this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
22 points (80.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43907 readers
1063 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Cloak@lemmy.ml
mekhos@lemmy.ml
tmpod@lemmy.pt
14specks@lemmy.ml
22
Do you think that technology will help with social media drug and encourage socializing more? Could this process be reverted? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by xelar@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Technically yes, but I don't mean technology as phones/laptops/tablets/etc. Imho, the biggest factor in social isolation is atomization due to bad urban planning. When everything and anything is only accessible by car, you lose any connection with your local neighbourhood and local stores/cafes/etc.

In environments where people walk around the neighbourhood, doing small daily shops, going to local businesses and taking mass transit to work/school/restaurants/bars, then you're much more likely to interact with people rather than driving around in your social isolation-mobile.

Urban planning can be considered a form of technology, which is why I said technically yes.

EDIT: Oh, another big factor here is the loss of the third place. It still exists in some places (local pubs in British towns, local coffee shop in Portugal, etc), but in places without a socially normal "hangout spot" that is separated from both home and work/school, it's much harder to meet acquaintances which may in time become friends.

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is a very true concept.

We recently built a house in a neighborhood that purposely has no privacy fences, it’s open concept. All of our yards have low cedar fencing you can clearly see through. This encourages neighbors to actually get to know one another. It works; I haven’t felt this connected to people since I grew up playing with the neighborhood kids. Everyone living here feels the same way. Oh and I’m an introvert. I just realized that continual isolation is not great for mental health.

Get out there and actually ask how your neighbor is doing and be interested in their response. Be willing to help. You’ll feel better than you have in a long time. We are social creatures and need that. Feel like the world is collapsing? Then get out of your own way and help someone else. It’s a feeling you can’t buy. The richest people are those that have the most connections. They’re usually the happiest and most mentally stable too. It all starts by being willing to say how’s it going? Where are you from? What brings you here? Everyone has a story and we all love to talk about ourselves. It just takes some longer than others to open up.

I have an elderly retired neighbor that sits in front of his house most days and hands dog treats out to the dogs being walked by. He knows all of them and their owners. He’s made some awesome connections and friends. Everyone knows him and when someone is in need he isn’t afraid to ask the other neighbors to help. It’s a great relationship with someone others would see as a nosy neighbor. For us he’s a connection to other neighbors we haven’t met yet due to time at work, etc. He’s one of my all time favorite people just because he actually cares about us all. Be that person. You can do it!

[–] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Social media are basically a replacement for the good old neighbourhood bar where kids used to play flippir/arcade after school, adult got their after work beer and so on.

Then places like sport/art clubs, worker union, political parties are great for socialising.

Finally don't forget that you can socialise with your neighbour, it also contributes to everyone safety

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

This is a good way to put it.

Especially relevant now that public spaces are less and less accessible.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No. I think this is a symptom. People escaping the shitty world we live in. Fix real life and less people with want to run away from it.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Addiction is separate from circumstances.

Look at Heath Ledger, Amy Winehouse, Michael Jackson, etc etc etc.

Heath was young, successful, dating a billionaire, and had everything in the world at his fingertips. He decided to have a one man party with drugs and alcohol.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

I agree with you, but I'd call "circumstances" socio-economic status instead. A few remarks for everything else:

He didn't "decide" to use drugs. By definition, addiction is the compulsive use of substance a despite knowing they are harming you. As in: You want to stop, but you can't. You can't "choose", your way out addiction.

Being young and having money make it easier to be happy, but are not requirements beyond your basic needs. I agree with you 100% there. But to me this shows the issues in society go beyond money and basic needs.

These dudes don't kill themselves because their circumstances make them miserable, they kill themselves because DESPITE having "everything" they are still miserable.

Precisely because everyone is sold in the idea that the reason you're miserable is not the oppressive, violent system you live in and the lack of opportunities for free development and growth, but instead it's just that you haven't purchased enough stuff and don't go to the gym often enough.

When that doesn't work, boom: Addiction or death.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

While this is true to a degree, there also seems to be indications that some people are more susceptible to addictive behavior than others, so some will only be inclined towards addiction if their circumstances are bad enough to make it more attractive.

I suspect this is similar to smoking causing cancer. Sure, it will likely shorten your life and cause cancer, or you can be like George Burns and smoke regularly for over 70 years.

Ultimately, it's hard to know how susceptible you are to addiction (or smoking-related cancer) until you've taken the chance.

[–] theywilleatthestars@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Not unless tech companies are incentivized to do so, which they won't be for the foreseeable future.

[–] Alice@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago

Social media drug? Like screen addiction?

I think technological solutions can help, eg app blockers and screentime trackers, but that's not even half the solution. You need to figure out what need you're trying to meet with your phone, and find a low tech version. You can't rely on tech to cure an over-reliance on tech.