The Social Psychology of Homo Interneticus

Everyone is a revelation or at least an instantiation of a revelation. Special-ness is not diminished by duplication.

Other people’s opinions are worth the time it takes to elicit them. It’s just the content of their opinions that are worthless.

The Ancestors become alive when you become old.

Non-college people become more collegey when they get older while college people become less collegey.

When it comes to sympathy, validation, approval or camaraderie, quantity surpasses quality.

If postcards, greeting cards and postage had been free we could have had Facebook and Twitter hundreds of years ago.

Conversation is propaganda and everyone else’s comments are always somehow inappropriate.

Clicking buttons is hard work and scrolling even harder. No information is worth more than four clicks to get at.

A picture is worth a thousand words but a picture with words on it is worth a thousand pictures. Force multiplier.

Be honest and forthcoming in private conversation; be a little more guarded in small groups. Before large audiences, stick to the script or an outline. But when the whole world is listening, let it all hang out.

It’s a great joy to say you’ve already seen or read something and an even greater joy to show it to someone who hasn’t. Especially when they go 😮

Advertisements

Bud and Lou Go to Grad School for Cognitive Psychology

Background information:  In October 2010, Professor Jeanine Hoo espoused a new psychological theory of cognition called What Theory (i.e., cognition as primarily interrogatory in nature). Its detractors were led by Professor Ronald Hizz, many of whom subscribed to alternative views referred to as That Theory (knowledge as primarily indicative), of which Hizz Theory, as it was called, was one of the leading doctrines.

Needless to say, this made for some unfortunate misunderstandings when the unprepared Lou tried to study with his more well-read friend Bud.

“Now let me get this straight—what is his theory?”

“No, What is Hoo’s theory.”

“Who?”

“Exactly.”

“Exactly what?”

“Yes, that’s Hoo.”

“Who is who?”

“Of course Hoo is Hoo, and What is the theory.”

“That’s what I’m asking!”

“And I’m telling you.”

“So what is his theory?”

“No, That is Hizz Theory.”

What?”

“No, That!  Look, all you have to remember is: That is Hizz Theory and What is Hoo’s Theory. Ok?”

“…. OK, so what is ‘that theory?’”

“No, now you’re mixing it all up. That Theory is not What Theory!”

“What?”

“No!!!”

“–And who’s ‘he’ in all this?”

“Hoo’s a she.’ ”

“’She?’  You said ‘his theory.’ ”

“And I meant Hizz Theory.”

“So who’s ‘she?’ ”

“Exactly!”

“What???”

“Yes! I think you’re finally getting it! Like I said, Hoo’s she, Hoo’s What, and That’s Hizz.”

“What is ‘his?’”

“No, now you’ve lost it—What is not Hizz and Hoo’s is not That.”

“I guess I’ll never understand psychology.”

Waaahhhhh-waahhhh!

Alan Brech 2012