The Internet

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Oh I don't know, there is some pretty whacky stuff on the internet. I think susceptible humans can be consumed by sites like youtube and have their whole outlook on life and spirituality reconditioned.

While we all think that we are not susceptible, advertisers think differently.
And psychologists would agree.

https://sites.psu.edu/dps16/2016/03/31/car-crash-experiment/

@fmf said
If the human condition is getting worse then that means it is changing and so cannot be described as being the same as ever. If the internet is contributing to this, then how can the impact of the internet be said to be "none"?

The human condition is the same, and getting worse. That's how it's changing. If you can't grasp the concept, and I think you do, then obviously you're just creating an argument because you've nothing of substance to contribute.

Anyone can understand the meaning of having a specific medical condition that gets worse. The same condition, but getting worse.

The "impact" of the internet is "none" in the sense that it is neither the cause or the cure for a pre-existing condition relative to human nature. In fact it exacerbates human behavior and makes it plain to see.

Clearly you understand how whatever science and technology develops man weaponizes. Don't try using the "I don't have data" to excuse you from seeing the obvious.

@fmf said
I don't need to. The dictionary definition will suffice. If you have some alternative definition of "the human condition" or a more elaborate definition that makes your reply to the "What is the impact of the internet on the human condition" question posed by the OP - you said "none" - if you have some personal non-standard definition of it that makes your answer correct to your own way of thinking, you go for it.

I don't need to either. Stick with your narrow, limited and confining definition of what constitutes the human condition if it helps you feel better about yourself and the world around you.

@secondson said
The human condition is the same, and getting worse. That's how it's changing. If you can't grasp the concept, and I think you do, then obviously you're just creating an argument because you've nothing of substance to contribute.

Anyone can understand the meaning of having a specific medical condition that gets worse. The same condition, but getting worse.

The "impact" ...[text shortened]... elops man weaponizes. Don't try using the "I don't have data" to excuse you from seeing the obvious.

That is what church does to you; turn you into a bitter negative pessimist, unable to see what blessings God has showered on mankind in the last 50 years.

@rajk999 said
That is what church does to you; turn you into a bitter negative pessimist, unable to see what blessings God has showered on mankind in the last 50 years.

I'm a realist, and you're out of context.

I am well aware of the "goodness" of God toward the human race, but that's not what's being discussed.

You're the one that's a negative pessimist evidenced by the fact that you seek and find every opportunity to deride, criticize and malign the character of anyone that doesn't share in your heretical systematic theology that makes God a monster that hates those that disagree with you.

@secondson said
I'm a realist, and you're out of context.

I am well aware of the "goodness" of God toward the human race, but that's not what's being discussed.

You're the one that's a negative pessimist evidenced by the fact that you seek and find every opportunity to deride, criticize and malign the character of anyone that doesn't share in your heretical systematic theology that makes God a monster that hates those that disagree with you.

Your church doctrine is contrary to the Christ as I have demonstrated over and over.

@secondson said
The human condition is the same, and getting worse. That's how it's changing. If you can't grasp the concept, and I think you do, then obviously you're just creating an argument because you've nothing of substance to contribute.

Anyone can understand the meaning of having a specific medical condition that gets worse. The same condition, but getting worse.

The "impact" ...[text shortened]... elops man weaponizes. Don't try using the "I don't have data" to excuse you from seeing the obvious.

If it's "getting worse", then it is changing. If the internet is contributing to this change, then one cannot say that the impact of the internet is "none".

@secondson said
Don't try using the "I don't have data" to excuse you from seeing the obvious.

What was it exactly that I said "I don't have data" about? You have mixed up two different posts of mine.

@secondson said
Stick with your narrow, limited and confining definition of what constitutes the human condition if it helps you feel better about yourself and the world around you.

I posted this definition: "The human condition is all of the characteristics and key events that compose the essentials of human existence, including birth, growth, emotion, aspiration, conflict, and mortality."

That is not a "narrow, limited and confining definition" of the human condition.

Indeed, it's a broad definition that does the complete and utter opposite of limiting or confining the meaning of the term.

@secondson said
The "impact" of the internet is "none" in the sense that it is neither the cause or the cure for a pre-existing condition relative to human nature. In fact it exacerbates human behavior and makes it plain to see.

Clearly you understand how whatever science and technology develops man weaponizes. Don't try using the "I don't have data" to excuse you from seeing the obvious.

If it "exacerbates" something, then it is having an impact.

@secondson said
Anyone can understand the meaning of having a specific medical condition that gets worse. The same condition, but getting worse.

If X is causing Y to "get worse", then X is having an impact on Y.

If then, in light of this worsening effect, someone asks "What impact is X having on Y?" it would clearly be a mistake to say "none".

And it would clearly be a mistake for the person who answered "none" to keep doubling down instead of just admitting he hadn't thought the question through.

@secondson said
The human condition is the same, and getting worse. That's how it's changing. If you can't grasp the concept, and I think you do, then obviously you're just creating an argument because you've nothing of substance to contribute.

Just because I think "none" was the wrong answer, it doesn't mean that my point of view has "nothing of substance".

Personally, I think the internet does have impacts on the human condition, both positive and negative ones, and I am sure anyone - including you - could think of an almost unlimited number of such impacts: the enormous spread of pornography and sexualization of children, for example.

And the empowerment of formerly voiceless ordinary people who are able to speak truth to power and hold their leaders accountable, another example.

These are appreciable and tangible changes in the human condition that have been impacted by the internet.

Another example: a Muslim wanting to convert to Christianity is far more able to find out about how he or she might do that [not to mention, why] and also able to interact with Christians anywhere in the world before converting; this is something that was harder to do and relatively less likely to happen before the internet facilitated the knowledge and the communication.

A clear and obvious impact.

As I said, if X is changing Y, then X is having an impact on Y.

@rajk999 said
Never once have I said or implied that I can reassure kids lying in a Beruit or any other kids etc. More than 150,000 people die every day. If you wish to concern yourself about that and blame God, then you go for it. Clearly you have not matured to the point where you can accept life or death for what it is. Grow up.

If, as I glean from your response, you are now saying that life and/or death are a series of random and accidental events, then I agree with you and we have accord, and I'm not blaming god for anything, since, as I have said before, I don't believe that there is one. My only issue has been your claim, within the context of your discussing the Beirut explosion, that your god was 'guiding the affairs of men'. If you are now saying that he wasn't, then we have agreement.

@indonesia-phil said
If, as I glean from your response, you are now saying that life and/or death are a series of random and accidental events, then I agree with you and we have accord, and I'm not blaming god for anything, since, as I have said before, I don't believe that there is one. My only issue has been your claim, within the context of your discussing the Beirut explosion, that yo ...[text shortened]... god was 'guiding the affairs of men'. If you are now saying that he wasn't, then we have agreement.

The odd thing about discussing this point with theists is that they cannot tell you why God intervenes in some human affairs, but not others. They're just very sure he does intervene in at least some affairs. Even though they have no real way of telling guided events from the unguided.

@bigdoggproblem said
The odd thing about discussing this point with theists is that they cannot tell you why God intervenes in some human affairs, but not others. They're just very sure he does intervene in at least some affairs. Even though they have no real way of telling guided events from the unguided.

It's a tricky one to nail down, you never get a straight answer. We do however get treated to some biblical quotes which can be interpreted to mean just about anything, I think my favourite so far in this thread is the ravenous bird coming from the east. If there's a ravenous bird coming from the east we're all in trouble....