Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'? • Hacker News Board

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#41

Post by cyphar » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

buboard wrote: post #37

cagenut wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I confess I have no idea what you're talking about. What "addictive nature" is there in Marx's theories?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

Have you read The Communist Manifesto, or Das Kapital? Is there a particular aspect you are referring to as being "addictive"?

I would argue "workplaces should be democratic" (which is a very rudimentary one-sentence synopsis of Marxism) is only an addictive idea if you consider democracy to be addictive in the same manner. And maybe it is, but then you have to ask yourself -- is an idea being so good that it becomes addictive a bad thing?

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#42

Post by mayankkaizen » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC

KineticLensman wrote: post #31

cagenut wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you might be interested to dig into who "opium of the people" comes from. he's somewhat political!

Indeed he is ... Karl Marx [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people [Edit] Note to self - check other threads before posting links?

On internet, reading is hard and typing is fun.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#43

Post by buboard » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

cyphar wrote: post #41

buboard wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

Have you read The Communist Manifesto, or Das Kapital? Is there a particular aspect you are referring to as being "addictive"? I would argue "workplaces should be democratic" (which is a very rudimentary one-sentence synopsis of Marxism) is only an addictive idea if you consider democracy to be addictive in the same manner. And maybe it is, but then you have to ask yourself -- is an idea being so good that it becomes…

put the phrase "opium of the masses" in its original context. Religion was the "illusory happiness of the people" for marx. 50 years later, one could say the same about Communism however. People believed in it , it made them feel good, but their belief ended up becoming a facade that masked their misery. I think this extends to politics in general, in particular Statist politics , which promise make the individual as powerful as a State, but usually end up making the State itself powerful by stepping on the individual.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#44

Post by rv-de » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:17 PM UTC

Given the stimulating nature of smartphone usage the proper drug analogy would be coke or amphs and not a sedating opioid.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#45

Post by coldtea » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:28 PM UTC

buboard wrote: post #32

coldtea wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the "medium is the message" (that is, the medium dominates and enforces its norms over everything transmitted, e.g. by forcing people to echo bubbles, polarization, and centralized control by its very design regardless of what content is transmitted) then the messenger is the culprit -- and we should shoot the messenger.

the phrase 'dont shoot the messenger' exists for a reason. (the messenger has always shaped the message, even when it was a runner man)

>the phrase 'dont shoot the messenger' exists for a reason

And I've just argued why the reason is faulty, and we shouldn't hold it as true for modern media. I'd expect a counter-argument on that, not a reminder that it exists for a reason (as if I hadn't already considered it).

>the messenger has always shaped the message, even when it was a runner man

It's a matter of degree: the degree with which TV at the time of McLuhan, and now social media shape the message, is nothing like the degree previous "messengers" did it...

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#46

Post by goto11 » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:42 PM UTC

dondawest wrote: post #40

cagenut wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I confess I have no idea what you're talking about. What "addictive nature" is there in Marx's theories?

It’s an inherently addictive thought that “the current system is wrong and there’s another system that would be better if only people would listen.” It becomes even more addictive when there’s other people willing to give you dopamine/affirmation for your beliefs. You see its addictive nature today in the sparse numbers of people who achieve “sobriety” from communism after becoming addicted to its theories.

What thing would not be addictive given that reasoning?

"Dopamine" make it sound sinister, but if everything which gives you enjoyment or feels meaningful is addictive, then basically everything anybody does by their own volition would be addictive.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#47

Post by rimunroe » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 5:09 PM UTC

jfk13 wrote: post #38

rimunroe wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yours appears to have been submitted after this one.

Curious - is your conclusion based on the id? (Are those sequential?) I assumed this one was more recent based on the timestamp that shows on the items. Currently, I see "4 hours ago" for this item, and "5 hours ago" for the link I submitted. But maybe there's more to it than that?

Huh. I see what you mean! It was based on when it showed up in my (supposedly only sorted by time) viewer, but yours definitely appears before the other if you go through the official “New” submissions list.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#48

Post by buboard » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #45

buboard wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the phrase 'dont shoot the messenger' exists for a reason. (the messenger has always shaped the message, even when it was a runner man)

> the phrase 'dont shoot the messenger' exists for a reason And I've just argued why the reason is faulty, and we shouldn't hold it as true for modern media. I'd expect a counter-argument on that, not a reminder that it exists for a reason (as if I hadn't already considered it). > the messenger has always shaped the message, even when it was a runner man It's a matter of degree: the degree with which TV at the time o…

> not a reminder that it exists for a reason

I really don't want to reitarate what people a lot smarter than me have written.

It's not different this time - the media have changed, but so have the Kings. No matter how many messengers they beheaded , the problems that Kings had did not go away. No matter how many people we deplatform, the problems of modern Democracy won't go away either. To me it seems people are going through a classic crisis of misattributing the blame: Modern political systems like democracy are ill-adapted for an increasingly individualistic, globalized world, and the problem won't go away after they regulate the media. (BTW i can't think of any case where shooting the messenger/media worked in the the long term in the past)

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#49

Post by buboard » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

goto11 wrote: post #46

dondawest wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an inherently addictive thought that “the current system is wrong and there’s another system that would be better if only people would listen.” It becomes even more addictive when there’s other people willing to give you dopamine/affirmation for your beliefs. You see its addictive nature today in the sparse numbers of people who achieve “sobriety” from communism after becoming addicted to its theories.

What thing would not be addictive given that reasoning? "Dopamine" make it sound sinister, but if everything which gives you enjoyment or feels meaningful is addictive, then basically everything anybody does by their own volition would be addictive.

Dopamine is a necessary neurotransmitter, there is nothing sinister about it. Even addiction is necessary , but we ascribe negative value to it when the repetitive behavior (not just any enjoyable behavior) becomes destructive to society. Addiction as pathology is not a strictly defined term - homosexuals in the past or sexually liberated women were believed to be addicted. So, it is largely left society to decide which addictions are "good" and bad, which generally politicizes the issue.

Re: Are smartphones the new 'opium of the people'?

#50

Post by Noumenon72 » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 6:06 PM UTC

Slate Star Codex: Is Everything a Religion? https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/03/25/is-everything-a-religi...

People sometimes anthropomorphize pets, cars, and computers by reacting to them the way we do to people, but that doesn't make them people. We religiomorphize by interacting with communities or ideas the same way we participate in religion, but that doesn't make them religions.