No answers (961 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 1.48 on 32 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by LisaCat (View user info) at 2004-01-09 12:41:53 EST
It doesn't take social philosopher to decipher that modern technology has made some drastic changes to our lifestyles. There are places on this world where technology has made no impact, but for the most part we all live in a society so wrapped up in itself, we almost lose our own personal identification.
Take this atypical discussion between two supposed strangers meeting for the first time:
"Hello, my name is |l|lll||||l|ll||."
"Hi my name is |||ll|ll||||ll|l|."
"What do you do for a living, |||ll|ll||||ll|l|?"
"Oh, I provide a service. What about you |l|lll||||l|ll||?"
"I provide a slightly different service."
We can all say that not all conversations go like this, but eventually they will lead towards something similar to this. My question is this - why are we, as a society, defining ourselves by what we do?
I am not Lisa, I have to be Lisa from Corporate Risk Management.
I cannot simply 'be' anymore. Society won't accept that "I am" simply because "I am." I understand that we live in a world of technological marvels, but what's with the whole notion that the world is becoming smaller as a result? I know less about 'the next man' than I ever have my entire life. Perhaps its due to the impersonal, sterile environments we lock ourselves in Monday through Friday 9-5, but we have lost something. We are out of touch with ourselves.
I have never had the pleasure of meeting any of my elders, but I have managed to steal away parts of tradition here and there from others. There used to be definition to cultures. Definitions, that I would argue, have been muddied by generations of integration and migration. It's true that our world has become much smaller in that we exhibit a sort of socio-cultural eclecticism previously unheard of. Whether this is leading to a world culture or not is yet to be seen, although it is difficult to think otherwise with current world leaders shouting "Globalization, Globalization, Globalization!!!"
We're all just |l|lll||||l|ll||.
User Reviews
Submitted by PeopleAreStrange (user info) at 2004-01-17 12:38:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever ;¬)
Submitted by PeopleAreStrange (user info) at 2004-01-17 12:36:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
"Keep in mind, we are the ones who started the industrial revolution. Since then, everyone has been playing catch up."
Lisacat I beg to differ - both Britain and America contributed to the industrial revolution. What am I saying, it was all thanks to GREAT Britain gawd bless the queen aint she lovely.
Okay it was both of us and as proof I offer you this link http://www.darex.com/indurevo.htm
Submitted by Sounsexy00 (user info) at 2004-01-10 15:30:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Someone's been reading Orwell...
-Hadley
Thoughtcrime.
Submitted by Quartermain (user info) at 2004-01-10 15:10:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
**Keep in mind, we are the ones who started the industrial revolution.**
I'm not entirely sure this is wholly accurate. I think that a case could be made that the Industrial Revolution actually started in the British Empire and its environs.
Other than that, this was a good post. I've noticed this too. Often, one of the first questions you ask someone after meeting them for the first time is 'what do you do.'
Submitted by xLisaCatx (user info) at 2004-01-09 17:14:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Hablo Espanol! Er, un poco.
I picked up my choice vocabularly from my neighbor Ernesto and his mother. Amazing sight really, two hispanics fighting is often like that guy who telecasts futbol matches on Telemundo. The anticipation builds up and up until, one team shoots, and SCORES!!!!
GOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLL!
It's Friday afternoon and I've had HOW much coffee!!!!?????
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2004-01-09 16:55:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I think about that from time to time Phinch. We had a little household discussion about getting a maid and yard service. I've fought it because it seems so proletariat, but the fact is, we don't want to spend our free time working around the house. The argument I got hit with was that back in "the good ole days" you had two people running a household - one of them worked outside the home and the other one took care of the domestic front. If you just simplify it to assume that both of them worked a 40 hour week, you had one person working full time to do what we're trying to do as a sort of second job. If we did everything that we should do around the house, all we would do is work. It's fucked up, but what do you do. The back yard is sinking into an entropy of white trashness and we need help.
