn't engage in this kind of normal interaction. Hope this clears things up a little.
 
 
Persephone
21:31 / 09.04.02
What I'm thinking is that "real life" is typically equated with the "real you " and "virtual life" is assumed to involve not so much a "virtual you" but a fake or fantasy you of the Rainbowbright Flaxenknees sort; I'm feeling that it would be helpful to tease apart those constructs. It seems to me that most 'lithers are presenting their virtual selves--i.e., selves that are basically congruent with and integrally connected to their persons, to the identities housed in their bodies. The only ficsuit that I'm aware that isn't so connected is Dao Jones, whom it would be interesting to hear from. If you take the fake/fantasy self out of the equation --and actually, I think there are even interesting things to say about this... I knew a guy IRL who constantly made up things about himself & would tell you with a straight face to your face that he thought he might be descended from the Romanovs-- but if you talk strictly about real vs. virtual selves (as I've defined), what kind of distinctions are there between real vs. virtual life? What limitations are there IRL and IVL?

It does seem to me that if you haven't seen the body of a person that you call your boyfriend, then he isn't your boyfriend & delusion is involved. But not so with friends in my book, virtual friends count as real friends. And why do I think that?
 
 
netbanshee
03:32 / 10.04.02
VL is no where near as good as it's imagined to be honestly. Not Lawnmowerman yet. It mostly just simulates or greases up the tasks that we already have. Pull the powercord you're still alive...pull the I.V. and see you next life...

I'd say the best perks are online communities like here. When it comes to communication and info, there's nothing like it. And at times, I'm rather curious of what a poster may say on a subject here when my RL counterparts may not have the capability or understanding. Certain things tend to be purer in certain places.

Kind of like doing interactive / web designs and experiments, you can do the work with the tools but take them away...is the same expression still possible? There's things that (or more likely will) exist inside this virtual space that eventually will grow into something beyond our grasps of understanding its abstraction. But in the same token...its basis is in RL, at least initially. There are very few web artists who can do admirably good work and can't express it any other physical way...

But...I have a feeling that when the virtual grows seemslessly with RL, then the distinctions will fall to the side. Then everyone with these tools that do the work for them will be simulating tasks they could do with their bare hands and prefer to. Mix nanotech with organics down the road...RL will be the foundation, but at that point it wouldn't be recognizable to people from a 100 years ago...
 
 
tSuibhne
13:00 / 10.04.02
VL: A portion of your life that is lived through the use of networked communication. This change commonly results in a slight modification of (real world) personality, but does not have to do so. Also, these modifications can range from slight to drastic.

NOTE: I'm using the broadest definition of networked communication here, and including irc, BBS systems, Message boards like this one, etc.


It doesn't appear to me that anyone here has made the decision to live the majority of their lives in a virtual existence. Which brings this arguement down to whether you think it's theoretically viable. I think we can all agree that the choice to live in such an existence is likely the result of escapism. Some of us feel though that a situation can exist where this isn't escapism, but a full choice to choose one world over the other. I conceed that the limitations of current technology put a damper on this. But, with the current advances in wearable computing as well as ever increasing processor power, means that one day this choice will exist.
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
18:30 / 10.04.02
Originally posted by tSuibhne

"And how exactly would you define what a friend is? The above gives the impression that you've got an extremly narrow view of the term."

Perhaps I do have a narrow definition of what a friend is. To me it heavily involves face to face interaction. This is not to see that computers are not a very good way to keep in contact with your friends, if they are like mine and have rather selfishly decided to scatter themselves all over the country.

Mordant, apologies if I caused offence.

Originally posted by Bizanchee

"And at times, I'm rather curious of what a poster may say on a subject here when my RL counterparts may not have the capability or understanding. Certain things tend to be purer in certain places."

Slightly off the topic but one of the things I find Barbelith best for is taking the ideas I hear here and discussing them with my IRL friends. Whilst we disagree a lot on Barbelith we all have a fair amount of our core beliefs in common, my RL friends tend not to share these beliefs, it makes for challenging discussions.

Originally posted by tSuibhne

"It doesn't appear to me that anyone here has made the decision to live the majority of their lives in a virtual existence. Which brings this arguement down to whether you think it's theoretically viable. I think we can all agree that the choice to live in such an existence is likely the result of escapism. Some of us feel though that a situation can exist where this isn't escapism, but a full choice to choose one world over the other. I conceed that the limitations of current technology put a damper on this. But, with the current advances in wearable computing as well as ever increasing processor power, means that one day this choice will exist."

I think Buk was making a claim for that, whether it's actually how he lives or he was just proposing it as a possibility. It sounds like you're agreeing with me, at the moment a so called virtual life is a cop out. Don't get me wrong escapism is very important in keeping people sane but when you choose that over RL responsibilities then you are copping out. I would suggest that by the time that technology exists that would enable a so called VL the VL will be so close to the real that you'd have to ask what's the point, all that'll be missing is the anima of real life.

