Social media evidence

by Captain Walker

Categories: Humanities, Psychology & Philosophy

One of the big reasons I hang out and interact on social media, is to explore cultures and ways of thinking/behaviour.  So when you see some of the same represented in the utterances of Stupid (that imaginary impish figure in my mind), you know where that came from.

The example below shows that individuals feel personally insulted when a group to which they may belong is criticised. This explains why when ‘some’ people want to criticise ‘doctors’ or ‘lawyers’ (for example) – if they’re in the company of one of those – they  would preface what they might have to say by saying “No disrespect to you but….“.

Culturally, people see themselves as closely connected to groups. It’s the nature of ‘identity’ as a sociological construct. This psychosocial behavioural phenomenon – an evolutionary inheritance from the herd instinct – is then manifested in cognitive patterns and responses. Of course ‘nobody’ (except me perhaps) will be consciously aware of the latter. So criticising a group of people – even if based on facts and hard evidence – leads individuals who may be part of a group or related to, to feel offended.

In the social media ‘norm’ of today, criticism is taken as ‘insult‘ (should I add ‘not by everybody’ just to stay safe?).

But in the captioned conversation, is another phenomenon that I have been tracking – look for the words, “.. isn’t seen as insulting by people you denigrate. It is insulting.” I just have to unpack my thinking on that.

Seen‘ obviously means perceived in some way. If it’s not seen how can it be described at all? I don’t want to know – maybe by telepathy? ?

But ‘is insulting‘ then pushes what is obviously a perception into the realm of ‘objective fact’. As mentioned elsewhere there are two kinds of reality a) one in the head  (perception) and b) that which lives outside the head (objective reality). In the captioned example here, the individual has taken a) and swiftly made it into b). This is the heart of all self-deception and delusion of various types.

Underlying – or on top off – all the above is something most are unaware of. What’s that? In the normal use of language – social media or elsewhere – people don’t actually take time to construct their expressed thoughts (text or spoken word). Oh no  no.. .the cultural norm is to blurt out the first thing that pops into ‘your head’. The reason for that you may see next is because ‘Life is too short’! Which means that everybody is busy on the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Netflix – or just maybe.. just maybe … bathing the dog. So hey – who the devil has a few fractions of a second to think, before engaging mouth? Like ‘nobody’ (or should I say not everybody).

Interruption

Stupid: I think a criticism is an insult!

CW: I don’t think so.

Stupid: I don’t see the difference between a criticism and an insult.

CW: Well, I’m not going to spend time explaining it to you.

Stupid: You took one example of perception becoming reality and generalised it.

CW: You would think so because you’re looking at one sequence in the captioned conversation. I have a body of knowledge of many similar situations.

Stupid: Well, I still think criticising a group of people is insulting.

CW: Would you consider as statement such as ‘Black people in London are notorious for carrying knives and murdering people‘ to be insulting?

Stupid: Absolutely! Who said that?! It’s wrong to say such things.

CW:  Oh? Well it happens to be a fact. In February 2022, it was known as fact that “Despite making up only 13% of London’s total population, black Londoners account for 45% of London’s knife murder victims, 61% of knife murder perpetrators and 53% of knife crime perpetrators.

Stupid: That’s about some black people – not all black people.

CW: Obviously. That’s what percentages and statistics are about. They cannot include all people.

Stupid: I’m not a statistician.

CW: Good. Nor am I. So with that, you’re back in the box! 

[collapse]

== ==== ===

In the next captioned conversation (clicking on screenshot enlarges it) what happens is:

  1. I present facts that are available in the public domain.
  2. I state that those fact create a probability of a deep and lasting recession.
  3. I recognise that these things are unpalatable, and what people really want is good news and hope.

What emerges early on is confirmation that good news, the ‘enjoyment of’, and hope are exactly what people want.

Lower down in the thread, it is patently obvious that all who responded avoided dealing with the facts.

They found pleasure in throwing jibes and demonstrating further avoidance of objective facts in a reality external to their heads.

