Is the Internet turning us all into natural born disagreeable people? A study in the age known as the brave new world.

Seems to be the case – when one peruses through the online reaction of LKY’s recent riposte to Sadavisan speech here. only to be sharpened by Miss Chua admonishment of the online community Shame on you, young bloggers – it’s hard to deny these days the word that may comfortably unite proponents and detractors on their various objects of interest these days has very little to do with content or even generation gap and everything to do with the medium.

This should prompt us to consider whether the internet like some brain altering drug has somehow managed to change the way we think? Or maybe it’s detractors like steam engine cognoscenti’s haven’t figured out: how to get onboard the maglev train?

What really accounts for the ongoing divide between netizens and those who may regard blogosphere as nothing more than a brutish and feral haven? Why are these two groups always at each other throats? Why can’t they just sit down and see eye to eye and even agree to disagree amicably?

Most people may not realize this; but as I mentioned earlier, the root cause accounting for the odium may have everything to do with the medium rather than content; the internet, if u didn’t know like the telegraph, radio and TV imposes a new way of making sense of the known world – this is not merely a hypothesis; the process is already under way in earnest. In fact, it’s happening all around us even as I am writing this, altering the full spectrum of our thought processes and coloring how we would normally make sense of stuff.

It’s conceivable, when we talk of common ground these days; the entire question hinges on whether we have such a thing as a common vantage point? My gut feel tells me, the outcome may have everything to do with whether you happen to be a netizen or not.

I wouldn’t go as far as to say; this form of change is closer to the revisit of the invasion of the body snatchers – only it would not be an exaggeration to say the internet may have already altered our traditional cognitive DNA to such an extent; it may not even be possible for many of us to agree on the whole idea of what constitutes; collective consciousness – like the quirky idea of parallel universe and dual economies - we may have to content with the new idea of a dichotomy.

In this parallel universe, it’s conceivable  netizens may even see events unfolding in an altogehter different scale, speed and perspective from those who may choose to deride this medium no end – to paraphrase, we may have lost all hope of crafting such a happy thing as common ground.

This would seem like a novel dystopian theory; if only you didn’t realize cognitive change has always featured along side human history – when we first developed language, we significantly increased our ability to share insights and knowledge across time and space. And as language assumed text; it further compresses meaning into multiple layers of nuances, till of course, for every thesis there is an anti- thesis.

Unfortunately, with every cognitive shift, be it the printing press or telephone – it spawns the same dooms day dystopian warnings, we are all going to drown in a cesspit of electronic cacophony. In its wake the whole gamut of anxieties are dragged into the ark light about the possibility that the advent of the digital age may even do irreparable damage to our natural ability to think sensibly.

That’s basically the nub of such essays prosaically entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Which highlights how interconnectivity encourages dyslexia. Here the arguments suggest the spontaneity of medium is effectively rewiring our brains as we melt happily away oblivious to how our grey matter is frittering away – till it’s impossible for us to bear out the beauty of the written text without skipping the rest of the pages and fast forwarding to the last chapter (not a bad idea when you’re reading a novel like the Da Vinci code).

How true is this dystopian cyber take? Is our attention span giving way to the tao of the house fly? Are we becoming so accustomed to on the click information on our finger tips that we’re starting to find focusing and thinking hard?

There’s just one problem with that theory – for one it presupposes the human condition resides in a state that must be bubble wrapped as consciousness is so crumbly and fragile that we cannot be sensibly be counted to winnow the voices for more noise. In reality, Google may not be perdition, but rather salvation -as with each successive medium, our overall ability to make sense of stuff may actually make us smarter, rather than dumber, by exposing our minds to a form of cognitive obstacle course.

Even the once base and vapid, such as role playing games have become extraordinarily dense with detail, filled with countless references to broader subjects, and more open to interactive engagement. They reward the capacity to connect the dots and to seek out patterns—precisely the kinds of skills we need for managing in the age of information overload.

Besides too much has been made of “information overload.” For one the idea predates the advent the internet. My point is the conditions may be different, but the context remains one of the same reality – this is not “new” as much as old dressed and marketed as “new improved.”

If that last example sounds prosaic, it may simply reflect a brand new reality: the future may not bear any resemblance to the narcomantic nightmares to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World; we need not fear the idea of a population being dumbed down into automatons any more than we should live in fear of an alien invasion, as what’s likely to pan out may be a reverseal: a populace stuck permanently in hyper drive mode, searching out endlessly 24/7 for the last bits of competitive advantage – in points of views relating to politics, business and social insights – a sort of post modernist smartocracy.

