Is social Networking destroying today's society? What about our social skills, are they being destroyed too?
Do you find it easier to talk to people in person or online? Why?
I don't think social networking is destroying today's society. Society has just changed, as does the world - and the world continues to change as time passes. Today's society is considerably different from what it was ten years ago, ten decades ago, or ten centuries ago, now that the Internet creates a whole new way of conveying information, collecting information, and drawing communication.
Social networking (and by proxy, the Internet) has brought hundreds and thousands of people together from across long distances and across borders - people who share similar interests, goals, aspirations, or experiences. Without it, we would not have known John or Hank, nor could Nerdfighteria exist. Nerdfighteria could not have existed without John and Hank beginning their exchange of communication via public video blogs all those years ago.
Some people may find it easier to talk online because they can think things through before sending an instant message, text, or e-mail. In other cases, communicating in person conveys emotion and tone more genuinely. Personally, I'm fine with both, since either mode of communication is used in different contexts at different times of the day with different people in my life.
Yeah what he said. I think it enhances it. It has brought social groups together from all over the world for example this one. Another example is the National Space Society which meets online in second life every Monday at 3:00pm pacific time. The online second life meetings are free. Feel free to drop in.
I just know that my social ineptitudes were present long before any social network made its presence, and I am pretty sure that there have always been lonely/dysfunctional people in the world. Social networks are just one way of being social, and they aren't mutually exclusive with the old ways either. They are incredibly useful too.
I'm not an eager facebooker myself, but when I studied in Texas last semester, facebook were the place to go if you wanted to know what others in the group were up to. It was indiscriminate, so that everyone in the group regardless of popularity were able to show up at gatherings, games and bars etc to socialize.
I find it easier to talk with people online so long as there is something to talk about. I'm an extremely quiet person, and only enjoy other people's company if we are doing something concrete together which doesn't involve much talking on my part. I can't chat for example, for more than a few seconds anyways, but I'm not interested in it either. I'm usually interested in what other people have to say though, so that is my predicament. I'm sort of got that creepy fly on the wall personality going for me.
I agree that it is not destroying today's society, but rather is just part of the drift of how societies change and develop through time. However, there is some concern about the ability to be communicatively social through only the sharing of text. This concern is not just a personal opinion, but one that is researched by language, psychology, and communications experts (I can track down some references if people want).
Verbal and written communication accounts for less than 10% of our ability to communicate, while the other 90+% comes in the form of of paralanguage (volume, pitch, intonation, etc.), facial expressions, and body expressions (including gestures, body positioning, nervous tics, etc.). There is a tendency for many of the younger generations to satisfy their social needs through social networks and texting, and limit the amount of phone and face-to-face communication. This plays off and can be reinforced by personality type. For example, an introverted person by nature may find it more comfortable and easy to communicate through the potentially more impersonal communication offered by social networks. The potential trouble is that this occurs through the developmental stages for a person, and could lead to impaired, full-spectrum of verbal and non-verbal, adult communication skills, which are still required in many careers. The degree of this impairment cannot yet be understood as there isn't a long enough baseline to do comprehensive and statistically significant studies. Mucking up with the natural developmental stages, however, is known to have long-term lasting effects. So, I don't believe it is too much of a stretch to suggest the conclusion that not developing all of our communications skills throughout our physical, emotional, and mental development can have adverse effects on our adult-communication skills.
Could be, but kids still go to school, for the time being.
I'm not a big fan of home schooling, due to many of the same issues that you've raised. But I know there are many on this community which have had it and they seems to be satisfied with it.
I'm not a big fan of home schooling myself for many of the same reasons I listed with my social network discussion, and for a good number of others.
I guess the questions would be: 1) Is the social environment as school sufficient; and 2) with the availability of satisfaction of social needs through social media, has there been a shift in how kids communicate at school? Neither of these questions, and the original question of how social networks are changing social development, have a clear or easy answers. Also, it would be good to consider the potential benefits of a high level of proficiency in communication through social networks. As society changes, it might be that the older generation is lacking a set of social skills that are developed through social networking and just plain out internet proficiency. This new set of skills in younger generations will shape what society becomes, and it is pretty hard to qualify good or bad in that situation. There may be leaps forward in technology that the older generation just can't imagine. There may be an entire restructuring of how our brains develop in response to the highly level of connectivity of social networks. There may be some level of fallout, such as new or increased mental illnesses attached to improper social development. Either way, it will be a very interesting future, and I, personally, find it hard to find a lot of fault in the internet's capacity to link together so many people across the globe.
That makes sense and definitely something to think about. But I think it's safe to assume that social networking pretty much is still in it's infancy, and the next step is going to be more interaction in 3D spaces, like Latch is on about. I don't know how advanced they currently are, or how they operate, but I imagine that they are still sort of a detached and awkward place to express real emotions in.
But imagine if they implement something like this, which would be awesome to implement in games also:
(have seen better presentations than this, but I couldn't find them right now)
Instead of controlling a drone, you would be controlling an avatar. Think forward- walk forward. Think sideways - move sideways etc. And instead of pushing the appropriate emoticon to convey your emotion, the avatar would simply express the emotion you're actually feeling, unless you tell it otherwise.
This wouldn't solve the problem with lack of actual physical contact though; such as touch, smell, and um... that other thing. Will most probably cause people to get issues.
But, I think the benefits ought to outweigh the damage.
Dang that looks fun.
Just around the corner now I'm betting. 5 years, if we're lucky. Have to make do with the next batch of gaming consoles first, but the gen after that will most likely come with controllers somewhat like that.
That's a good point, Eystein. Biofeedback-type technologies are improving at a dramatic rate, which is exemplified by your linked video (by the way, I want one!). There are even small games out that operate on simple biofeedback technology, and let us not forget Japan's Neurowear Necomimi ears (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w06zvM2x_lw&feature=plcp)... only Japan... but it does demonstrate that biofeedback technology can be used to express emotional states.
Use the force LUKE