My solution - convert to LDS and get me a damn sister wife. Sort of that, we're looking for a couple of "undocumented workers" who need a little extra money - that's my plan for making sure that no one goes to the police over anything they may run across in the process of cleaning the house. Plus, it would be good for my Spanish skilz.
Submitted by xLisaCatx (user info) at 2004-01-09 16:38:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Nicole I haven't many opportunities to travel abroad, but based upon the continuing spread of 'western axioms,' I wouldn't be surprised if this whole thing spread out across industrialized nations. Keep in mind, we are the ones who started the industrial revolution. Since then, everyone has been playing catch up.
Submitted by LarryG (user info) at 2004-01-09 16:37:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Ummm...i'm not historian but i'm sure that most last names started by stating your job in the sociaty, Smith comes to mind.
And the fact that 90% (or whatever the real number is) of people work and it's a common "interest" that makes and easy ice breaker/discussion maker.
Submitted by Phinch (user info) at 2004-01-09 16:31:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Loki, you've got me thinking.
In the 50's, a single income household was great; and those few with two incomes were greater.
Nowadays, (I'm assuming) most people have double or triple income households just to make the rent.
Why? More income, less resources. High school economics. Yada yada yada. The bottom line is that households had more money which led to inflation.
So, my point is this. Why don't we (as a society) stop working. Eventually costs will go down, and a single income household will be far better off than those with zero income.
"in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king"
Submitted by Nicole3 (user info) at 2004-01-09 15:51:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No time to read comments but I think this is a particular American induced phenomenon. Unfortunately, we often do define ourselves by our jobs as our careers have commandeered the rest of our lives. This isn't the case in most other countries. In many countries it is even considered rude to ask what a person does.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2004-01-09 15:23:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
All true - Really the notion of a childhood is a fairly new development. Back before the industrial revolution, kids were just short farm workers. As for it getting better or not, think of it this way. Back in the 1950's a family could survive and thrive on one salary. You would think that women entering the work force would allow both the husband and wife to work part time and for damn sure that is not the case.
Submitted by Phinch (user info) at 2004-01-09 15:13:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
every 70 years or so a revolution comes upon civilization. the internet revolution was the last one. before that there was the automobile revolution. in Harry s. Dent jr.'s book "the roaring 2000's" the author describes the cause of these such revolution as a large surge of disposable income. the result of a majority of the population having their kids move out. now the parents can spend their money on stuff besides kids thereby stimulating the economy. with a large number of jobs being invented, one would have to rely on that as a form of identification.
Submitted by Zod (user info) at 2004-01-09 14:24:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I think that technology has a VERY large part in the shaping of our society today. If you think about it, the only difference between our society today and the societies of the past is the level of technological advancement.
I often think about this scenario. Lets say that aliens came to earth at some time during the, let's say, 800's A.D. These aliens bestowed upon us humans all of the technology that we have available today, except a couple thousand years earlier. The only thing that separated us(current humans)from them(past humans)is the level of understanding. There really wasn't any biological of physiological difference between us. So would they have taken to the new technology and became mirrors of our current selves? Or would they, with their knowledge of the fragile balance between people and culture, become a different society altogether? One that utilized their technology for more good than bad?
I dunno, maybe i'm insane, but that interests me. The Family Guy and toilet humor also interests me. Does that make me a schitzo? Ah, we're such a diverse people these days.
Submitted by Slopster53 (user info) at 2004-01-09 14:17:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I'd imagine we define ourselves by our occupations since we put so much of our time into preparing and mastering them. Plus its an easy cultural out.
Submitted by xLisaCatx (user info) at 2004-01-09 14:08:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I don't quite know what, if anything, is to blame for this change. I'm trying to stay away from as many negative words as possible in writing this, so please don't mistake it as being vague.
I think a large portion of all changes inbetween generations has to do with the overall complexities of modern life, mixed in with some leaps and bounds from a technological (sp?) standpoint. I don't know that using such an extreme example like "The Simple Life" may be used to define where we're going, but it does make you wonder where such things stemmed from in the first place. One could similarly point at several images Yidele posted of Japanese porn and ask What the fuck is wrong with them.
