Social Media Nowadays: Good or Bad?

[AphroditeWorshiper]

Good, obviously, duh

[Neon Knight]

People will be people, they have always been the same and will always be the same. Social media only provides them with a platform. If they introduced social media in 1850 they would have had exactly the same problems as we do now. The problem is not social media, it is the person who uses social media.

It is the same with asshole drivers. It isn't the car's fault, it the driver. Put a totally "normal" person behind the wheel of a car and some of them develop rage and behave like lunatics.

People were always assholes. It's not a new development.

The problem is maybe that we have created technology in our everday environments that we have not evolved to cope with properly. The death and injury toll from cars is terrible. High stakes gambling machines ruin the lives of people who otherwise would probably do better. So things like social media are bad if they cause bad results.

[Kazimiera]

The problem is maybe that we have created technology in our everday environments that we have not evolved to cope with properly. The death and injury toll from cars is terrible. High stakes gambling machines ruin the lives of people who otherwise would probably do better. So things like social media are bad if they cause bad results.

So what you are suggesting is to take the self-determining factor out of people's hands to make them less of a danger to themselves? Yes, some people drive like assholes - others don't. Gambling machines provide entertainment for many people. Not all gamblers gamble their homes away. Gambling isn't the problem - the people who gamble are. There is nothing wrong with alcohol. Many people enjoy a glass of wine with their meal, others rip the ass out of it completely. Whether it is a good or bad thing lies in the choices people make around it. At best, I consider all these things (social media, gambling, alcohol, drugs, driving) as neutral activities. The determining factor, or danger, lies in the hands of the user. Think Sartre and existentialism!

[Neon Knight]

So what you are suggesting is to take the self-determining factor out of people's hands to make them less of a danger to themselves? Yes, some people drive like assholes - others don't. Gambling machines provide entertainment for many people. Not all gamblers gamble their homes away. Gambling isn't the problem - the people who gamble are. There is nothing wrong with alcohol. Many people enjoy a glass of wine with their meal, others rip the ass out of it completely. Whether it is a good or bad thing lies in the choices people make around it. At best, I consider all these things (social media, gambling, alcohol, drugs, driving) as neutral activities. The determining factor, or danger, lies in the hands of the user. Think Sartre and existentialism!

I've long since moved on from existentialism and embraced determinism (think Spinoza ) The difficult thing to decide is whether the pleasure these things bring to society outweighs the pain they cause.

[Kazimiera]

I've long since moved on from existentialism and embraced determinism (think Spinoza ) The difficult thing to decide is whether the pleasure these things bring to society outweighs the pain they cause.

I don't think it is for anyone other than the user to decide. I think I would draw the line with activities that are virtually guaranteed to bring about a negative outcome. However, these "virtually guaranteed" activities are a debate on their own.

(It's so nice to have a discussion/debate with someone without it deteriorating into insults and name-calling!)

[Neon Knight]

I don't think it is for anyone other than the user to decide. I think I would draw the line with activities that are virtually guaranteed to bring about a negative outcome. However, these "virtually guaranteed" activities are a debate on their own.

(It's so nice to have a discussion/debate with someone without it deteriorating into insults and name-calling!)

What about personal gun ownership? Are you or would you be happy for individuals to decide on that? I would fiercely oppose that for the UK.

[Myanthropologies]

It's okay now, but very political, full of teenage shit post, and dank memes. I have a facebook account, but I don't really use it much anymore. I only use it for messenger.

When I was in high school, social media got a lot of people in trouble for them doing stupid things. It even got to the point where some kids got in legal trouble because of it. Lots of bullying/harassment/shit talking/fight planning on social media. There was also a girl I knew who killed herself due to bullying on social media in late 2012 (my junior year of high school) and that sucks.


It can be good cause it leads to more hearing of things though.

[Kazimiera]

What about personal gun ownership? Are you or would you be happy for individuals to decide on that? I would fiercely oppose that for the UK.

This is one of those cases which deserve a debate on its own. I was actually hoping you wouldn't go here but you did. I don't have a problem with gun ownership per se. I have a problem with any Tom, Dick or Harry being able to buy bazookas at the grocery store with their milk, bread and ammunition. Here guns are illegal unless you have a license, a safe place to keep them and you have to prove that you have undergone training for the type of weapon which you plan to acquire. Having a license for a revolver doesn't mean you can now buy a shotgun. Personally, I don't like guns. I've never owned one, nor do I want to.

[N1019]

On balance I'd have to say social media is fucked because despite the global connectivity it facilitates it is either displacing or a poor substitute for healthy direct interpersonal social activity. Perhaps it is a symptom of a widespread social problem in the modern world.

[Kamal900]

It is bad for me, and I don't have a facebook account and etc.