Discussing people that you never met. Phenomena that you never observed. Stuff that you never saw, personally, with your own eyes.
Discussion without empiricism. Without grounding.
Discussing people that you never met. Phenomena that you never observed. Stuff that you never saw, personally, with your own eyes.
Discussion without empiricism. Without grounding.
Give me an example of a better answer to whatever you wrote here. And I wasn’t trying to be insulting I’m sorry. It’s just very hard to understand what you are questionning beyond “society bad! Yes/No?”
Re this giant conversation… this collective linguistic technology-augmented hallucination…
It’s good because it ignores space. You can talk to anybody all over the world instantaneously.
It’s bad because it is dominated by the loudest
It’s good because we can render our ideas in a broad menu of options. Text, sound, video
It’s bad because it does not differentiate between levels of abstraction. First-hand accounts carry the same weight as fifth-hand acccounts.
It’s good because it’s convenient. Smartphones.
It’s bad because it exists entirely apart from the world. Asserting a world-ness of its own. And that’s a seductive argument.
It’s good and bad because it supplies infinite entertainment.
It is strong and weak the way all language is strong and weak.
That’s all that one person could come up with in 5 minutes. Theoretically the combined intellect of the internet’s billions might come up with a couple more.
Yet you asked “what is this”. Lol, you’re tripping balls mate. Plus who are you to decide what’s good, bad, strong or weak. Especially with some bullshit like “it’s apart from the world” (it’s not, it’s definitely part of it you aren’t transcending dimensions here). Anyway get some sleep.