ViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolenceoftheinternetViolence

The message boards are full to the brim; the brim being the humans sensory and intellectual capacities who indulge in them, not the severs that house them. Full to the brim of one sided arguments. That is many arguments that all have approximately one side. 

One avatar states, “That was gay”.  Another reply’s “you can’t say that”. The first then explains that this statement was not accusing the generalized topic of “gayness” but was just something from personal experience. At this point the clashing of presumed viewpoints has already started and the precious protection of each party’s stance is being valiantly protected at all costs of understanding and argument.

My proposition is that arguments do not exist on the internet. The social style does not induce reasonable argument and discussion. The speed and instantaneous nature of the medium essentially puts rockets on sentences. Whatever an avatar says is no longer part of the complex, multi-faceted internal monologue of the human that avatar represents, it transforms into a flag for that avatar to assert itself.

 Humans are essentially the most successful adaptive specious in the known earth’s history but in the context of millions of years. The exponential speed in which technology is growing is leaving humanity behind, much like the apes whose forests are being cut down. When one human’s language is taken out of their intrinsic context, their physical life in their physical world, the meaning is completely distorted. The language is thrown into an unknown context. One with no recognisable vantage points or visual cue’s to help inform and shape the thought’s and therefore language of it’s inhabitants. This context less space does not fit into our physical paradigm. It is inconceivable to the human embarking on it so it’s context needs to be filled. It is a requirement of compulsion. An example in the physical world would be the pitch black darkened room. There is no context so this is the first thing to be sought out. The sensory tools are put to use to find out where and what. This cannot be achieved in a messageboard for example. There is no hand to feel the server. This context therefore is fuelled by presuppositions and the quick snap judgements that categorize the inhabitants as friend or foe. To gain gravity in this space is essential and the 2-dimentional scanning of other avatars sentences is a by-product of the filling of this context less place.

How can anyone be expected to understand what they are reading when these words are less about their intrinsic linguistic value and more about mediating the signs in order to establish some sense of context. Arguments require trust. To be listened to, the language of the recipient must be spoken. The language of the recipient in the sever does not exist. Sentences become images to be seen by everyone but read by no-one.  Please continue on your path to destruction.