It's rather difficult to try and stay as objective as possible about such a subjective matter as individuality. I guess a simple way to sum all this up is, "Has anyone else noticed there are more and more 'sheep' these days?"
Zod, I'm not much older than you but I feel like my cosmic egg has recently been cracked. I think Murphy would actually get along quite well for a change, because I've recently found that the grass isn't greener on the other side.
Submitted by Zod (user info) at 2004-01-09 14:05:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
C'mon, Loki, you know you can say penis to me whenever you want!
I kinda see what you're saying. Todays society offers so many alternatives to human contact that one wouldn't have to leave their house for anything. Back in the day, things were different. But I always assumed that the base instincts of people would always stay the same. Apparently being able to have your groceries delivered to your front door by using the internet has changed people.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:51:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Ok Zod - penis
now that it's out of the way
I think that what we're seeing is a move towards a more segmented society largely because we no longer need our old values and systems for survival. If you think about it, back when we were an agrarian society, you needed your neighbors and everyone worked together or they wouldn't have made it through the winter. Now, not so much. All I really need my neighbors to do for me is feed the dogs when I'm out of town. How this works into the value system I don't know. There is a difference between attending church and having a value system. Maybe people just realize that more now. Back in "the day" everyone went to church whether they were a believer or not just because that's what people did. Now we have more choices.
I have no idea what I'm spouting off about here and I'm obviously not explaining it well because I can't even follow it.
ignore me
Submitted by Zod (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:40:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Lisa, I agree with your latest response almost 100%. Todays culture, to me, seems to be a mere shadow of what it used to be. Tradition, culture and family customs all seem to be going down the proverbial toilet. This may just be from my perspective, however. I'm 19, but I am still observant enough to see that todays youth doesn't take culture as seriously as they should. Many of my friends, older and younger, have stopped going to church as much as they used to.
Also, family traditions seem to dwindle away. Is this just a stage in our development? Will we later revert back to our old customs, or are they gone for good? I really don't know the answer. I can't help but think that the developing generation that will replace the baby boomers is waaay of track. But I guess different times call for different types of people. Hopefully we're all not going to become the kinds of people who will let their lives rot away while watching reruns of "The Simple Life." Because if we are, then I don't want to be involved.
If you don't mind, please respond to this. I'm not sure how old you are, but you're obviously older and more wise than I. Its nice to actually hold a debate without the word "penis" springing up every other sentence. Anyone else...please give me your feelings on this.
Thanks, Steve.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:37:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
People are at least partially defined by what they do. I think historically, men more so than women, but now lucky us, women are now also defined by what they do. Think about it this why, how does your perception of someone change if you find out that they are a doctor vs. a janitor or worse Canadian?
That being said, it's also an icebreaker. You can't exactly walk up to someone you don't know and ask them about their political or religious beliefs. Plus you have certain cultural issues at play. To an American, asking about someone's family is polite, but Japanese people see it as prying.
It might be interesting just as a social experiment to start out things at a party with, "so who all thinks that abortion should be illegal?"
good times
Submitted by Acarnis (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:28:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
This first thing I thought of while reading this is where the common English last name of "Smith" came from. It came from the "old days" when people refered to say the village blacksmith, as e.g. "John the blacksmith", or "John the smith." Of course, last names from father's first names and places of origin are more common, probably because the vast majority of people were farmers. You can, however, see that the identification of people related to their specialization did not originate in our time.
I don't disagree. I remember in high school English; we learned what the authors of the "Lost Generation" was portraying. The society is indeed, less personal.
Nice replies, Zod and Swik.
Submitted by xLisaCatx (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:22:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
There's a great book about talking and saying nothing entitled "The Left Hand of Darkness," by Ursula K Leguinn. It's "sci-fi" but has quite a bit to say on the subject.
