Friday, 15. March 2013
For every conversation, we each have a different purpose. In all there is usually an element of: debate, display, control, aggression, submission, desire, dishonesty, conflict, the desire to triumph or destabilise, and so on… Rarely do the real treasures of our humanity enter ins small doses: compassion, fascination, cooperation, love, empathy, exploration, forgiveness, and so on. So whatever anyone says that tries to restrict the definition of a debate, conversation, small-talk, bullying, whatever… is generally neither accurate nor helpful. And not until you see the richness/complexity of human interaction, even the most boring, is your opinion or account of your feelings of any weight. Some people speak in a restricted code and are tuned to only a couple of channels; some people use subtle and elaborate codes and pick up experience on many wavelengths. The problem with disembodied internet contact is that it isn’t always obvious what kind of entity you are dealing with, not until you can provoke them to reveal their true colours, which is what I try to do. People who just “like” everything and count their “contacts” are obviously a very limited type of life-form and likely to get vicious if pushed.