Second Life: A Threat to Humanity?

In Part III of Open Sky, Virilio discusses how technology has changed traditional relationships, making physical relationships more uncommon and virtual ones more popular. "From now on, distancing prevails over nuptial abduction; as, with teleconferencing, what counts above all is the separation, the putting asunder of face-to-face parties; touch, physical contact between partners, being no longer the go so much as the rejection of the other person" (108).

Society is functioning at a much faster pace than it used to, so as a result we need speed up the way we go about our everyday lives. The Internet, particularly social media, is intended to provide information quickly. Social media is intended to keep people connected in this busy and fast-paced world, however our obsession with staying connected is resulting in more online relationships and less physical contact.

I agree with Virilio that all of this technology that we are exposed to on a daily basis takes away from physical relationships. Much of the Internet is now interactive and demands attention, taking us away from paying attention to the real world and what's going on around us. While social media sites (ie: Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter) are interactive forms of media, the connections and relationships all take place online, in a virtual world, rather than in the physical world with interpersonal relationships.

I believe the purpose of social media is to serve a supplement to physical, interpersonal relationships; however, I see more and more people creating two different accounts (personal/public and professional/private accounts) to separate their different relationships in the virtual world. By creating two different accounts people are no longer using social media as a supplement to their interpersonal relationships, but rather using it as a substitute to these physical relationships.

I disagree with Virilio's claim that this obsession with virtual relationships could result in the loss of physical relationships altogether, which in turn would result in threatened reproduction and continuity of the human race. I think that statement is a bit extreme, especially since a lot of relationships that begin on the Internet (the virtual world) end up turning into physical relationships (in the real world). 

Let's look at online dating as an example of virtual relationships turning into physical relationships. Many online dating websites such as EHarmony provide people with a directory of potential mates. It's up to the individuals to choose who they want to meet. Most of these relationships are initiated through the Internet, but are continued as an interpersonal/face-to-face relationship. The image below shows a couple that met through eHarmony and got married after forming an interpersonal relationship.

It wasn't until a few weeks ago that I learned about a website called Second Life, which allows people to essentially play a video game of their life - so they are virtually living their life. This honestly worries me and makes me question humanity and Virilio's claim that the human race could become extinct. However, I have yet to meet someone who plays Second Life, and only lives in a virtual world. 

So there are options for people to live an entirely virtual life (Second Life), but I have yet to meet anyone who participates in this form of living. I'm sure that there are many people who have a Second Life account, and maybe even people that do nothing but play Second Life; however, I do not believe that this form of living will ever replace physical relationships that take place in the real world.

Is Technology Making Us Lazy Or More Productive?

In the second part of Paul Virilio's Open Sky, he talks about the law of proximity, grey ecology, and continental drift. He relates the law of proximity to the law of least action. In today's age the help of technology has made people think that "less is more."

Virilio's example of the stairs and elevator is a great example to show how lazy people have become, but how much faster they can get things done simultaneously. The characteristics "lazy" and "productive" seem to be almost opposites, but modern technology has allowed people to possess these two characteristics simultaneously. His stairs and elevator example shows that when there's a choice between the two, no body takes the stairs anymore. They're getting to their destination faster, but without having to do any extra work.

In the chapter "Grey Ecology", Virilio points out that acceleration of geographical knowledge has led to loss of meaning in scale and physical dimension. Travel was seen as the best form of education in the past, since it allowed people to free themselves from their everyday familiarities and experience diversity first hand.

Today there are so many different forms of technology that allow people to learn about different geographical locations without even having to leave their physical location. While there is a lot a person can learn about a place without visiting it physically, there is also a lot of information that can be missed such as experience. I believe that relatable experiences, which are obtained through traveling, are what make information so meaningful and memorable.

The theory of continental drift is that the locations of the continents are changing, in relation to one another. Virilio argues that with the help of technology we are reversing the traditional theory of continental drift. The continents were once all connected, but over time have moved further and further apart. Virilio states that metropolization for this coming century is the "world-city," meaning there will be a virtual city of which every real city will be a suburb whose "centre will be nowhere and circumference everywhere."

I do agree with technology and the convenience it brings, in terms of quick communication, that there is already a more connected world, I just am not sure if I'd describe this as a virtual city where real cities will be irrelevant.

Tying all of these chapters together, I see where Virilio is coming from when he describes the typical person's use of technology and how it is making them less reliant on people and more reliant on virtual experiences; however, I do believe that there will always be a connection to the real world.

I see more and more people using their cell phones for more things (for example it went from solely using it for phone calls to adding text messages and now people can pay their bills on their mobile phones). But I do still see people actively connecting with the world and other people in ways that are impossible to do virtually, a perfect example would be physical exercise.

I see the danger of technology from Virilio's point of view, but I believe we should take everything with a grain of salt. I personally believe that yes, too much technology can be dangerous to one's "real time" social life, but I also believe that using technology within reason helps the average person balance everyday tasks more efficiently.

Discussion Questions:
1. What are some ways in which you use technology everyday? What is one example of an activity that you do that in no way involves technology?

2. Based on your answer to the above questions, do you believe you are "too reliant" on technology? Or too unfamiliar with it? Do you see either as being an issue?

Connected or Disconnected?

Paul Virilio's concept of dromology is defined as the logic of speed that is the foundation of our current technological society. Virilio see this term as form of pollution that society is facing on an every day basis. I found it interesting that he compares dromology alongside air and water pollution. We live in a fast paced society where the demand for information is increasing at a rapid pace.

How is this information provided at such a quick rate? Technology. My generation tends to be glued to their cell phones are have an online presence in almost every social media outlet. The question is whether this form of connectedness is really keeping people connected. Virlio believes that people are so engrossed in the virtual world that the concept of real life and real time relationships are lost.

I found this reading to be very confusing, primarily because of the unfamiliar terms and how the author spoke a lot about physics, which is not my forte. My main question was why so many connections to the environment when talking about how society goes about communicating through technology? Maybe it's because technology has become the main mode of communication in the past decade?

I constantly see people glued to their cellphones. In today's world there are a lot of applications such as Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook that allow people to communicate but not in real time. These conversations are not taking place instantly, but rather have a time lag between when the post is made and when the audience members/friends are obtaining the information.  I think Virilio sees communicating through technology as an issue that is affecting all of society, just like air pollution is an issue that affects all of society.

I can see where Virilio is coming from when he characterizes dromopsheric pollution as a pollution that attacks the liveliness of the subject and the mobility of the object by wasting away the journey to the point where it becomes needless. What he is saying with this statement is that through this new form of digital communication we are losing the meaning in our messages as well as losing meaningful relationships, by being so involved in our online social media and relationships.

My generation has become so dependent on technology and the modes of communication through technology that meaningful, and personal relationships are being lost. By being so attached and engrossed in our cellphones, iPads, and computers we're losing touch with reality. So is technological communication really the way to go? I understand that it allows us to multitask and stay connected... but is it really keeping everyone connected, or just creating distance?