Post by Ashe Raven on Jul 31, 2010 3:15:46 GMT 1
Whilst I wont pretend to be a psychologist by any stretch of the word, consider the post a lay man's understanding of what he has picked up over the years. This is by no means a scientific paper, or based on any reasonable hypothesis, but more an observation that requires a great deal of critical review and discussion. It is a post designed to make you stop think and examine, nothing more and one to help me better understand the “community” that has been built. When it comes to internet personality I find that the temptation and moral impulses that would otherwise negate our real world behavior is overidden. This in itself is ironic as we often mistake our “online friends” to be our real friends and not mere associates. It is this disconnect, I feel, adds to the environment we have seen recently. But I digress. What I specifically want to focus is perhaps the more controversial subject of the three personalities and, ID, Ego and Super-Ego and how they function in a disconnected environment. No don't get me wrong I choose not use Freudian terms because I agree with him or his ideas, to be honest I take much of what he says with a pinch of salt. No I simply use the terms, ID, Ego and Super-Ego because they are terms we are all familiar and really for the benefit of simplifying a topic of which I will be the first to admit, have only limited knowledge about.
We should have seen much of this coming before the internet became an issue. The recorded disconnect of film stars like Marilyn Monroe, to the rantings of Bill O'Rielly should have been a warning sign. The ID personalities of these individuals were certainly in overdrive, and it very clear that the Ego had it's work cut out for it when it came to appeasing both ID and Super-Ego. One could easily blame this on their backgrounds, Marilyn coming from less than acceptable background, suddenly thrown into a world of extravagance was certainly a toll on her ego, and Bill O'Reilly's conservative background was obviously fortified by his position given to him by Fox (who can forget his famous “fuck you outbursts”). The ID was in one case overwhelmed with decadence, the other was made more secure in it's beliefs with a stronger structure of support. With the ID placated, the Super-Ego obviously had it;s work cut out for it, with nothing to justify it's moral judgment, the ego itself was easily swayed by ID's arguments. And why not? What possible moral high ground did Super-Ego have in the end? Glenn Beck is a prime example of a modern age ego breakdown. All logic is thrown out the window, so ID can get a high from the most crackpot of theories and accusations. With guaranteed work and support from a disconnected people, Glenn Beck is perhaps the first of many that will follow his lead into what H.G. Well's referred to in the Time Machine as the decadence of Mankind.
But it's not just the unreasonable or selfish that suffer from this condition. Imagine what it's like when you feel you're more right because you make an effort to see what's wrong in your argument? On a social scale, this kind of debate is both very rewarding and educational. The disconnect of the internet, however, makes this a double edged sword. I'll use myself an example here. I was good at debate in class and social studies. I prided myself on both having an opinion and looking at the opinion of the other side. In short I could make a counter argument to my own very effectively, much to the frustration of my class mates and history teacher. I was Pro-Choice on the one hand yet could easily see the frustration of the Pro-life band with some ease. This made me, or so I thought, a prime candidate for Internet debate. If I could see both sides easily as I could, then I could debate with more efficiency. Great in theory, in practice, it's amazing how much of real tit I could become. The ease with which I was able to voice my opinions was perhaps the Achilles heal. The comfort zone of disconnect was indeed an overriding factor that added to my arrogance, and still does. Some habits die hard I guess. I was good, I was damn good, so I thought. Wrong. MY comfort zone and my limited success only made me feel more right than I actually was. How could I be wrong? I looked into every conceivable counter argument after all didn't I? Well yes and no, eventually this reasoning was replaced by a comfort zone, the high was there, and I feel into a state of arrogance I refused to recognize in myself. In short I was becoming the very bigot I hated, if not worse. I was becoming too right, and I was proud of it. It took me a while to recognize the value of being wrong, mistaken even corrected now and again. I can only look at dropping my channel at the 1200 sub level as a good thing on reflection. The more people listened and agreed with me, the more my ID was satisfied, and the less I was contributing to the community. It's good to reflect, look back on what I was, what I became and what I was becoming and it is to my shame that perhaps some of that old me still remains, trying to get that ID high again. It's the Hyde to my Jekyll that more often than not rears it's ugly head, and I have to struggle to keep it at bay. I have to admit with some limited success.
