I know a lot of people strongly disagree with Dreyfus, but I find myself agreeing with some of his points. Unlike Dreyfus, I love the internet and find it very useful, but I can see where he is coming from on some of his points. Dreyfus talks about how he thinks that while we are on the internet, we are disembodied on the internet. Dreyfus believes that without our bodies we will slip into nihilism. I agree with Dreyfus that we are disembodied while on the internet. People feel that just because they are on the internet they must take no responsibility for their actions or words. I don’t know how many times in middle school that girls would get in fights through instant messenger. People would say the most cruel, hurtful things and think nothing of it because it was on instant messenger. It must not mean anything and it won’t hurt anyone if you say it through the internet because it isn’t as if you are really saying it to the person. People think that nothing bad can happen to them for the actions they take on the internet.
I also agree with Dreyfus about the internet giving people a platform to make opinions and never act on them. I think that Facebook is the best example of this. I don’t know how many groups I get invited to be in supporting some cause or another. “Wear black for tolerance.” “Support breast cancer.” “Vote for Obama.” These groups have thousands and thousands of members and I always wonder how many of these people are actively involved in this issue they claim to believe in. It is really easy to just click the ‘accept’ button and join a group to make people believe that you are taking a stance. The internet allows people to make it seem like they are involved or care about things that in fact they do nothing for. People can even make horrid videos of government officials or make videos full of racial slurs and terrible things and then think that they will never see any consequences. We live in a world where speaking your mind is the thing to do and there are groups fighting for every issue possible. The internet allows these things to be amplified even more and really does cause problems in our society. This anonymity is one of the draws of the internet and this is not right. The internet gives us the ability to pass between embodiment and disembodiment so easily it’s amazing. I personally love the internet, but I agree with Dreyfus and think that these things are a little disturbing.
4.30.07
Jennifer Crabill | 23-Apr-07 at 7:06 pm | Permalink
The AIM fight is a good example of how conversing online can be different than conversing in real life. What you do on the internet and the effects of what you do are buffered way down; sometimes so much that you hardly feel responsible for your actions on the internet. Those who were caught red-handed on “To Catch a Predator” (or whatever the name is) probably felt disembodied from their real selves, and, therefore, thought in some way that they were not fully responsible for the crimes they were committing.
The internet is wonderful. But Dreyfus successfully points out that the Internet can disconnect users from their real world. You know how in junior high girls would break up with guys on the phone rather than in person because it wasn’t as uncomfortable or awkward? The internet has replaced the phone as people’s No. 1 crutch in replacing real-life situations.
Kimberly Koch | 23-Apr-07 at 8:33 pm | Permalink
I agree with you that Facebook and other sites make it completely easy to support different groups and issues just by clicking ‘accept’. I think this is very sad because just clicking accept in no way helps any cause. It further proves that opinions mean nothing if they are not acted upon, which Dreyfus said would happen when opinions were too easily heard.
Jeremy Mcguire | 23-Apr-07 at 10:45 pm | Permalink
I agree with the disembodiment that occurs while being on the internet with others and yes people do not take action for their words that they post all over the web. But don’t you think that Dreyfus is a little bit going over the edge when he says the internet will lead to nihilism. As I have said before I think that Dreyfus does not give us the credit we deserve for being able to separate false information from the credible sources. He makes it seem that we all get lost in a sea of endless information with no way to get out.
Amanda Bleatman | 24-Apr-07 at 9:27 am | Permalink
I definitely think that both sides of this debate are true. I like the Internet too, but I have already realized the negative affects that it has on society. Yet, it doesn’t stop me from using it or enjoying using it either. The problem is that people don’t understand how much it affects them. If you are so wrapped up in such things, there is no way you can see the problem and it’s easier to deny one. I’m not saying that we should stop using the Internet or technology completely. Instead, we should practice self-control on how much we use these things, and how we use them.
Ashley Graham | 25-Apr-07 at 1:13 pm | Permalink
I disagree with the fact that we are disembodied through use of the internet. On this website, I could not and would not say anything and everything that came to mind, no matter how hurtful it was to others. Although I cannot see my fellow classmates face to face, I am still showing respect for your opinions. People are able to track down a persons screen name and e-mail, and they know who was saying what. In regards to your middle school fights, yes they were said online, but they had implications in person, I am sure. There is not complete anonymity on the internet, and I hope that there never is.
