Originally posted by StarrmanThis is false, as Cribs (RIP) explosively counterexampled.
I disagree with that. Sure once off this is true, but regularly and the person's true nature is revealed. Here it is quite simple to keep up the pretence of whatever version of yourself you wish to portray, indefinitely.
An individual's personal characteristics are contextual; even being alone is a social context. In particular, there are very few social contexts for debates of the type had here in the 'real world'. I doubt many RHPers actually have different opinions in the 'real world' than on RHP, although it's possible. However, social conventions are much more present, generally, in the 'real world' and thus fewer opportunities arise to express these opinions; for example, several of my friends are fairly religious, and I don't often discuss religion with them because it's more important that we maintain an amicable relationship and discuss other things.
Forums like RHP inspire open communication, in general. I tend to communicate on RHP in much the same way as I communicate with people I know very well in the 'real world'; in most other contexts, I'm a lot more subdued, but my beliefs and values are the same. I suspect this is true of most people (I think everyone at the London meet-up besides Shav exhibited this to some degree) -- forums are a social lubricant like cocaine or alcohol, not a mask.
I've never lied outright on RHP, except about the TLW 😛.
Surely everyone knows many people who took ages to reveal their 'true personality' in the 'real world', and would not have revealed this without abnormal amounts of contact?
Originally posted by royalchicken
This is false, as Cribs (RIP) explosively counterexampled.
I thought Cribs was backing me up, did I miss something?
An individual's personal characteristics are contextual; even being alone is a social context. In particular, there are very few social contexts for debates of the type had here in the 'real world'. I doubt many RHPers actually have different opinions in the 'real world' than on RHP, although it's possible. However, social conventions are much more present, generally, in the 'real world' and thus fewer opportunities arise to express these opinions; for example, several of my friends are fairly religious, and I don't often discuss religion with them because it's more important that we maintain an amicable relationship and discuss other things.
I'm not talking about the debate process; what opinions are held etc. I'm talking about the personas we use to actualise these debates.
Forums like RHP inspire open communication, in general. I tend to communicate on RHP in much the same way as I communicate with people I know very well in the 'real world'; in most other contexts, I'm a lot more subdued, but my beliefs and values are the same. I suspect this is true of most people (I think everyone at the London meet-up besides Shav exhibited this to some degree) -- forums are a social lubricant like cocaine or alcohol, not a mask.
You were nothing like I thought you would be when I met you. I'm not saying you put forth an incorrect version of yourself here, but that with a lack of other factors (body language, accent, dress, hairstyle, tone of voice etc. etc.) the impression anyone gives will differ immensly to the real them.
I've never lied outright on RHP, except about the TLW 😛.
Some lies are not worth being called lies because no-one believes you anyway 😛
Surely everyone knows many people who took ages to reveal their 'true personality' in the 'real world', and would not have revealed this without abnormal amounts of contact?
Really? I honestly don't believe this, although I'm prepared to believe that I don't know any of these people because I don't tend to continue a relationship with people who are not honest (with themselves or others).
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI protested against the use of the term 'Spirituality' from day one.
Who can remember the last time he saw something spiritual posted here? Spiritual posts are the rare exception rather than the norm. Mainly what we do here is argue and bicker. On occasion we get some rare spiritual insight from Revered Kirksey, but that's about it.
Why don't we merge this forum back into Debates, where the rest of the site's a ...[text shortened]... es place, or give it a more fitting name. This Spirituality forum is an object of ridicule..
Unfortunately Russ' heart was hardened.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesLast time I looked, this Forum was defined as follows:
Who can remember the last time he saw something spiritual posted here? Spiritual posts are the rare exception rather than the norm. Mainly what we do here is argue and bicker. On occasion we get some rare spiritual insight from Revered Kirksey, but that's about it.
Why don't we merge this forum back into Debates, where the rest of the site's a ...[text shortened]... es place, or give it a more fitting name. This Spirituality forum is an object of ridicule..
Spirituality
Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after.
Better to keep it separate. Religion and Politics can be a lethal mix.
Plus, you should have posted this in the Site Ideas Forum.
Originally posted by StarrmanI thought Cribs was backing me up, did I miss something?
[/b]
I mean Cribs, not DoctorScribbles -- if your position is correct, then they may as well be regarded as totally different people. Cribs intentionally maintained a persona (that of a pirp), which was easily seen to be affected.
You were nothing like I thought you would be when I met you. I'm not saying you put forth an incorrect version of yourself here, but that with a lack of other factors (body language, accent, dress, hairstyle, tone of voice etc. etc.) the impression anyone gives will differ immensly to the real them.
