nebuchanezz4r
No bio...
User ID: 4014
I think something as fundamental and rich as social interaction needs to be treated as sacred. There are very clearly people in the world who, for any number of reasons aren't interested in or cannot interact socially in a skillful way. Some of the reasons you've touched on and ones that I've thought about are:
- Genetics
- Trauma
- Social Environment (did you grow up in a setting with skilled socializers? is your current setting conducive to positive socialization?)
- Awareness (could be related to the above as well, but are you aware of how you socialize and what do you think of that?)
- Current physiological state (stressors, psychological weights, health, etc.)
- Indifference (they know and they don't care / it doesn't affect their survival)
I definitely think that our world is supporting in-person social interaction less and less as the years go on. I mentioned "rich" earlier because I believe that physically being around people has way more nuance and minutiae than it's virtual counterpart, which I'm sure isn't even controversial. Body language, tone of voice, the physical space, the collective energy. So we must support positive Social Environments (which is a TALL task).
But I think an even taller task is dealing with trauma and awareness. You mentioned people talking over on another, only relating to themselves, something I experience everyday and it drives me mad. To me that means they aren't at all genuinely interested in the other person. They are only interested in surviving the social interaction by trying to relate things to themselves rather than expound upon what the other person has to say, which is what's important and fun for that person. Now of course, this could be a function of the other person being unpleasant to interact with. Maybe they are a selfish and shallow socializer, so why would we be interested in them? I think this touches on your point about "nutrition". Social health is a matrix that everyone participates in and if you find yourself shouldering more of the load you'll adapt to the people around you by either becoming them or hiding from them.
Although I agree with the fact that either end of the doomer spectrum is probably wrong, I have a hard time feeling good about AI and the future.
I will grant that the benefits of AI could be massive. Breakthroughs in the right hands will yield almost infinite positive possibilities. But how do we get to this altruistic future when so many nefarious actors are in the way? There are already some very rich and powerful people who wield techology to influence the voting habits of entire countries. Think of the possibilities for healthier food, efficient supply chains, medical breakthroughs, solutions to societies burning issues, yes, but also think of the possibilities for deception, social hijacking, wealth disparity, monopolies, and any other tactics used today, but multiplied by the power of AI.
I currently don't see how things will settle into a peaceful and supportive existence for all.
More options
Context Copy link