Andrea Fish | 25-Apr-07 at 4:38 pm | Permalink
I agree with your facebook comment, as I recently went through and deleted all the groups that I didn’t really know why I joined in the first place. On the other hand I think that their are some people out their who truly support a cause and facebook is a good way for them to inform their friends of these issues. I see the good and bad in it, but the disembodiment can’t turn into embodiment with out the information their to take and stance and then hopefully an action.
Danielle Foster | 25-Apr-07 at 6:36 pm | Permalink
Ashley-
I think there are certain cases where you are in fact embodied on the internet. This is a site in which you know that your teacher and fellow classmates will be looking at what you are saying and evaluating it. There is a definitive authority on this site so it becomes a lot harder to disembody and just freely speak your mind. When you know that someone is actually looking at what you are writing/saying and you know that what you say will be accounted for you are so much less likely to just say whatever you feel like saying.
Fernando Londono | 25-Apr-07 at 8:43 pm | Permalink
Definitely. We become disembodied the moment we click the mouse and type on our keyboard (reminds me of the Dave Chappelle show where he’s actually “in” the internet) Some people do not understand the consequences of their actions because their is no other real “physical” presence in the room with them, so they believe they can say whatever they want. You mention AIM, and this is a prime example: screenames. From the moment I login I no longer exist as the person I am but a different logger with a different name.
Annie Werly | 25-Apr-07 at 9:05 pm | Permalink
People certainly do become disembodied on the internet- the middle school example is exactly what I thought of throughout Dreyfus’ examples. People would get “asked out” over AIM or girls would get into fights that would escalate over IMs- people cannot convey the tone of their words, they’re just words on a screen and can be read anyway the person chooses to interpret. You don’t have to take credit for what happened because you don’t have to look the person in the eye. Our society has an issue with making eye contact, we seem to think it’s okay to talk to someone whilst looking at their chest or not even looking at all. We seem to be uncomfortable with direct eye contact and I feel this has a lot to do with the internet being substituted for inter-personal relations; in this light, I think Dreyfus has a point.
Brian Horn | 25-Apr-07 at 9:35 pm | Permalink
I do not think that we are disembodied while we are on the internet. While some people may think that, I think that we are still connected to what we are doing while on the internet. We may say some things we wouldn’t normally when involved in a conversation on AIM, but we still have to consider the implications of what we say and do while using this technology. We are not exempt from any reprecussions of what we say, even if we do say things we wouldn’t normally say.
Danielle Foster | 25-Apr-07 at 9:55 pm | Permalink
Annie and Fernando- I completely agree with you guys. To people online I am not known as Danielle, I’m known as my SN. I can say anything I want and if it is taken in a bad way, I can say “oh thats not what I meant, you just read it wrong.” Perception plays such a huge role in our internet lives. It is so hard to tell if someone is trying to be sarcastic or if they are actually being mean. I agree with Annie about our society and eye contact. We have so many devices (text messaging, cell phones, emails, facebook, IM) that enable us to communicate with others without ever having to look at them or be in direct contact with them. This is a sad reality and I hope that it does not keep progressing. Imagine 30 years from now when no one leaves their houses, everyone works from their computers, and no one talks face to face. Its a scary thought.
Erin Murphy | 25-Apr-07 at 10:49 pm | Permalink
“People would say the most cruel, hurtful things and think nothing of it because it was on instant messenger.”
There was a featured video recently on YouTube… it was home movie of a cute little baby plucking guitar strings.
Here are a few comments that were left for the mother…
“thats fucking gay shit”
“Any brainless idiot can pluck a guitar string.”
“that babys kinda fat”
I’m willing to get that if those people had been there in person, they never would have said such horrible things.
Danielle Foster | 26-Apr-07 at 10:47 am | Permalink
That is terrible. I agree with you that those people would definitely have not said that if they were there in person. Who are they to judge this woman for putting something up of her child that she thinks is cute? Something else that goes along with this is the videos that people put up on YouTube and other sites. There are some incredibally racist and inappropriate videos on that site. Things are said and done in those videos that I am sure none of the people would say or do in real life to other people. My eight year old sister watches stuff on YouTube all the time and I always worry about her finding something really vulgur or upsetting. These video posting sites allow people to do and say whatever they want and play it off as just trying to be funny. It is another example of being disembodied on the internet.
Amanda Jakstas | 26-Apr-07 at 11:04 am | Permalink
I also agree with Dreyfus in terms of embodiement. I really liked Danielle’s example of AIM. I would be a hypocrite if I said that I hate it, but I do think it has some negative affects. I often get frustrated on AIM, especially when I am talking to my boyfriend from home. A simple phrase can have so many meanings online, as opposed to being in person. AIM has lead to many fights due to misunderstandings. Additionally, AIM reduces the risk that we encounter in body interactions. People can say whatever they want online and not suffer the same consequences as if they were in person.
