Questions Of The Day/Week/Month/Ages
Let us (or me, to be specific) take inventory.
* Eight years (soon to be Nine) on the Internet.
* Hundreds of people met in various net venues.
* Thousands of people's web pages/blogs/comments read.
** Number of sane, rational, normal humans encountered = 7.
Admittedly, I exaggerate (maybe about that grossly high figure of normal humans encountered) but my question of the day is, "Why are so many of the people I encounter in one form or another, on-line, seemingly Mentally Defective?"
Alas, I will not fully answer that q. but I will likely stay in a semi-Socratic mode, and offer up even more questions. Such as:
Why do people who have great difficulty stringing together three coherent, original sentences think what they believe should have any value to any stranger?
Why do some people think that arguments made using Ipse Dixit logic (a very poor and ignorant form of argument where the truthfulness of the proposition has no basis at all, but for the fact the proponent "believes it" to be so) are even worth reading, leave alone the keystrokes to create them?
Why do people who have trouble reading (comprehending) a paragraph, such as follows:
"The reputation of this work is largely due to his analysis of inductive proof, in contrast to Aristotle's syllogisms, which are deductive. Mill formulates five methods of induction -- the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint or double method of agreement and difference, the method of residues, and that of concomitant variations. The common feature of these methods, the one real method of scientific inquiry, is that of elimination. All the other methods are thus subordinate to the method of difference."
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill )
Think they are smart enough to form an intelligent thought?
That was the just the tip of the iceberg, for the cognitive issues. How about behaviors?
Why do some people believe that being an Internet Tough Guy/Gal is anything but the mark of stunted maturity and bad manners?
Why do some people think they gain any thing of value from being rude, crude, or mean, on the Net?
Why do some people think that their lives can be at all enriched by spewing venom to strangers
on some web forum or blog?
Ultimately (and not merely within the confines of the Internet) why do so many people believe
that belligerence is anything but the mark of a bully?
I don't have the ready, neat, and universal answers. I just know that there is too much ignorance, and meanness floating around both the "Real" world and the Virtual one.
And it would be nice if more folk could step back from the combat and try to see that it is at best a waste of time, to engage with others that way. But saying that is easy. I confess that I have been in my own "recovery" phase, and it is hard to give up the old habits of snark and bite.
But I am trying.
* Eight years (soon to be Nine) on the Internet.
* Hundreds of people met in various net venues.
* Thousands of people's web pages/blogs/comments read.
** Number of sane, rational, normal humans encountered = 7.
Admittedly, I exaggerate (maybe about that grossly high figure of normal humans encountered) but my question of the day is, "Why are so many of the people I encounter in one form or another, on-line, seemingly Mentally Defective?"
Alas, I will not fully answer that q. but I will likely stay in a semi-Socratic mode, and offer up even more questions. Such as:
Why do people who have great difficulty stringing together three coherent, original sentences think what they believe should have any value to any stranger?
Why do some people think that arguments made using Ipse Dixit logic (a very poor and ignorant form of argument where the truthfulness of the proposition has no basis at all, but for the fact the proponent "believes it" to be so) are even worth reading, leave alone the keystrokes to create them?
Why do people who have trouble reading (comprehending) a paragraph, such as follows:
"The reputation of this work is largely due to his analysis of inductive proof, in contrast to Aristotle's syllogisms, which are deductive. Mill formulates five methods of induction -- the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint or double method of agreement and difference, the method of residues, and that of concomitant variations. The common feature of these methods, the one real method of scientific inquiry, is that of elimination. All the other methods are thus subordinate to the method of difference."
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill )
Think they are smart enough to form an intelligent thought?
That was the just the tip of the iceberg, for the cognitive issues. How about behaviors?
Why do some people believe that being an Internet Tough Guy/Gal is anything but the mark of stunted maturity and bad manners?
Why do some people think they gain any thing of value from being rude, crude, or mean, on the Net?
Why do some people think that their lives can be at all enriched by spewing venom to strangers
on some web forum or blog?
Ultimately (and not merely within the confines of the Internet) why do so many people believe
that belligerence is anything but the mark of a bully?
I don't have the ready, neat, and universal answers. I just know that there is too much ignorance, and meanness floating around both the "Real" world and the Virtual one.
And it would be nice if more folk could step back from the combat and try to see that it is at best a waste of time, to engage with others that way. But saying that is easy. I confess that I have been in my own "recovery" phase, and it is hard to give up the old habits of snark and bite.
But I am trying.
posted by Abstentus at 9:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home