The ‘Life is too short’ comment popped out, which is just brilliant. If you’re not ‘English’ or know this culture, you would not appreciate that it’s a polite way of saying ‘I won’t be wasting my time on that!’. Ooooo.. people don’t have time. Like why? Facebook and Twitter has them, that’s why.

There are statements like ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself’. These are things that roll off the tongue when people want to live in hope (aka optimism), in preference to reality – that very hard place.

Those who moan and groan are a drag on society” – obviously they are people to be avoided. The point here is that people don’t want bad news. It is categorised as ‘negativity’ and people who spout negativity must be suppressed. This reminds me of a situation at one place of work about 10 years ago, when we were realistically in a bad situation. Managers told everyone to smile and stop saying negative things.

The foundations of delusion are in these posts. Did I say mental disorder? Did I diagnose anybody? I did not! People can suffer delusions without having mental disorder.

The equation is: OPTIMISM + DISTANCE FROM REALITY => DELUSION.

Just to be clear – as this is a form of social media where imaginations and perceptions become reality –  I have no problem with ‘optimism’. I have a problem with optimism that avoids facing reality.

I also having nothing against social media. I spend quite a lot of time on various platforms, except Facebook.

Overview and conclusions

My overview in the last 10 years is that social media has damaged thinking processes in the following ways:

  1. People (in general obviously) no longer take time to think.
  2. Reaction is ‘golden’ in those spheres.
  3. People do not read – which involves thinking.
  4. Due to the lack of thinking the abilities of people to apply rules of logic have atrophied.
  5. People think that what they perceive is reality – it isn’t.
  6. The above creates a mindset that washes into the realms of normal (non-social-media) life.

The reading of posts on this blog is subject to the Terms & Conditions. Unpalatable truths and personal experiences may be told. Nothing posted on this blog is directed at any identified person. On occasions individuals are quoted anonymously. That does not mean that they have been identified to the world. Should any person or organisation reading this blog find something that makes them feel or know that they  are being referred to - any such perceived identification does not mean 'identified to the world'. ‘Stupid' is an impish figment of my imagination who occasionally is allowed to pop up – and does not represent any known individual or individuals. ‘Stupid'  carries the characteristics groups of people with 'social media mindsets'. The treatment of  'Stupid' is not representative of the way people are treated in real life. Adverse inferences made are dismissed in advance. 

While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing posts on this blog, they make no representation or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents  and specifically disclaim any implied warranties or fitness for a particular purpose. Posts on this blog do not contain all information available on various topics. Posts contain opinion based on facts, experience and other concepts. Opinions expressed are not advice nor intent on persuading any individual or other legal entity to adopt the opinions.  Posts are not created to be specific to any individual’s or organisation’s situation or needs. All persons are instructed to obey relevant policies and procedures that may apply to them. Departure from such, is at readers' own risk. You should consult with a professional with fiduciary duty to you, when making decisions. The author and publisher shall have no liability or responsibility to any person or entity regarding any loss or damage incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, directly or indirectly, by the information contained on this blog or hyperlinked from this blog. 


Other posts that may interest you...

Digging into logical fallacy

It’s usually a good idea to define what one is talking about. Fallacy is derived from the Latin word, fallacia which means trick, deceit or fraud. Logical fallacy is an argument containing faulty reasoning. Also note that ‘reasoning’ itself depends on applications of the rules of logic – which stand rather separately. So – misapplication ... Read more

What is love?

At this post Word are cheap in October 2021, I was meant to explore ‘What is love?‘ Of course, I got distracted by so many things along the way. But tonight the question suddenly hit me, when I accidentally came across a discussion on YouTube. Well, I’ll leave that video for lower down this post. ... Read more

A simple thing

Well, as usual people don’t know what they don’t know and won’t take the time to explore – so they need to be told.  On this occasion I’m sharing this simple timer thing that lives on Windows 10. Obviously, I can’t say nor do I have time to check if it exists on any other ... Read more