And this is what I see today. In many ways the ID has taken the superior role. We have found a soceity that satisfies our primal natures, needs and desires without the consequence of normal society. I look at the Thunderf00t and Ray Comfort debate and see the ID's battling without the wisdom of the Super-Ego to council the Ego. Pat Condell's ID is on rampart overdrive, with little need to even acknowledge those who even have the audacity to disagree with him. Why bother, his ID is placated. We debate morons because we can, and they keep coming back as their ID's override their commonsense. It makes us feel superior in many ways, that to have our ID challenged in someway is a wound, and the ID is too childish to deal with pain. So it either ignores it or lashes out till it kills the threat to it's sanctity. All the while our super-ego, our commonsense whispers, “dude... what are you doing?”
And all the while the information age bring forth a new society, as H.G. Well's predicted, with us as the Eloi and the techonolgy that both feeds us and off us, slowly takes on the face of a cybernetic Morloc.
We should have seen much of this coming before the internet became an issue. The recorded disconnect of film stars like Marilyn Monroe, to the rantings of Bill O'Rielly should have been a warning sign. The ID personalities of these individuals were certainly in overdrive, and it very clear that the Ego had it's work cut out for it when it came to appeasing both ID and Super-Ego. One could easily blame this on their backgrounds, Marilyn coming from less than acceptable background, suddenly thrown into a world of extravagance was certainly a toll on her ego, and Bill O'Reilly's conservative background was obviously fortified by his position given to him by Fox (who can forget his famous “fuck you outbursts”). The ID was in one case overwhelmed with decadence, the other was made more secure in it's beliefs with a stronger structure of support. With the ID placated, the Super-Ego obviously had it;s work cut out for it, with nothing to justify it's moral judgment, the ego itself was easily swayed by ID's arguments. And why not? What possible moral high ground did Super-Ego have in the end? Glenn Beck is a prime example of a modern age ego breakdown. All logic is thrown out the window, so ID can get a high from the most crackpot of theories and accusations. With guaranteed work and support from a disconnected people, Glenn Beck is perhaps the first of many that will follow his lead into what H.G. Well's referred to in the Time Machine as the decadence of Mankind.
But it's not just the unreasonable or selfish that suffer from this condition. Imagine what it's like when you feel you're more right because you make an effort to see what's wrong in your argument? On a social scale, this kind of debate is both very rewarding and educational. The disconnect of the internet, however, makes this a double edged sword. I'll use myself an example here. I was good at debate in class and social studies. I prided myself on both having an opinion and looking at the opinion of the other side. In short I could make a counter argument to my own very effectively, much to the frustration of my class mates and history teacher. I was Pro-Choice on the one hand yet could easily see the frustration of the Pro-life band with some ease. This made me, or so I thought, a prime candidate for Internet debate. If I could see both sides easily as I could, then I could debate with more efficiency. Great in theory, in practice, it's amazing how much of real tit I could become. The ease with which I was able to voice my opinions was perhaps the Achilles heal. The comfort zone of disconnect was indeed an overriding factor that added to my arrogance, and still does. Some habits die hard I guess. I was good, I was damn good, so I thought. Wrong. MY comfort zone and my limited success only made me feel more right than I actually was. How could I be wrong? I looked into every conceivable counter argument after all didn't I? Well yes and no, eventually this reasoning was replaced by a comfort zone, the high was there, and I feel into a state of arrogance I refused to recognize in myself. In short I was becoming the very bigot I hated, if not worse. I was becoming too right, and I was proud of it. It took me a while to recognize the value of being wrong, mistaken even corrected now and again. I can only look at dropping my channel at the 1200 sub level as a good thing on reflection. The more people listened and agreed with me, the more my ID was satisfied, and the less I was contributing to the community. It's good to reflect, look back on what I was, what I became and what I was becoming and it is to my shame that perhaps some of that old me still remains, trying to get that ID high again. It's the Hyde to my Jekyll that more often than not rears it's ugly head, and I have to struggle to keep it at bay. I have to admit with some limited success.
And this is what I see today. In many ways the ID has taken the superior role. We have found a soceity that satisfies our primal natures, needs and desires without the consequence of normal society. I look at the Thunderf00t and Ray Comfort debate and see the ID's battling without the wisdom of the Super-Ego to council the Ego. Pat Condell's ID is on rampart overdrive, with little need to even acknowledge those who even have the audacity to disagree with him. Why bother, his ID is placated. We debate morons because we can, and they keep coming back as their ID's override their commonsense. It makes us feel superior in many ways, that to have our ID challenged in someway is a wound, and the ID is too childish to deal with pain. So it either ignores it or lashes out till it kills the threat to it's sanctity. All the while our super-ego, our commonsense whispers, “dude... what are you doing?”
And all the while the information age bring forth a new society, as H.G. Well's predicted, with us as the Eloi and the techonolgy that both feeds us and off us, slowly takes on the face of a cybernetic Morloc.