Ryan Riordan | 26-Apr-07 at 12:39 pm | Permalink
I definitely agree that many things that occur on the Internet are a little dangerous and in my personal opinion, wierd. Sometimes it seems that by using a feature like AIM you are taking away many of the consequences of your actions. AIM is a breeding ground for gossip and this gossip does not have many of the consequences that it might have in real life because it is in a way sheltered. I personally have not used AIM for over two years. I know that sounds funny because the way i say it is almost in the form “Hi, my name is Ryan, and I’m addicted to the the Internet.” In a way though don’t you feel that that could be an accurate way to assess some people’s use of the internet and all of its vast possibilities?
Wes Gotschall | 26-Apr-07 at 2:12 pm | Permalink
While the subject matter of the show is no laughing matter, my roommates and I watch Dateline NBC “To Catch a Predator” and find it hysterical at how stupid the guys on the show are. For those of you who don’t know, it is a show exposing Internet predators who solicit sex from underage teens. These guys clearly find the disembodiment of the Internet appealing. They would never have the gall to approach underage girls in person. When they are caught, many of them say how they were just messing around and having fun online and that they weren’t actually going to do anything. Unfortunately for them, state laws don’t see it that way and almost all the guys on the show get convicted of felonies. The disembodiment of the Internet is a dangerous thing. Inhibitions are lost when you can just exit the program and not have to think about your actions ever again, which makes the Internet a dangerous tool.
Ryan Marshall | 26-Apr-07 at 5:43 pm | Permalink
I agree with Amanda on the situation with AIM. Things often get misconstrued to mean something they’re not. It is also much easier for a person to get past feelings that would normally hinder them from doing or saying something that they normally wouldn’t. There are no consequences if you can’t see the person. I believe it takes away from our ability to regularly communicate and will cause many future problems in social society.
Chris Paolinetti | 26-Apr-07 at 8:37 pm | Permalink
I agree that people become detached online, and many times say things they wouldn’t ordinarily say - take the big controversy on facebook…there was just one idiot who made a comment about another person’s views on the Chief…and the fallout prompted an email from the Chancellor. Would he have said that in a public forum? I doubt it.
Adam Domanico | 26-Apr-07 at 9:08 pm | Permalink
“Without our bodies we will slip into nihilism.”
This is a scarry and powerful notion that I will have to agree with Danielle and Dreyfus on. Yes I do think that being disembodied on the internet is bad due to the lack of consequences (which seems to be the consensus) but I wish to focus more on the effect: nihilism. A state of being where no cares about anything going on around them…. now there is something wrong with that. It is so easy in the world today to slip into a mode where nothing around you matters because you are so busy with your own agenda. This I believe is mainly due to technology. Technology has made our world so fast paced and has increased our epectations or output levels. However, getting ride of this technology will no longer solve the problem. Technology has become not just what we do but who we are. It has changed our expectations, lowered our patience, and ultimately made us forget the real joys in life. How often do you see movies of husbands ignoring their families because they are so caught up in their work. This nihilism that is perpetuated by innovations like the internet has caused us to forget many basic human functions, such as compassion. Because of all the technological conviniences in our lives we no longer share the bond created for working together. To find information we do not need the help of another person, the internet does it. When you want to build a house your neighbors do not help you but a crane does. This comment got really random really fast but I just wanted to address the concern of nihilism and how technology drives it in our modern society.
Jaren Gaddi | 26-Apr-07 at 9:47 pm | Permalink
I totally agree that we can become very disembodied through internet chat. I never go on AIM anymore because I often times lose interest in a conversation or get sidetracked and forget that I’m in the middle of several conversations. A guy I know from my dorm room from freshman year got into an argument with his sister - on facebook. And to top it off, the argument was typed out over each other walls, where everyone could see. Normally, he’s a very timid character and doesn’t talk too much, but I wonder if he started the fight with her since it was online and he did not have to confront her face to face. While on the topic, I saw a facebook group about the VT shootings entitled “CHO SEUNG-HUI- NATIONAL HERO”. I looked for it again and I think it was removed, but the title was shocking as well as most of the content. He tried to make a point about how it may have been society’s fault that he went berserk, but I wonder if he would have had the audacity to say what he wrote to the faces of all those affected by this tragedy. Anyway, the point I’m trying to make is that I agree that the internet has a way of causing us to act disembodied, and we need to remember that our voices on the internet have an affect on the real world as well.