(2020oct12 thread) someone quote-tweeted one of my “build an audience” tweets with a very interesting disagreement that I want to explore. they’re a small account so I don’t want to stress them out by quote-tweeting them in turn. but lemme break it down

1. “This craze around “follow & make friends in social media” “create content for social media” is the toxic madness that has kept most of humanity unhinged in today’s world.”
2. “I would rather encourage scholarly pursuits for one’s internal satisfaction without engaging outer world.”
3. “Echo chambers of the social media are as detrimental to learning & living a genuine human experience as the crazy educational loans! Learning should be accessible without having to be made a spectacle out of!”
4. “I also wish an individual’s pursuit of excellence doesn’t get distracted by things specific to social media like having to have an audience etc. Social media should be like the community well of yesteryears. No one goes there to build tribe!”

Alright. So. I simultaneously agree and disagree with every single one of these things. The reality is quite nuanced.

Let’s start with 2: scholarly pursuits for internal satisfaction without engaging with the outside world. This is actually an option, if you really want to do it. You could be an independent lurker-scholar who reads and writes in isolation for decades without sharing anything. Although even here I must say: there’s something that strikes me as somewhat selfish and hoarder-like about this. After all, where do your scholarly materials come from? You have to read other people’s work! You are studying the outside world! But you don’t want to engage with it.

But this *is* an option, and if you choose it, I respect your right to make that choice. You may have your own reasons for wanting to be a shut-in. And of course, there’s a HUGE spectrum from “basement rat nobody has ever seen” to “narcissistic center of attention pop star”.

Which brings me to 3b: “Learning should be accessible without having to be made a spectacle out of!” – for the most part, you get to choose the precise degree of spectacle that you want. So much of learning happens in the dialogue *between* individuals. You have to see each other.

It’s true that some people make a huge spectacle out of their pursuits – and you could say that this is what I do. I accept that. It’s a choice. (If you observe carefully though, you’ll notice that I also make very specific decisions to avoid the worst excesses of spectacle. But people tend not to notice things that are avoided.) I think it’s highly likely that there’s a selection bias where you look at the absolute circus clownshow that dominates mainstream media and pop youtube and so on, and then assume errenously that that’s the only show in town, because it’s so lurid. (h/t the times square problem.)

Social media allows you to connect with *anybody you want*, including people who share your values about not making a spectacle out of things!

back to 1: “This craze around “follow & make friends in social media” “create content for social media” is the toxic madness that has kept most of humanity unhinged in today’s world.” I think there’s a conflation here between unhinged idolatry (bad!) and genuine human connection. What’s really wild is that there are so many people who are absolutely suffering in isolation and loneliness, and I think often as a direct consequence of being afraid to share their thoughts and feelings in case they get accused of being narcissists.

Science is social. scholarship is social. we know this. it is *exceedingly* rare and unlikely that any of your intellectual heroes worked in isolation. even if they did, they must’ve read books, and thinked their thoughts with language – which is a communal enterprise.

ok now let’s talk about 3a- echo chambers. I’ve been thinking about these for many years now. I do think any serious info operator should be very sensitive to the ways in which their info environment has systemic biases built into it, reinforcing signal…

I will concede that it’s very possible, maybe even more-than-likely, that lots of individuals get on the internet precisely to seek out information that confirms their biases, and they then spiral into getting radicalized + inducted by some cult… lots of sad stories abt this

there’s a quote attributed to Mark Twain that goes like, “Censorship is telling a man he can’t have a steak just because a baby can’t chew it.” I try my best to be kind and compassionate… and/but it’s hard to avoid coming to the conclusion that the internet *is* full of babies.

maybe not just the internet, maybe it’s the species itself that remains woefully underdeveloped emotionally, psychologically and so on. people allegedly need to be protected from themselves and each other and their worst impulses. millennia-old problem

and yea a big part of this may just boil down to the fact that as a species we have not yet adapted to the consequences of industrialization, living in cities and so on. whole species is babies. 99% of social media activity is screaming and banging pots and pans. fair enough

occurs to me that you could actually argue against all social activity! “groups of people should be discouraged. every group ends up being overwhelmed by petty politics and infighting, dominated by selfish assholes, groupthink”. “wait, ingroup or outgroup?” “all groups bad”

“Social media should be like the community well of yesteryears. No one goes there to build tribe” – is another fascinating statement. I mean, where did the community well even come from? you have to have a community to have a community well. where does that community come from?

“oh, that community was already there. but no new communities!” hm (c/f douglas adams: anything invented before you’re born is ordinary and normal, anything invented in your youth is new and exciting, anything invented after you’re 35 is against the natural order of things)

you know what’s funny – WE NEED THESE PEOPLE! We need these grumpy people who are anti-spectacle and skeptical of ideologues and narcissists etc to be a part of our communities. because when they exit, then we have a “the inmates are running the asylum” situation

but ofc you cannot coerce people to be part of communities that they don’t want to. I’m not trying to force anybody to do anything here. I’m just trying to share what I’ve learned and what I’ve seen and hope that it persuades some people to think about this stuff. it’s v impt

and I’ll share a talking point that I often annoy my wife with: the fact that OP posted this on social media is itself a demonstration that, at SOME level, they understand and appreciate this, even if only subconsciously. they realize that their opinion matters. and I agree!

it’s the ppl most reluctant to post on social media whose voices we most need to hear

it’s unlikely that we’ll ever reach the most extreme cases directly*, but we can move the needle on those who are on the fence ___ *we can kinda cheat and reach them via proxies

I will likely continue riffing with some version of this talking point for the rest of my life, bc I remember how frustrating it was for me to try to find people who would talk to me when I a kid. better public commons are possible & we can build them. and when I say “talk to me”, I don’t just mean ” wah, wah, give me attention”. I mean, involve me. In the community. In the world. Give me some meaningful work to do. When good people fail to do this, fascists pick up the slack. I’m serious.

but like, no pressure or anything.

[earnestly] hey wanna help me fight fascism at a global scale? no worries if not!!