I think you're undercomplicating the issue: I'm saying 'the real them' is not a very well-defined concept. Everybody's personality varies wildly, in the real world, depending on their context. Why should a person's internet personality (their personality in a context where their raw verbal expressiveness is their most apparent characteristic) be treated any differently?
Actually, 'the real them' is probably best defined as the way in which a person's apparent personality changes with context. Freddie, for example, seems more articulate and gregarious in person (in the one context I've met him) than on RHP, while the reverse is usually true for me. I think a highly developed personality is a range of personal characteristics which fit well into a wide variety of contexts. RHP is probably the best sort of environment for well-constructed chatting, but it's not always very good for displaying compassion or sympathy, for example.
Really? I honestly don't believe this, although I'm prepared to believe that I don't know any of these people because I don't tend to continue a relationship with people who are not honest (with themselves or others).
You must be very good at spotting dishonesty -- my life, especially since coming to university (where many people feel the need to invent personas far beyond any I've seen on RHP), is littered with people I misread.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesNext time I have an idea for the site I'll make sure I post it here then 😛
Only the lamest of ideas get posted in Site Ideas. It's like kindergarten over there.
Russ, please amend the definition to something like this:
"Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after. No kindergarteners allowed, bright ideas welcome."
😉
Originally posted by royalchicken
I mean Cribs, not DoctorScribbles -- if your position is correct, then they may as well be regarded as totally different people. Cribs intentionally maintained a persona (that of a pirp), which was easily seen to be affected.
What's in a name? A pimp by any other would smell as sweet.
I think you're undercomplicating the issue: I'm saying 'the real them' is not a very well-defined concept. Everybody's personality varies wildly, in the real world, depending on their context. Why should a person's internet personality (their personality in a context where their raw verbal expressiveness is their most apparent characteristic) be treated any differently?
Actually I think everyone else is overcomplicating it, all I initially intended to say was that life is a far broader set of experiences and as such our personas have a much broader range of facets. To try and condense that into an arena like RHP is like resizing a hi-def photo into a 100x100 pixel gif: destructive compression.
Actually, 'the real them' is probably best defined as the way in which a person's apparent personality changes with context. Freddie, for example, seems more articulate and gregarious in person (in the one context I've met him) than on RHP, while the reverse is usually true for me. I think a highly developed personality is a range of personal characteristics which fit well into a wide variety of contexts. RHP is probably the best sort of environment for well-constructed chatting, but it's not always very good for displaying compassion or sympathy, for example.
Whilst I agree with you that Freddie comes across far more mature, quick witted and articulate in real life, I do not agree that his ability to change from 'out there' to 'in here' defines the depth of his personality at all. However I am only a bedroom psychologist, so I've nothing to back this up with.
You must be very good at spotting dishonesty -- my life, especially since coming to university (where many people feel the need to invent personas far beyond any I've seen on RHP), is littered with people I misread.
Trust me, it's a frickin curse. Empathy and character judgement are not the skills you might think, they make you cautious, dissmissive and bitter after a while.
Originally posted by StarrmanI'm not even a bedroom psychologist, although I may become a toilet psychologist if my PFC membership continues. This whole conversation just hit a nerve, because it's rather like something I often think about when feeling introspective/narcississtic: I feel 'artificial' (as though I'm acting unnaturally) frequently because most of the people I interact with on a daily basis have no connection to me beyond circumstance, and they could say the same about me. I think this is somewhat tragic, unavoidable and presumably universal. I also never feel this way among close friends, or on RHP, or while discussing something real and specific with anyone. I almost always feel this way in contexts where being silent would be impolite.
Originally posted by royalchicken
I mean Cribs, not DoctorScribbles -- if your position is correct, then they may as well be regarded as totally different people. Cribs intentionally maintained a persona (that of a pirp), which was easily seen to be affected.
What's in a name? A pimp by any other would smell as sweet.
I think you'r ou might think, they make you cautious, dissmissive and bitter after a while.
Being cautious, dismissive and bitter as a result of empathy and character judgement beats having those same characteristics without those causes!
EDIT I bet in the real world rwingett's a Mormon and Nordlys can't spell.
Originally posted by royalchickenWhy does this bother you? I would have thought as a Bayesian, probability of encounter is as good a reason as any for connection.
I feel 'artificial' (as though I'm acting unnaturally) frequently because most of the people I interact with on a daily basis have no connection to me beyond circumstance
Originally posted by StarrmanIt bothers me because it often requires effort to 'make conversation', and it frequently seems that neither participant does the other justice in these circumstances.
Why does this bother you? I would have thought as a Bayesian, probability of encounter is as good a reason as any for connection.