[MD] Food for Thought

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Dan previously]
We construct roles and then call them real. In a sense they are.

[Arlo then]
In what sense _aren't_ they?

[Dan]
I think the MOQ would say there are no biological patterns underpinning the
virtual world reality.

[Arlo]
This suggests there is a "real" identity that is connected to your physical
body, and some that are not. The identity, "Dan", that I know here is real and
yet I don't have any experience with a physical body backing it up. Is the
"Dan" I know less real than the "Dan" known by those who co-experience a
physical body along with it? (By the way, I hope you know I'm not arguing
against you, just trying to tease out Turkle's main thesis).

[Dan]
Turkle uses phrases like "at least temporarily" and "usually disappointing" to
illustrate how even though these virtual "lives" are compellingly addictive for
many players the games fail to translate into anything meaningful in the "real"
world.

[Arlo]
Well, I'm not arguing for (or against) the playing of these games. All I am
looking it is the identity construction process regarding creating a "virtual"
identity and creating "real world" identities. I think Turkle would say they
are BOTH equally "real" identities, and the co-presence of a corporeal body
does not constitute a "real" identity. Or, all "identities" are equally "real"
as they are negotiated through discourse. 

[Dan]
I would go so far as to say that Arlo (or any "established" member of a group)
cannot move outside established parameters, period, and that is precisely why
many people find it so compelling to develop new online personalities.

[Arlo]
I'm not sure what you mean "cannot". I think as identities are historically
grounded over time they become difficult to change. When people move, for
example, you often hear of a "fresh start" or "starting over". "Habit" is a
strong force. But I don't know if I'd say it is impossible. And, of course, it
depends on acceptance. I might want to recast an identity as "artist", but in
doing so you'd also have to agree to this new identity.

Interestingly, some studies have demonstrated that "you really have to see
yourself a certain way" in order for an identity to "work" (be successfully
negotiated). Men who pretend to be female online typically don't fool anyone...
so long as they do not see themselves as female. In other words, both
interlocutors must accept an identity trait for it to be successfully
negotiated. Or, its not just me convincing you of something, its us both
becoming mutally convinced together. 

[Dan]
No I have never seen [the South Park "Warcraft" episode]. 'Fraid I am not much
on tv. I did go to the url you suggested and try to watch but after a few
seconds I remembered why I gave up my cable so many years ago. Do people
actually watch this stuff? Oh my.

[Arlo]
I think this is a good parody of this social activity, but admittedly South Park
is not everyone's cup of tea. I like the line, "you can stay out here bouncing
a ball around and stuff, or you get online and do something that matters" (or
something close to that). Anyways...