

Our Computers, Ourselves: Are computers changing human character? - Hooke
http://www.npr.org/programs/invisibilia/385792677/our-computers-ourselves

======
ChuckFrank
It is in my experience. Try dating outside of an app. It's pretty amazing the
social changes that I believe are a result of being able to date almost
exclusively through an app. Friends of mine mention that people don't ask
people out in person anymore. One friend came back from France and was amazed
to have people ask her out in person. She said it felt almost shocking and
archaic. So, yes, computers are changing our social character, and likely our
personal character as a result of their increasing presence in our lives.

------
comrade1
I'm a believer in the William Golding (Lord of the Flies) view of humanity -
that the baseline character of humans is quite different than what you see in
modern humanity and that what makes us who we are comes from social controls
and not instinct.

IOW, human character is malleable and constantly changing. It's not surprising
that something as significant as the Internet (not computers on their own) is
changing us again.

~~~
narrator
I think our human nature is more a function of scarcity than anything else. If
you look at Colin Turnbull's work comparing the Pygmy tribes to the Ik tribes,
it's pretty evident that under harsh conditions people are more ruthless and
selfish then under conditions of relative plenty.

I like to also compare the Old Testament from Deutoronomy onward and
Gilgamesh. In Gilgamesh, which is a much older book, the world is vast, lonely
and mysterious and man's primary struggle is with the forces of nature. In the
Old Testament, the world is crowded and the the story line is dominated by
near constant never-ending warfare.

~~~
hga
My question in response is, "is that qualitative difference also qualitative?"
I'm starting to think I agree, as long as you extend "scarcity" and
"harshness" beyond the purely economic.

Otherwise how do you explain what appears to be the majority of modern
jihadists coming from at least the upper 1/2 of society, if not solidly middle
class or above, e.g. the 9/11 hijackers?

Of course, your thesis doesn't have to explain all examples of being
"rutheless".

As for your last point, hmmm. Is that in part a function of viewpoint, of e.g.
the author(s) and audience(s)?

ADDED: other counterexamples: The Japanese in WWII, the actions of some high
caste Indians towards lower caste ones. (As a matter of fact, in India in the
last few decades, while incomes have gone up, calories and quality of them has
gone down for those lower on the socioeconomic scale...).

------
mc32
Computers aren't so much changing who we are, rather they ate allowing people
to expose their unmasked selves. With computers there is no longer the need to
wear a social mask. You don't have to pretend.

That's to say the nice gal at the office who when she plays video games plays
a sadistic character, that character is closer to her unfiltered self. So she
is less the agreeable helpful persona --that's the role she puts on in
society-- due to norms and expectations, and is more that violent persona. And
that violent persona is not so much a reaction to balance her social mask, but
more the "real" self. We can imagine why societies evolved to manage the true
selves in ways that seem hypocritical.

------
hessenwolf
One of the best books to make me realise this was Accelerando, by Charles
Stross. The chips were inside her head, but, you know, accessible through
typing and inside your head is just a difference in degree.

------
shaurz
I really dislike the weird narrative style of this radio programme.

------
talles
Thank you for _indirectly_ showing me Invisibilia. I'm in love with the
content.

