Reality Vs Second Life

My previous post was demoted to the "Off Topic" folder, I agree with Jeska Linden that the responses it drew were off topic, mostly about sci fi novels. In hind sight I realize that my previous post assumed too much and was not suffiently clear on how it related to Second Life. I will try to correct that in this post.

I respectfully request that anyone who wants to discuss sci fi, relegate that discussion to my previous thread in the "off topic" folder. I will join you in that discussion.

/120/59/36617/1.html

I will endeavour below to reintroduce this topic in a way that is more clearlly relevant to Second Life. In brief, I think that Second Life is at least part of a significant step in the evolution of the human species.

This is not an entirly new idea. Its roots were put forth by Teilhard de Charden (1881-1955) who many people credit with predicting the evolution of the world wide web, which can be seen as part of what he called the "Noosphere".

http://www.godconsciousness.com/The%20Teilhard%20Page.htm

Charden was both a Jesuit Priest and a scientist, specializing in paleontology and the evolution of mankind. He saw no reason for science and religion to be at odds with each other. I don't either and I believe that priests, philosophers, mystics and scientists have more in common then they have apart. They all question and try to understand the nature of reality.

In short Teilhard predicted, based on observations of our past, that humankind and life, has and is evolving toward greater complexity, community and interconnectedness. He predicted that the next phase in the evolution of life is towards a world wide interconnected community, the "Noosphere".

What does this have to do with Second Life? Did you know that Philip Rosedal (Linden) the founder and CEO of Linden Labs, creator of Second Life, has a BS degree in Physics?
http://lindenlab.com/management.php You cannot spend that much time studying Physics without pondering the nature of reality.

With Second Life Linden Labs has created a Universe within a Universe. A Universe that simulates our existing universe, but which has fewer limitations. Second life is a universe that encourages and facilitates creativity, community and the sharing of ideas in a way that has never existed before.

Second Life is exploring places where there are no known landmarks. When ocean explorers set out across the void, where there are no landmarks, they keep track of where they are and predict where they expect to be tommorow by "dead reckoning". A process of projecting your current and past course, speed and direction, into the future. A process of extrapolation. If you extrapolate the course of the World Wide Web and Second Life into the future, you must conclude that Second Life or sims like it will continue to grow more and more real, until they either match or transcend reality itself. Look at how much more realistic Second Life had grown in the four years it has existed.

As predicted by Teilhard de Charden, the future of humankind is in the "Noosphere" and Second Life is heading there.

Good, well-thought-out post. I humbly respect where you're trying to go with this.

While I don't feel these forums are an environment precisely conducive of intellectual discourse, I'll do my best to add where I think you're going.

The nature of reality, as mirrored in virtual worlds like Second Life, is a strange one. One of the reasons it's an industry that grosses so much (that is, MMOs and virtual worlds) is simply because we're attempting to achieve the perfect medium for reflecting what and who we are onto a plane that's readily accessible over vast distances. To a lesser extent, companies in this market have pursued formulaic goals, such as how best to make quick profit, but in general, I feel the art of expression and understanding is the ultimate goal.

The great blogger, Zero Grace, had good insight on this: http://www.mindjack.com/feature/bodylanguage.html

While his article offers a subset of a growing trend in virtual media, body language, it's spit in the ocean against the net progress that's been made. As time goes on, that will continue to improve - and I feel world systems like Second Life are at the forefront of this field.

Additionally, it's interesting to see how our collective sense of surreality is based, at core, on our perceptions of reality. At the lowest (user) level in Second Life, we have flat images, primitives, and an LSL code language. What are they but reflections of our perceptions, both on the ubiquitous nature of spheres, boxes, et al, as our persistent pursuit of knowledge through language and visual expression?

Furthermore, "builds" themselves are surreality based on our perceived reality. What are spaceships, flying avatars, treehouses, and abstract art but statements based on the act of eschewment of certain preconceived norms while coveting others for aesthetic appeal? And what are they but statements on the limitations we have as human beings?