To elaborate on my statements; I am not saying that there is a complete void of individuality within our society, nor am I trying to say that our given society has become so large that in the aggregate, we have no culture. I think that we are heading towards times in which we are quickly forgetting how we got there.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that tradition or culture is dying, because it will always be there, but it's changing drastically.
I will no doubt end up on my death bed looking back at what I have done, and making my decision as to whether I lived a good life based on those decisions I made and the actions I took. There's got to be more than that.
Submitted by DJMattB241 (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:10:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
DJing: the hobby that IS a passion that IS a life.
weeeee!!
LisaCat, when are we hanging out?
Submitted by Zod (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:06:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Yeah, I understand this obviously isn't your entire opinion on the subject, lisa. You bring up a good point, but the bottom line is that most people do use their job as a sort of common ground, just as PMJ says.
This is a pretty good topic though. I always find the way people go about their conversations very interesting. One of my friends if very outgoing, but when you actually listen to what he's saying, instead of just hearing the volume of his words, he just bullshits about all of this stuff that has happened to him in the last week. Last night a bunch of us went out to dinner, and at first everyone thought he was very personable. But by the end of the meal, everyone wanted to know why he demanded the tables attention for fifteen minutes to complain about how the lines at the DMV suck.
Sometimes, i'd just rather sit in silence.
Submitted by Swik (user info) at 2004-01-09 13:00:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This actually made me think a lot. Especially about the differences between children and adults. Mainly the way adults see children as inexperienced, spoiled, ignorantly happy, retards. While this is mainly true, children are much happier than adults in general. Could this be because they still have the concept of I am Me. Just me. They have no job, at school they all do pretty much the same thing in class, they have a stronger sense of self. When one gets a job one gets a title. It's when people get titles and descriptions that things get complicated. You can see this as a child progresses through life. Elementary school- everyone is the same, in the same class all day. Middle School- Things get broken up a bit. You go to several different classes a day and are separated by your abilities or lack there of. In High School- it all seems to hit the teenager. They are completely grouped by their abilities and hobbies such as sports and clubs. You go from Ted, to Ted the Quarterback. Or Bob to Bob who stays home every Friday night.
You also start to look more towards the future and college and jobs. You get divided into groups more and more as you go through life, each step losing more and more of ones self...
Heh, I just farted
I can never remain deep for too long.
Submitted by potatomanjack (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:58:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I agree with Zod. When you introduce yourself to someone and really don't know much about them, a good starting point of conversation is occupation. It's common ground that basically everyone shares. I mean, I could introduce myself and then ask a person what he/she thought about the Canadiens hockey team this year, but for all I know the person may not watch or be familiar with hockey.
Submitted by xLisaCatx (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:54:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I was going to get into more depth with this, particularly with what you bring up Zod, but I ran out of steam and a meeting derailed my train of thought. I probly shouldn't have posted this as it's only half of what I intended it to be.
"Woah, she said 'service.' A fuh-fuh-fuh fuh-fuh. I know what 'service' she can provide. A fuh-fuh fuh."
Thanks guys, but no thanks.
Submitted by Phinch (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:54:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
thats why i have hobbies.
i can be "phinch the rock climber" or "phinch the skier" or "phinch the snowboarder."
i usually just phinch the "sit-on-the-couch-and-watch-dvd-rentals-er."
+2 for the barcodes.
Submitted by Zod (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:51:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I only slightly agree. Not everyone lets themselves be defined by their job. If all you can bring to the table in a discussion is your job, than you need to get more of a social life. Sure, discussing ones job is a good ice breaker or whatever; it being common ground. But it shoudln't engulf your life like you seem to hint at.
Submitted by drstrangedhruv (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:47:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Har har peener!
Submitted by KoolMang (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:46:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I agree Dick-Squat. You are funny man!
Submitted by smokymtcsw (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:46:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Okay squat that was actually funny
Submitted by squattail (user info) at 2004-01-09 12:43:44 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
One guess as to what your "service" in question is.