Mnemonica

[font=Palatino Linotype][size=1][font=Microsoft Sans Serif]Alright, bear with me here... This might get a little longer than usual. I've read over the whole thread, and I find it interesting for a number of reasons. First and foremost in my mind is the aggravation that this topic created for some users. Now I'm[i] not[/i] saying that anyone got really steamed over it, but rather slightly perturbed. Like so:[/font] [/size][/font][font="] [quote name='Retribution]Adahn, your topic is ridiculously pseudophilosophical and as a result, comes off only as [b]un[/b']interesting and mildly irritating[/quote][/font][font=Microsoft Sans Serif][size=1] T[size=1]his was followed with:[/size][/size][/font] [quote name='Adahn]Why must you speak so of pseudophilosophy? [u]I wish to be a philosopher, but I have no experience,[/u] no training to give weight to my words. So, I write in this manner, choosing words and forms that are dense by their very [i]nature[/i]. This thread asks but a simple question. Some choose to answer in the voice of what has already been written, others as they are most comfortable, and others still ignore the question, attempting to undermine a thread which others may enjoy.[/QUOTE][font=System][size=1]And later, this:[/size][/font] [QUOTE=Adahn]I [i]like[/i] being cryptic, but I also wanted people to be [i]able[/i] to interpret what I said. I suppose my hints are visible to me alone, unless some of you can see what I was getting at, now that I have explained everything. If you still think I was impossible to understand, please don't tell me. I can't be cryptic [i]and[/i'] be clearer than I am here without feeling cheap. I suppose my flaw is that I am more afraid of being taken as an idiot trying to be cryptic than an idiot trying too hard to be cryptic.[/quote] [size=1][font=System] [font=Arial] [font=Microsoft Sans Serif]Mmmk. Now that we're all on the same page... What follows is what I've been thinking of. [/font][/font][/font][font=Microsoft Sans Serif] [/font] [/size][font=Microsoft Sans Serif] [/font] [font=Microsoft Sans Serif][font=Trebuchet MS][size=1][font=Microsoft Sans Serif]Retribution, I think Adahn wasn't trying to be so much pseudophilosophical as either simply trying to be long-winded or actually philosophical. If his aim was the former, then I agree that it is slightly annoying and pointless. But I'm guessing that Adahn's goal is centered on finding out what philosophy actually [i]is [/i]and how to write eloquently.And for someone who is inexperienced in the realm of higher intellectual thought and proper eloquence in speech, getting involved in such a discussion is quite a task... Forget about starting one! *Disclaimer: I'm[i] not [/i]picking a fight. I'm not disagreeing with what you said. I'm simply commenting and voicing my thoughts for the sake of furthering the discussion... That tends to get me in trouble, so I wrote this in order to keep things focused. ^-^ Note also that I'm not trying to be a pretentious ***.

I agree with your point of view, DeathKnight. The problem, I think, is that one person's 'logical' guesstimate of what's appropriate doesn't always line up with the rest of the world. That's when you have the big, greasy guy frenchin' the bimbo showing too much skin at the fountain in the mall. It's gross, and everyone knows it except for them. Gah... Now I've got that image stuck in my head... Give me a minute... *leaves computer, takes a jog, takes a nap..... ... ...

Wake up an hour earlier... I have a very hard time going to sleep, but wake up very easily. ;) Would you rather get shot in the head while looking at your killer and be able to say one last thing to them? Or get shot in the back of the head and not know that it was coming?

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']you end up being afraid of talking to a physical person.[/size][/quote] That's the perfect example of an extreme situation. The problem lies with people who have not self-identified using impersonal communication on a daily bases. I use the term "self-identified" or "self identification" a lot because it is the barrier between the solidification of ones own ideas, beliefs and personal freedom... And the state of being a child, really. A person can learn to adapt to life without ever self identifying, and this can be seen in abusive relationships (individuals that are raised by abusive parents generally marry an abusive spouse), some cases of -slight- mental deficiency, and in individuals that lack a sense of tact. I believe, and have seen, that most middle school children who have grown up with unrestricted access to various forms of impersonal communication are hindered in their understanding of social enviornments in general. And sense impersonal communication has very little consequences, it does not provide sufficient instruction to be an acceptable tool for social development before an individual has self-identified. I think the pieces fall together quite nicely. That's really the only point that I have so far. Because once you get past that barrier, impersonal communication becomes slightly more personal.

