We live in an age that seems to be perpetually torn between choosing from a smörgåsbord of choice as it relates to traditional values and contemporary approaches to life. This veritable selection of seemingly opposing ideologies makes presenting oneself in varying social situations difficult enough; but the conflict doesn’t end there.
Thanks to the many ways in which we digitally interact these days—including over the phone, by way of instant messaging programs and even by way of online avatars—we are becoming and expected to be, more and more often, social chameleons. We change the pitch of our voice depending on who we’re talking to on the phone, we project a more-considered and ‘turn-based’ version of ourselves in instant messaging situations and we can become entirely different people when making use of an online avatar.
During my university years, I remember hearing a lecturer lamenting over the inherent problems of defining notions of selfhood for those who physically exist in one space (e.g. behind a computer), but are mentally projecting themselves into other places (e.g. online chat rooms and games). I find myself further reminded of my high school English teacher talking about the many faces of individuals being comparable to a disco ball and how, although a single object/entity, it looks different depending on what light is hitting it and what angle you’re looking at it from.
As with the disco ball metaphor, in day-to-day life we subconsciously switch our personalities to interact with different groups of people: work colleagues, bosses, parents and friends. This notion is by no means new, but then throw the aforementioned digital considerations into the mix and suddenly our handful of different faces increases (potentially exponentially too).
And then we have this news article on the PopSci front page that talks of the ability to create life-sized paper version of yourself for less than $40. Initially I laughed at the prospect, and then I realised that this was essentially a tangible representation of what I’ve been talking about in this post.
I’m not terribly interested in publically exploring whether Tesla Patent Pending, plus my gaming self, plus my writing self, plus my actual self, etc. are different versions of me or pieces of the same puzzle. What I am interested in is predicting whether our current obsession with multiple digital faces will cause problems, as a generation obsessed with all things digital, in the future. Are we losing something by stepping away from our reliance on communication by physical proximity, or is the digital communication revolution simply an efficient step in the right direction?
Popular Science has been a leading source of science, technology and gadget news since 1872. With up-to-the minute latest space news, insightful commentary on the new innovations and concept cars ...if it's new or future technology you'll find it at popsci.com.au.
WW Media - Popular Science © 2010
Technology - DIY - Videos
I don’t think that there is any crisis or whatever what i have dubbed the ’stupid media’ is reporting (being any newspaper in print today).
People have always, and will always wear masks. Digital masks are no different to our work personas which are no different to the people act around the opposite sex which are no different… ad infinitum.
The ‘problem’ is that here they can’t see your face or ‘hold you accountable’… for what exactly? because you said something along the lines of ‘OMG you are suck a NOOB. GO AND *add expletive here*’.
Just. Wow. Seriously anyone who hasn’t had a great rant on the net projected at them, or in a game hasn’t lived. The best thing about it is that you can’t hurt someone on the net. How can you? They know for a fact that they don’t know you, they know for a fact that you are commenting only on what they are doing right at that second. Sticks and stones don’t even come close to what these are. They aren’t even words, they are projections of idiocy projected on a wall of tissue paper.
I will admit i have felt ire at some players before, and their slander has affected me. But they are just douches who hide behind their facelessness. They need that, let them have it while real people converse civilly and on topics far more diverse than the latest nightly activities of my mother.
I don’t think that faceless-ness or a loss of identity will flow from the internet. If anything I am merely creating a name for the voices in my head. Dude from Sydney is as much I/me/myself as the man sitting in the office typing this reply; he may be a little more erudite, a little more cultured, have a deeper and sexier voice but he is still ME. Individualism has withstood fascism, it has withstood soviet economics, it has withstood fashion and intrigue, it withstood the dark ages and the enlightenment. If it has withstood all of these then the internet, the last true place for free speech and the free exchange of ideas, will certainly not be the arena in which it is finally brought low.
@ Dude from Sydney - You raise some interesting points, particularly as it relates to online games: I can relate to a lot of them.I do, however, see this as becoming problematic in the future, mostly because of our heavy reliance on impersonal means of communication. It’s so much easier and more efficient to maintain friendships and family connections by way of phones (both calls and messages), emails, social networking websites and a variety of online chat programs. Don’t get me wrong, I love these things as much as the next person, but it does feel a whole lot less authentic than being able to look my friend/family member in the eye while talking to them.