Perhaps it is a tech short fall but their just seems to be so much missing from online communication that's present in RL. Inflection, body language, smiles for god's sake, smell, spontaneneity and a fully shared experience, not to mention time. If we were sat around a table in a pub we would be better able to understand each others arguments as well as having a shared experience. This is so mediated as to be barely passing for a conversation, not to mention it's taken the better part of a week.

Incidently if you had the choice of conducting this conversation as we have been over the board or sat round a table in a pub, which would you choose?
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
18:50 / 10.04.02
Sorry Buk, styill getting use to not being able to peruse the whole thread when replying.

Originally posted by Buk

"The validity point is a good one. What do I mean by that? Well, for instance, take a few different lifestyle options. The kind of things that a lot of people consider doing.
- taking some time off to write a book (perhaps in a cork lined room)
- travelling round the world
- living on a desert island
- working more than necessary for survival in order to earn money for luxuries
- doing voluntary work in a third world nation
- spending a year living in the woods away from society
- immersing in an online community

I would say all of these would be interesting, valid ways to live. Perhaps temporarily, perhaps long term."

I disagree. Working more to by luxuries, there's nothing alternative about that, that's what we're supposed to do, our television tells us so. What have you not got your plasma screen TV yet? Immersed in an online community? Okay I'm not the most computer literate but my understanding of an online community would be something like Barbelith? If you're "immersed" (and perhaps we need to define what you mean by immersed because to me it sounds like a large part of your life) then you're fooling yourself if you think you have a life. Hell regardless of how much shit we hand to Tom to sort out he still seems to have time to go out, form human relationships, that kind of thing. If you're spending all your time in an online community then I would suggest you need to reassess your priorities.

Originally posted by Buk

"The idea of "wife, kids" is basically just the idea of family. Now I understand and would support anyones belief that the family is important to them personally but I don't accept the idea that the family has to be central to everyone. As I say, what if someone doesn't share your ideals about family, friends...do they automatically have a problem? What if their ideal lifestyle doesn't revolve around "wife,kids"?"

Of course, that wasn't what I was saying. If however geezer had a family (ie a decision he'd made himself in the past) and he screwed that up because of his work, hobby, calling whatever then I'd suggest he needed help. Regardless of how he felt about developing Linux I'm sure he had time to go to the pub for a pint, or skip through meadows, climb trees, make love to his significant other and all the other things that makes us human that you can't do on the internet.
 
 
tSuibhne
21:20 / 10.04.02
From Reid:

"It sounds like you're agreeing with me, at the moment a so called virtual life is a cop out. Don't get me wrong escapism is very important in keeping people sane but when you choose that over RL responsibilities then you are copping out."

I think there's a fine line between our arguements. You seem to be saying that immersion is not viable. I'm saying it is, in certain situations. I'm then tacking on that, I think most people don't fit those situations.

I'm wondering how much of your resistance has to do with your limited use of virtual communities. Personally, I find message boards (like Barbelith) to be the least inclined to form acctual communities. Email is closer, but chat programs like irc, seem to be the best. And immersion in irc is not only easy to do, it's down right common. The main factors in this seem to be the quickness of responce, and the push nature of the software (information is pushed down to you, instead of you pulling it down like here).

Would I prefer this conversation here on the board, over a pub? Pub of course. Would I rather have this conversation through a chat program then dropping the several hundred dollars to fly across the atlantic to have this conversation? I'd pick the chat program.

And I think that's a part of the draw to the virtual life. In a manner of speaking you are no longer constrained by physical limitations. At the height of my irc usage I had friends in most of the US states, Finland, England, and a few other places. Back sometime ago there was an earthquake in Olympia, WA. I knew about it with in 10 mins after it happened through friend's posts to an email list I'm on. The sense of connectivity is something that I could deffinetly see as a major factor in someone deciding to forsake the real world.
 
 
Fist Fun
06:46 / 11.04.02
This conversation is sort of flopping off in different directions. To narrow the focus a bit let's look at the question.
Incidently if you had the choice of conducting this conversation as we have been over the board or sat round a table in a pub, which would you choose?

Now this is not an either or decision. These are two different, things. They are each alternatives to the other. I would say that they are both equally worthwhile/valid.
Now it has been suggested that a messageboard conversation is merely a pale, unfulfilling, substitute for a pub conversation. It is one thing to indicate a personal preference, ie Reidcourchie prefers the pub, but it is another thing to dismiss the other as a shallow replacement, a wilting parody. Perhaps your preferences aren't universal?
Now I think most people would say they like a bit of both. A thread on a messageboard is just a metaphor for a real life conversation, as such it has inconsistencies but it also has improvements. It is a different way of communicating, perhaps a small evolution.
How do we judge what is worthwhile anyway? If we can say we enjoyed a conversation, that it was interesting ...isn't that enough...no matter where it has been carried out. So rather than focussing on how we live life (real, virtual, pure of heart, whatever) we can focus on what we get out of it. Which is probably what this whole discussion should be about. The what we get out of it rather than how it is carried out - life, I mean.
 
  
Add Your Reply