Dr. Junius Johnson on the Relationship between Imagination and Reason, Social Media: Good or Bad?, Bonsai Trees, David Bentley Hart and Sally Vickers, "Strawberry Picking", and John Malkovich
About social media: As Wesley knows, I mostly hate it.
I have a tendency to become obsessive about online stuff -- like, when I was on Twitter, I thought about my follower count too often, or once on Reddit I tried to see how fast I could reach 10,000 comment karma. I've had to really opt out of most of these sites for my own wellbeing.
Yet, I'm now making part of my living with The Classical Mind. This centers around two main platforms: YouTube and Substack. These are both social media of different sorts. It takes a lot of self-control for me not to become obsessed with metrics on these sites.
{Alrighty, I’ve finally corralled my thoughts on the first portion of the newsletter and am dropping them here. I’m excited to see what others think on the question of social media.}
I admit, these question sent me into a bit of a rabbit’s hole, trying to make sure I understand what’s being said/asked, finding loop holes in my own thoughts, finding (and raging at) my own biases, and then questioning whether or not I’m capable of understanding the question apart from my personal experience with words like “redeem”. It’s been a little bit of an existential tumble. And I’m pretty sure I lost sight of the original conversation somewhere along the lines, hopefully not too much.
I suppose I am inclined to agree with the idea of positive moral development via engagement. I think Bogost’s assessment of the dangers and damages of social media is accurate, although not absolute. But I guess, ultimately, I don’t think social media needs “redeemed” I think it is what it always was: a platform, a format for human engagement.
I’ve gone round and round over whether one can redeem a morally neutral thing, but ultimately, one can “redeem” a plot of land, so I suppose that social media can be. But then we have to identify which definition of redemption we are working with. Do we mean to compensate? To repossess? To atone for? Because I don’t see how any of these can be broadly applied to social media. I cannot repossess what was never mine. I cannot compensate for anyone else’s behavior. I cannot atone for anyone’s actions other than my own. And frankly, my ability to atone for my own actions is debatable.
If we say that social media should be left behind “as an unfortunate artifact”, then I argue we’ve missed the whole point of linear progression. To build on the foundation laid rather than cling to the it and refuse any further innovation. With innovation comes the responsibility to continually develop the application of our moral code and social engagement. I think it’s not a question of redemption, but a call to responsibility. And part of that means finding the right place for social media within the larger context of human interactions.
Which, I guess, leads me back to Stock’s vision for moral development via engagement.
I’m still pondering what the future “should” look like and any adjustments I hope we make.
Thanks for these thoughts! I greatly appreciate them and think I agree with you. It's really easy, I think, to take a reflexively pessimistic view about social media, just like it's easy to oppose any sort of innovation merely because it innovates. It's much harder to think about how to use those tools well while mitigating or minimizing the negative effects.
It's certainly true that social media, as it currently exists and is engaged, can bring out the negatives in people. However easy it is to make Silicon Valley or the platforms themselves a scapegoat, the problem lies within ourselves more than the platforms. I think one thing I'd like to see in terms of how we "should" use these platforms is increased reflection on what (a) what good engagement looks like and (b) the discipline to apply that in our particular situations. These both take the cultivation of wisdom so I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect this on a macro-level, but it does place the impetus on the individual participant.
I suppose when I think of 'redeem' in this context, I'd want to put it in terms of virtues.
So, I'd ask two different questions.
1. Is it possible for social media to facilitate the development of virtue?
2. What would the usage of social media look like for a virtuous person?
I'm skeptical about (1), just from personal experience. But if we suppose that some people will come to social media already virtuous (having been morally formed by their IRL communities), then perhaps there's something to be said about (2). I certainly don't have that answer.
I’m still mulling over these, I really like pulling the question of redemption into the context of virtue.
I’m actually inclined to think the development of virtue can be a by product of social media. What do you think the biggest hindrances to the development of virtue via social media might be?
I’ve not made it through everything yet. I really enjoyed Dr. Johnson’s sound bite and found it to be an excellent foundation for the rest of the newsletter. I’ve read through the article form the Atlantic and made some notes to go back and think through. But that’s as far as I’ve gotten.
Was there any particular piece that stood out to you as you were pulling the newsletter together?
About social media: As Wesley knows, I mostly hate it.