I realize this is pretty deep, so I'll cut it short here. I feel, though, that Second Life is closest to my thoughts on what true freedom of expression is like, and even if that may mean a plethora of unfavorable builds in the short term, it's amazingly unfathomable of what that freedom will allow for in the future.

i don't know. interesting post, but my basic feeling is this: technology and time has changed our environment, and thus some basic needs have become more important and some less important, but if you really boil down the fundamental human condition, it really hasn't changed in the last several thousand years. We have the same urges and the same basic emotional drivers - love, community, power/social standing... we are still (on the whole) rather confused apes running around trying to figure out the meaning of life.

We have evolved societal-induced self control and rules of co-operation, that is true.

SL is a new universe with new rules, but it is still a reflection of our universe in that there are no non-human intelligences behind the avatars. OK, AnneDroid is AI, but she's an exception . So SL provides new freedoms and new technologies and a new environment, but the interactions are still fundamentally human. The economy is still driven fundamentally by human psychology.

It all comes down to how you define evolution, of course. In some ways, SL unfetters people from the confines of society, so when it comes to behavior some people actually are reverting to more barbaric behavior rather than advancing! But I think that's the minority.

Addition: I agree with Jefferey, to me more than anything SL is about freedom and unfettered creativity. (if you allow it to be)

I feel we're poised to make a leap that will change everything. I think Second Life is part of the preparation for the leap as it helps us to value things beyond physical reality.

call me cynical but i kinda think if people don't already value things beyond physical reality nothing like sl or sl v2.0 or sl v12.9 will make them do it.

I would rally with you on this point, for different reasons. First, while I agree on the fact that "how you define evolution (is relative)," I feel what you put forward is, at core, a touch too limited in scope.

True, while the pursuit of carnal desires remains in many ways precisely the same, we have evolved tremendously as a species as far as how our tertiary goals go, and in many ways the widespread tolerance that's taken hold in Second Life reflects that (contrary to the dissonance posited in the forums, here).

While the scope of "what constitutes this form of evolution" has been laid out fairly well in other posts, indeed sufficient enough to render a long talk on it irrelevant, some items that stick out are:

- We've come to better understand reality over time than our precursors, and by extension, the meaning of life (though we're not there yet).
- Technologically and Scientifically, we've advanced tremendously from "fire burns" and "water is wet" to Theories of Relativity, String Theory, and other ideas. It's an interesting trend as we continue to further abstract ideas to better understand them.
- That's also nestled itself in our core systems of beliefs on what the world is, and strangely enough, the internet is a medium where dissenting opinions on what we believe flourish (an outlet conducive of "lack of faith" or honest, healthy pursuit of knowledge depending on your stance). I doubt I need cite examples.

One outcry I've seen in-world and here on the forums is that we should not forget that which came before us. This is correct - only by understanding the foundation can we fully understand what comes after. Such is the basis of Second Life, a world based on the best we know of spacial physics on a world comparable to Earth, both as it catters to what we're used to as what we know.

One interesting concept is that humanity is not evolving at all. This is far from the truth. Evolution - that is, the concept that survival is dictated best by those that live to the next generation - has very much taken part in our society. In the most stark, literal sense, we've not come far from where we were ages ago. As a species, though, we've collectively advanced enough that the bounds of physical evolution no longer hold us as they once would. The Internet, as well as concepts of Social Darwinism, further that point.

---

Anyway, to sort of round up my thoughts on the issue, the "barbarism" you see is brought on, I think, by a different reason. It is not the "release from society" that brings out the asshat in some people. Rather, the anonymity that they get as a nameless, distached person on these forums and, to a lesser extent, in Second Life, brings that about. Since there are no literal repurcussions to actions - those which normally keep literal crime in check - they continue to do as they please. This does not reflect a lack of community, which is very much in existance. It merely allows people to subvert that image of society for their gain, and by and large, that's something that's being snuffed out.

---

... I thought I warned people that getting me started on these topics was a bad idea.