Honestly I think we're a different breed entirely. There are three main groups of 'online chatters'. The first being the up and coming generation (Middle schoolers, and now high schoolers or younger), the second being the of college/late twenties peer group, and the third being from the early thirties and on. Obviously there are a couple of different sub-groups, but that's kind of irrelevant to the topic at hand. When you're talking about the second group (us), it varies depending on whether you grew up in a pc or mac based house-hold... Just kidding. There really isn't a whole lot to go on, seeing as how most of us adapted to impersonal communication after already self-identifying, it seems that the majority is very well rounded. There is the odd case where an individual uses all caps when 'yelling' (so you can hear them better, obviously), or chats using 'txt speak'... But that isn't the majority. So that boils down to how they developed personally with impersonal communication being either a small part of their social learning experience or not a part of it at all (e.i. it's another thing that's outside the realm of the current topic). There is a certain point at which the peer groups show proof of a definite split. The point being around '93-'95... Before that point computers were fairly common, but not everybody used them to communicate with others via the internet. Basically if you were born in '91 or later, you've probably always had access to the internet in some form. Everyone born before that point, but later than ~'70, is the transition group commonly referred to as 'us'. ;) We grew up knowing about computers, and most of us have experienced life with computer that had no internet access. Ask a twelve year old what he'd do without the internet, he'd probably resort to asking his mom to bring him to the mall. How embarrassing. Ask a twenty year old what he'd do without the internet when he was twelve, he'll probably say something about calling some friends on the phone and asking them to come over. Ask a fifty year old what he'd do without the internet when he was twelve, he'd go outside and play with a stick, or do chores, or kill a small animal.

Hey. New kid cuttin' in on the conversation. :) Here's hoping you don't mind. This is an interesting topic that I actually had to write a short essay on recently. Communication over the internet, especially through IM, is the best possible example of impersonal communication. You can be a complete jerk to the person on the other side of the chat screen, and suffer very little, if any, consequences. This whole train of thought generally grinds down to how children are affected by impersonal communication, which is where I'll skip to in a second... Just to save some time. Let's pray that I don't condense it too much. This is one of the many arguments: Children exposed to impersonal communication at a young age, and who have had little exposure to face-to-face communication with people outside of their family, will be underdeveloped socially. And, if there are a large group of children who have grown up in roughly the same environment, and then became more involved in face-to-face communication later on, their 'impersonal social skills' would be transfered over to their 'real life' social skills. Now all of that's fairly general. So I'll highlight a few things that I think are key. First off, by young I mean someone who has not yet self-identified. People who have been abused sexually/emotionally generally don't have complete self identification until they reach their late thirties or early forties (which would explain certain statistics concerning divorce, but that's another topic entirely). A couple of the reasons self-identification is important before impersonal communication is introduced in an individual's life are as follows; there will not be consequences for the individuals actions/words, there isn't a whole lot of verbal communication, and of course there's a lack of body language. Consequences are important because without them, an individual cannot learn, or will refuse to. Verbal communication is important, because that is (generally) how human children first learn to communicate. And verbal communication outside of the family is essential because it allows the individual an opportunity to step outside of their 'comfort zone' (which practically doesn't exist in impersonal communication). And learn things such as the fact that yelling isn't always associated with getting into trouble. ;) And last but not least, body language. This isn't necessarily essential, but I still find it interesting. It seems that most people less accustom to face-to-face communication have a very hard time understanding body language. This is due, I believe, to a couple of very obvious things. Such as the fact that you cannot see somebody if you're IMing. Things such as sarcasm and subtle humor are very hard to pick up on if an individual is under-exposed to verbal communication and body language. This trickles down to other forms of communication, and in the end hinders the individual's ability to communicate. Bottom line: There are pathways in the brain that need to be created, and a person must attain their self identity before impersonal communication is allowed. This is due to the fact that if these things are not accomplished before hand, then impersonal communication will hinder that person's future emotional, social, and mental development.