I have a tendency to become obsessive about online stuff -- like, when I was on Twitter, I thought about my follower count too often, or once on Reddit I tried to see how fast I could reach 10,000 comment karma. I've had to really opt out of most of these sites for my own wellbeing.
Yet, I'm now making part of my living with The Classical Mind. This centers around two main platforms: YouTube and Substack. These are both social media of different sorts. It takes a lot of self-control for me not to become obsessed with metrics on these sites.
I love this kind of newsletter keep it up!
{Alrighty, I’ve finally corralled my thoughts on the first portion of the newsletter and am dropping them here. I’m excited to see what others think on the question of social media.}
I admit, these question sent me into a bit of a rabbit’s hole, trying to make sure I understand what’s being said/asked, finding loop holes in my own thoughts, finding (and raging at) my own biases, and then questioning whether or not I’m capable of understanding the question apart from my personal experience with words like “redeem”. It’s been a little bit of an existential tumble. And I’m pretty sure I lost sight of the original conversation somewhere along the lines, hopefully not too much.
I suppose I am inclined to agree with the idea of positive moral development via engagement. I think Bogost’s assessment of the dangers and damages of social media is accurate, although not absolute. But I guess, ultimately, I don’t think social media needs “redeemed” I think it is what it always was: a platform, a format for human engagement.
I’ve gone round and round over whether one can redeem a morally neutral thing, but ultimately, one can “redeem” a plot of land, so I suppose that social media can be. But then we have to identify which definition of redemption we are working with. Do we mean to compensate? To repossess? To atone for? Because I don’t see how any of these can be broadly applied to social media. I cannot repossess what was never mine. I cannot compensate for anyone else’s behavior. I cannot atone for anyone’s actions other than my own. And frankly, my ability to atone for my own actions is debatable.
If we say that social media should be left behind “as an unfortunate artifact”, then I argue we’ve missed the whole point of linear progression. To build on the foundation laid rather than cling to the it and refuse any further innovation. With innovation comes the responsibility to continually develop the application of our moral code and social engagement. I think it’s not a question of redemption, but a call to responsibility. And part of that means finding the right place for social media within the larger context of human interactions.
Which, I guess, leads me back to Stock’s vision for moral development via engagement.
I’m still pondering what the future “should” look like and any adjustments I hope we make.
Thanks for these thoughts! I greatly appreciate them and think I agree with you. It's really easy, I think, to take a reflexively pessimistic view about social media, just like it's easy to oppose any sort of innovation merely because it innovates. It's much harder to think about how to use those tools well while mitigating or minimizing the negative effects.
It's certainly true that social media, as it currently exists and is engaged, can bring out the negatives in people. However easy it is to make Silicon Valley or the platforms themselves a scapegoat, the problem lies within ourselves more than the platforms. I think one thing I'd like to see in terms of how we "should" use these platforms is increased reflection on what (a) what good engagement looks like and (b) the discipline to apply that in our particular situations. These both take the cultivation of wisdom so I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect this on a macro-level, but it does place the impetus on the individual participant.
Yes! So well said and I whole heartedly agree.
I suppose when I think of 'redeem' in this context, I'd want to put it in terms of virtues.
So, I'd ask two different questions.
1. Is it possible for social media to facilitate the development of virtue?
2. What would the usage of social media look like for a virtuous person?
I'm skeptical about (1), just from personal experience. But if we suppose that some people will come to social media already virtuous (having been morally formed by their IRL communities), then perhaps there's something to be said about (2). I certainly don't have that answer.
Jared,
I’m still mulling over these, I really like pulling the question of redemption into the context of virtue.
I’m actually inclined to think the development of virtue can be a by product of social media. What do you think the biggest hindrances to the development of virtue via social media might be?
The Malkovich portraits are hilarious and amazing!
Wesley, this is amazing. Thanks for pulling this together!
Glad you enjoyed it! What is your favorite piece in it?
I’ve not made it through everything yet. I really enjoyed Dr. Johnson’s sound bite and found it to be an excellent foundation for the rest of the newsletter. I’ve read through the article form the Atlantic and made some notes to go back and think through. But that’s as far as I’ve gotten.
Was there any particular piece that stood out to you as you were pulling the newsletter together?
I think the article on the bonsai trees was the most fun discovery and read!