Mommy, my brain hurts.

Thank you all for the thoughtful responses, I will reply more later when I'm away from work. I'm pleased to find others that ponder these things. It is becoming pleasantly clear to me that some of these ideas have been discussed earlier in SL, and other forums. I'm Noob so I have some catching up to do.

The Zero Grace belogger was interesting, I will read it more thoughtfully later.

I also found some related posts about the "Thinkers" group on http://www.torley.com

Jeffery, I'm glad I got you started.

Oh hey ArchTx, thanks for the cite on mah site.

Yeah, I've had some good Thinkers discussions. A common thoughtline you'll see, of course, is "It comes down to the individual". Time and time again. I don't think there's been a Thinkers meeting in awhile tho -- Jinny, Eloise, Gwyngwyngwyn, info please?

Zero Grace's article on Body Language is one of my FAVES. As an individual (meaning me) with Asperger's Syndrome who is "mindblind" to such things and must run through them rotely and carefully as to not wildly misinterpret intentions, I'm glad SL allows a largely non-threatening, expressive environment in this regard. While repetitive anim loops may be seen as a crutch, I get better learning though that type of cyclicality.

There was a time in my life where I did things more compulsively and looped them over and over again. Something happened to me, I basically exploded from within, and became quite chaotic. Now, I'm in the process of finding my own balance again. In doing so, coming to Second Life, it is quite apparent to me there are a lot of futuristic and humanistic and what-have-you not ideas that hold a lot of appeal for me. I am a follower of the many schools of cyberpunk (and even related, steampunk and sandpunk and postpostpostcyberpunk ) and I am just thrilled to see thoughtful discussion such as the issues you are bringing into the pool here, ArchTx.

I can think of someone else you should talk to more inworld if you've not already -- Spider Mandala, a leader of Second Life's Tyrell Corporation. He's great with these topics! Tyrell is the OLDEST Resident-run group in SL, and many of SL's bedrock pioneers are their brethren. They have some articles in New World Notes such as:

http://secondlife.blogs.com/nwn/2004/05/the_unfinished_.html

And their own group forum:

/invalid_link.html

Well, onwards.

Refreshing stuff, my fellow avatars.

Torley, you are welcome. And thank you for the great referrals.

I'm very pleased that you and others are finding this thread to be worth participating in. I've gone thru most of my life finding very few people that I can discuss these things with. Its a bit too far out for most, but lets face it, most are not very self aware, they are all caught up in the maya of things. It is remarkable that Second Life has created an environment that can foster this kind of sharing.

Many, if you share these kind of thoughts with them, think you are a little cracked, so I've found it best to keep these thoughts to myself. I can imagine that your personal reality has made your realize that it is significantly different from other people's experience/perceptions. Which must lead one to question the nature of reality at some level. Your observations and writing is brilliant. I'm so glad you are sharing them with us.

I'm not sure what cracked open the doors of perception for me as a child, except perhaps that I was a twin. And read too many comic books. Of course there was also Walt Disney and Alice in Wonderland. And then the 60's came, which blew the doors open wider.

<< While repetitive anim loops may be seen as a crutch, I get better learning though that type of cyclicality.>>

Makes sense to me, I'm told by educational specialists that it takes a dozen or more repetitions for a person to learn something new.

Thank you again for the references, I'm looking forward to exploring them.

I collided with you while materializing at a teleport station the other evening, but my substandard computer lags so bad at those moments, by the time I recognized you and could type out a Hi, you were gone. I look forward to meeting you sometime.

Arch

Thank you, Arch for starting this wonderful thread. I am somewhat at unease though, with your restriction not to mention sci fi in it - because to me the dramatizations (by some of the better SF authors) of the concepts mentioned by you have been very important to me in grasping their true meaning. "Bloodmusic" for example is a wonderful dramatization of the idea of the noosphere. "Otherland" concludes with an emotionally gripping example of "uploading" the existence of one of the protagonists into a simulated reality. And "Eternity" realistically (IMHO) describes a society in which a balance between virtual and physical existence has been found. The latter beeing very interesting to me as it implies that the step to existing in a simulated (?) world has not to happen in a way where ALL existence of humankind or a single human has to leave the physical realm.

Yes, this has a lot to do with Teilhard de Chardins work. Which i like especially because he is one of those rare thinkers who try to bridge the (perceived) gap between physics or (so called) materialism and spirituality. Where I cannot follow him is the idea that the noosphere is the final goal of humanity or even the universe. I don't believe that such a final goal exists. Evolution is and will be an ever ongoing process - as long as the univers exists.

Its obvious to me that the next steps in (human) evolution will not consist of physical changes to our bodys. It seems plausible to me that other forms of reality - like digitally created virtual worlds - will play an important role in these next steps. And since iI have found SL I believe that we are much further along this way than i have tought before. The technology is still somewhat crude. The effects on the mind, the emotions of the residents, new forms of relationships and collaboration between people are already stunning.

One has to be very careful to discuss this with people who did not make this experience though. Its not only easy to be seen as nuts. "Looking at a GAME as important for the evolution of humanity?" People who see the possibility, that simulated realities actually may be important to larger groups of people, often see this not as an opportunity but as a great DANGER. Because they look at every diversion from the way humans exist, think and interact now (or in the last few hundred years) as basically "inhumane".

And yes, some of what is happening in SL gets me thinking if the way we are heading is one I personally "aggree with". Sometimes I think, SL brings ot the best in some - and the worst in others.

But all in all I am surprised on how much creativity, how much beauty and -most important - how much kindness I have already experienced here. And more and more I come to believe that this has to do a lot with some of the basic principles in SL. I you give people the power to create, the freedom to be what they wanne be (and can be) it sets in motion a lot of very interesting (and beautiful!) developments in single persons and the evolving society in the digital realm.

ArchTx! Moreso, thanks for your positive thoughts + feelings.

And moreso! I hope to see you inworld in more depth soon. Pardon me for taking off so fast, I'm often on the go somewhere (*sigh* I need clones).

I am not in the right state of mind to respond in depth to this thread. However, I seem to remember a lot of similar thoughts being expressed around 1990, 1993 when the internet started taking off and before internet was a household word. Thoughts on that?

Thanks for the thoughtful response. When I was thinking about whether we have evolved or not, I was not referring to carnal desires, actually, although that biological driver remains a force within humanity's makeup. But looking at the human condition, not the conditions around us, I think our emotional drivers are pretty constant. We seek social acceptance and love for happiness. We seek social standing and power. We revert very easily to mob mentality at times. We still get angry and want to bash something, though we are too civilized and well trained to actually act it out. You see where I am going.

Phsyically, we will move beyond the boundaries of the human body in the coming centuries, and who knows -- will the human psyche change dramatically when separated from the biology and genetics of the human body (if they ever accomplish it) ? And if so, will you be able to reverse engineer what makes an artist, and what makes a chieftan, and what makes a thief?

I am one who believes, as you can probably tell, that genetics, environment and experience all intertwine to make us who we are.

As for those who misbehave, I agree that anonymity is behind much of the behavior, but that is my point when i say "freed from society and thus reverting" -- anonymity means you escape the bonds of serious repurcussion, and the impact of social pressure. This can be wonderful but it can also lead to some bad apples. Personally, I don't really care that there's a few idiots running around acting like asses. They are a minority, and easily ignored. Sometimes they are illegal underagers, sometimes infantile adults. Comes with the new frontier, such things.

All I know is that they're both majorly equal to me. Especally since I can't afford anything in either of them.

My Second Life is much more entertaining. Especially if you consider I can LaLa all over China Town and not get arrested! I can La La all over amusement parks too. But darn that train, it never did come pick us up so we La La'd on the inside and the outside of the golf cart. Thank you Second Life.
I can't get pregnant. Thank God!



Heart

In many ways true, except that (so far at least) my RL framerate stays at about 80 no matter how many people are within 200 meters. =P

Think about it a different way. Perhaps, greater interconnectivity and greater communication does not represent evolution, but devolution. It could mean breakdown in the protoplasma. It could mean that the highly refined individual achieved over the millenia is in fact degrading. I can't help thinking of that chapter in T.H. White's book about the childhood of King Arthur, when he studied the ants, and discovered that all the ants were all connected, and they all had one radio station, and it played the same song all day, Mammymammy or some such. Are we really far off from that? Strip away all the kewlness of it all, and isn't SL a lot like some cynics have written here (Charlotte Gillepsie, saying it's all people wanking off in black boxes)?

What does it mean to me to log on and be instantly connected to some methed-out pea-brained ijjit in Kenosha, Wisconsin who has Jay-Lo blasting on his URL, little hearts pouring out of a box in his yard, the American flag, and a bouncer script that shoots me half across the sim?

Um, is this...uh...connectivity a step forward?

All this hands-across-the-sea stuff actually leads to fierce clashes of civilization. Just check out the clashing modes of styles in doing business and values of business among Americans, Europeans, and Asians in the game. There's a lot to be explored here.

When it's all connected, nothing is better than anything else, everything is equal. Marshall McLuhan said like 20 years ago that television was the great reducer of reality, that everything minimized to to fit in the box, whether wars or cigarette commercials or whatever. And the Internet is the great aggrandizer, making tiny insignificant personas larger than life and giving them more scope and heft than they perhaps deserve.

Try to think of this in practical terms. The Noosphere isn't cool, it isn't neon and blue. It turns out it's cherry red, hon, and its name is HelloKitty. It's just some Walmart shopper who now has the attention of thousands insinuating her mediocre taste on you against your will. There's no filter.

gotta agree with ya on that one. kinda goes back to the old "on the internet nobody knows you're a dog" thing. or the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory cartoon somebody posted.

One day you're responsible for someone's happiness for that day... and the next you're "somebody" ... *sighs*

In case you didn't know what the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory is, see the attached cartoon.

oh.. I get it...

so we are all like.. in the Matrix and like...

Wait a minute...

OMG I dont' really have this hoochie red hair? Or these fantastic boobs? and that's why i can't FLY to the supermarket when i get hungry????


lol...

i'm gonna have to go back and read it all, with pause, cause at 5 am, and going through SL withdrawal... mopping my floor wiht harsh chemicals cause well, I've been uh.. too busy lately counting prims to do so... so i'm kinda fried.

Prokofy, i agree with your scepticism, but not with the cynism. Too much interconnectivity and communication actually CAN be a bad thing. If you study computer science for example its quite a big issue how to get more performance out of multiprocessor systems or clusters. Its easy to get a system, where to much power and bandwidth is spent with communicating ...

On the other hand, a lot of research on creativity hints in the direction, that most creative breakthroughs depend on communication with others (who should be as 'different' as possible). Actually 'no one is an island' and innovation and creativity does not happen to the lone thinker in an ivory tower. Even if this thinker is sitting in this tower, when she gets the idea - usually a lot of communication has happend before, talking, reading, writing.

Its finding the right balance between communication and isolated individuality ... SL does not give us that balance. We have to find it ourselves. BTW: thats not different from RL.

This thread is reminding me of a conversation I had a few years ago. I was talking to my friend about how experience is constructed by the perceiver and most of what an individual thinks of as "reality" actually originates in the process of perception. In the background, someone I didn't know as well was playing a new baseball game on N64, excitedly throwing out information about how detailed the simulation was--different players with different batting and pitching styles, etc.

Drawing on the game as an example, I asked my friend, "With as far as this game is from Pong or NES, what if video games became just as detailed as real life? Would we be able to distinguish between the two? Would one be more real?"

The guy playing baseball responded, "If video games were just like real life, everyone would suck at video games."

Raises the question, if the final goal for simulations (like SL) is to simulate our 'reality' (?) as realistically as is possible. And that, i think, is at least 'debatable'