For many barreling into this new electronic cacophony it can certainly be a jarring experience;  policy makers rue no end how their reasoned discourses no longer have the power to assert their cultural authority on the collective consciousness. Journalist write, only they do so with the knowledge while what they may have to say will certainly appeal to one segment of society; it’s also likely to alienate another and even the lowest of the low hacks such as myself have no immunity against this condition.

As I rudely discovered recently when a few disgruntled readers hijacked one of my online novels – dissatisfied with the abrupt ending (which they perceived to be a copt out when I did in the heroine a la Anna Karerina style), they proceeded to resurrect her from the grave by rewriting an addendum to the ending (that only confirmed my belief R.I.P really stood for Rise if Possible) – watching this green shoot take root, germinate and overreach to even garner a sizeable readership my initial glee gradually waned only to be replaced with a feeling that what I was witnessing could only be described as the signs of new times – that we may already be living in an age when everything can be replicated with remarkable ease and that no one person can possibly be the sole purveyor of truth, reason or even story. Matters little how well crafted one’s argument is – against this new calculus, even the humblest cyber sleuths can decoct an entire point of view from a droplet of inconsistency with the brain muscle of the internet – it may also imply netizens may have already grown so accustomed to variety and diversity; we may no longer settle for Simple Simon explanations; the spell it seems is broken forever; and with it, the whole idea of “good” be it in the form of good governance and good homemaking may already be commonplace; so passe that no netizen in their right frame of mind might even considers it extraordinary anymore, very much in the way serious gamers these days rely on military grade simulation software to plan their campaigns without even having boasting rights.

The amount of data we’ll have at our fingertips may well be staggering, but we may have finally gotten over the ga-ga effect that information alone is a hallmark of power.

That doesn’t mean we’ll all come to the same conclusions – it just means, increasingly “the truth” will become more elastic, malleable and open to infinite interpretations - as with each successive cognitive change the internet brings about; it opens up a new vantage point to view the same problem making all attempts to seek common ground impossible.

Like my book that suddenly came to an end only to pick up and run like that ghost ship the Mary Celeste for another season powered by a group of breakaway readers. Living in a world of information guarantees only one thing; we will clash more often’ the melee’s will be bloodier – and expect no quarter as the traditional set pieces that has always conferred a competitive advantage to those who may have been the custodians of power will not by themselves guarantee success - your opinions count for nothing online. If anything living in the information guarantees arguments emerging from the digital wilderness are likely be sharper and buttressed not just by strongly held opinions but by intricate reasoning that may even roll over and flatten what’s already on the table.

Against this dizzy backdrop; when we look back at who we are and where we are going as a people and nation; don’t be surprised if most netizens may not wish to review it with the sweet feeling of remembrance of things past; but rather an aghast at how ridiculously shambolic the disputes of our present age were squared off in the public sphere, just as we might snigger at full frontal tobacco advertisements from some by gone age with that all too familiar condescending – they didn’t know better chuckle – as for my online book that suddenly put on gym shoes and ran away; the main protagonist and heroine have migrated to the US, they’ve taken to a microbiotics diet to improve the heroines sleep apnea and Hatha Yoga to show off to their new age neighbors, we’re very much in the groove (the main protagonist these days even ambles around in hemp slippers and wears only osho designed clothes); their only splurge seems to be an expensive apartment in Manhattan over looking central park; they haven’t got around to furniture yet and by the looks of it will never; the only thing that really stands out in this love nest is a bio degradable handmade mat from Sri Lanka that simply sums up the sign of our times – welcome to our brave new world.

Darkness 2009

This essay carries a code marker: 0977059 Doberman – this essay has also been published in Ekunaba 1 & 2 / The Strangelanders / SLF 1 to 7 (Malaysian Network) / Phi Beta Kappa / Just Stuff / Ikiran / – The Brotherhood Press 2009

SPECIAL MESSAGE THE SIGLAP READ CLUB

As some of you fine ladies may already know;  I;ve received unconditional assurances from the others that they will not proceed with a legal case against moir – I just need to get the same assurances from the SRC, what do you all say? Live and let live…huh?

I personally feel, it will do wonders to relieve my writers block – Darkness 2009