How many people are you face-to-face friends with (versus twit-foller or fayzebuk-friends)? If you don't know the difference, this essay is significantly above your reading comprehension-level. Go away. Right now. Click away from here.
Allow me to go on a tangent, here, and I will - hopefully - explain (in the long run) how to efficiently sort the wheat from the chaff.
The difference between a conformist and a non-conformist is not who they listen to, but how they choose who they might eventually actively listen to, later-on. Which is a tricky enough sentence that it deserves its own paragraph.
Non-conformists seek-out and carefully screen for those who they'll maybe-eventually trust with putting words into their brain; conformists almost immediately allow people who they happen-to-meet because of proximity and random chance (neighbors, coworkers, parish priests, the google or YouTube algorithm, etc) to guide their future actions.
Deciding to be a non-conformist rarely-never leads to becoming a true non-conformist. (Usually, it just means choosing to adhere to a slightly different set of norms.)
Intentional Non-conformists (IN) choose to do something different because it's different. IN's are focused—first and foremost—with what people in their DeSoc think about them; intentionally looking different/acting differently is their goal. Being viewed (with pics/documentation) while "swimming against the current" is all that matters to an IN. They rarely consider their own happiness, comfort, personal growth, well-being or health as the primary reason to act or not take an action. End result: IN's just conform to a smaller slice of their specific DeSoc. (Best example from the last generation: hipsters.)
Accidental Non-conformists (AN) are doing something "outside their current societal norm" with no pre-thought or consideration given to how their actions will, later, be viewed by neighbors, friends, coworkers, and/or family members. Most AN's actions/inactions are taken because the AN wants to become smarter, happier, more comfortable, or they are/were attempting to improve their well-being or health. And then AN's discover—after time has passed—that they were, coincidentally, not conforming to an expected norm.
π’ Someone may become a professional artist/musician/actor if they create works of art (or public performances) until they are so proficient (or lucky) they catch the attention of a gallery/label/agent. Those who desire 'quality' rely on galleries/music publishers/film studios to act as their gatekeepers because they invest in artists who create works they believe will make them a profit.
In the 2020s, (which I’m typing from the very bottom-edge of) each of us belongs to a unique ‘Default Society.’ Every DeSoc [say Dee-Soach]—theirs, yours, and mine—is as different from the quaint, Mister Roger's Neighborhood definition of society {an organized group living in close proximity} as ‘cellphones’ are from their Alexander-Graham-namesake. DeSoc's are different from ‘Society’ not because we don’t listen to people physically near-by, like our parents and teachers (definitely not new), but because we no longer actively listen to anyone we don't choose to actively listen to.
A generation ago, depending on how one measures a generation *whisper: 25 years*, in order to get information about any routine-anything one needed to first locate a physical collection of information (it was normally referred to as a local library), which might-probably would lead them to searching for a more comprehensive collection of information (distant university's library) and, possibly-eventually, to talking with a subject matter expert. Unfortunately, that was determined waaay back then in the before-before times by quantity of books published and/or courses taught, in the aforementioned libraries or university (rather than quality of those books or lectures). [If you're interested in understanding more about the reason 'quantity was valued over quality' read the π’ paragraphs below.]
Today we have total and immediate access to almost every word in every book in every library, and to millions of people willing to provide their opinion (all for the low-low price of a keyboard/screen and WiFi connection—free at local libraries). But . . . how does one identify real subject-matter experts (with high-quality information) and not engage with the ubiquitous multitude of underwhelming attention-zombies?
Allow me to go on a tangent, here, and I will - hopefully - explain (in the long run) how to efficiently sort the wheat from the chaff.
The difference between a conformist and a non-conformist is not who they listen to, but how they choose who they might eventually actively listen to, later-on. Which is a tricky enough sentence that it deserves its own paragraph.
Non-conformists seek-out and carefully screen for those who they'll maybe-eventually trust with putting words into their brain; conformists almost immediately allow people who they happen-to-meet because of proximity and random chance (neighbors, coworkers, parish priests, the google or YouTube algorithm, etc) to guide their future actions.
Deciding to be a non-conformist rarely-never leads to becoming a true non-conformist. (Usually, it just means choosing to adhere to a slightly different set of norms.)
Intentional Non-conformists (IN) choose to do something different because it's different. IN's are focused—first and foremost—with what people in their DeSoc think about them; intentionally looking different/acting differently is their goal. Being viewed (with pics/documentation) while "swimming against the current" is all that matters to an IN. They rarely consider their own happiness, comfort, personal growth, well-being or health as the primary reason to act or not take an action. End result: IN's just conform to a smaller slice of their specific DeSoc. (Best example from the last generation: hipsters.)
Accidental Non-conformists (AN) are doing something "outside their current societal norm" with no pre-thought or consideration given to how their actions will, later, be viewed by neighbors, friends, coworkers, and/or family members. Most AN's actions/inactions are taken because the AN wants to become smarter, happier, more comfortable, or they are/were attempting to improve their well-being or health. And then AN's discover—after time has passed—that they were, coincidentally, not conforming to an expected norm.
In January of 2021—at the beginning edge of a new decade (for those who don't begin counting at zero) there are more-n-more people deciding to Leave Social Media *dun dun duunn.* Droves of people are claiming they left Twitter, deleted their instaccount, and have chosen to close their fayzebuk forever. Some say they're going to "only keep one" (and the one they decide to keep usually depends on their generation/DeSoc). Because so many people say they're planning on unplugging from social media (it's unknown how many follow thru) they are all, now, joining a group of IN's.
To follow this example to its logical conclusion, an AN would be someone who never joined any of the social media platforms because way-back-in-the-before-times they suspected the time-suck would be detrimental to their well-being.
So. Back to my premise of how to find actual, real, subject-matter experts (remember? that was the set-up for this essay!) Yea, I know; that was nine paragraphs ago. Everyone who's either intentionally or accidentally lost their ability to follow a slightly complex train of thought, or to read more than a headline, or to concentrate on more than a couple of simple sentences, have long stopped reading this essay. Those with twit-tok-face-agram induced ADD clicked away before they looked at the above image of a hundred bland-white nearly-identical balls surrounding a single, heavily-timeworn, but still slightly spherical object with a complex surface.
The simple prerequisites for identifying a subject matter expert are two-fold: First, one must have an ability to understand enough about the subject to recognize they want to learn more - and - a capability to read and comprehend complex sentences. And then one must weed out the IN (who routinely claim they possess expertise on YouTube) and find an AN.
π’ Someone may become a teacher if they study/practice a skill (or series of tasks) until they are so proficient they can teach others. Highly qualified teachers may become university professors. Because university administrators aren't experts in every subject their schools teach, they rely on book publishers to act as their gatekeepers. Publishers invest in authors whom they believe will sell enough books for them to make a profit.
π’ Someone may become a professional artist/musician/actor if they create works of art (or public performances) until they are so proficient (or lucky) they catch the attention of a gallery/label/agent. Those who desire 'quality' rely on galleries/music publishers/film studios to act as their gatekeepers because they invest in artists who create works they believe will make them a profit.
π’ Today, 'authors/artists' unable to make it thru the gatekeeper system, can self-publish and attempt to self-market {sell their products online}. Or. They can invest their own money to open a gallery, music venue, or to produce a film.
more philosophy reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment