Is it childish to use facebook?

[Mr Rayon]

Is it childish to use facebook? What does everyone think?

 

Usually, is it considered normal for a fully-fledged adult to use this social networking site?

[Horza2002]

I'd say it depends on how you use Facebook...if you go around posting random/embarassing photos of people or changing your status every 10mins to inform the world of exactly what your doing....then you should really not use it.

 

If however you just use it to keep in touch with people you don;t see very often, then I don't see a problem in that.

[Mr Rayon]

I'd say it depends on how you use Facebook...if you go around posting random/embarassing photos of people or changing your status every 10mins to inform the world of exactly what your doing....then you should really not use it.

 

If however you just use it to keep in touch with people you don;t see very often, then I don't see a problem in that.

 

Do you use facebook?

 

Is it normal for academic/science-obsessed type people (mainly referring to SFN members) to use facebook?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I know a number of adults who use Facebook. I know the majority of students here do, even the science students. It's considered acceptable.

[Horza2002]

I'm a PhD student, aged 22, so you might still class me as a student. However, I use facebook to keep in touch with friends from Uni who have left this rea and other people I've met at random places (gigs, sports events, etc). I'd consider it acceptable for an adult to use it in the same way yes.

 

The people who I described before are annoying whether they're kids or adults so I don't think it applies too much.

[Mr Skeptic]

I decided to use facebook. Mostly now I won't forget about all my friends, won't lose touch with them and not know where they live nor how to contact them anymore. I use facebook because of how unsocial I am. Which reminds me, I haven't logged on in months. I should go see if any more of my old friends found me.

[Mr Rayon]

A while ago, I remember hearing somewhere that an estimated 1 in 5 divorces in the US were attributed to facebook usage somehow (found the link http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Facebook-Myspace-Divorce-Social-Network,news-5418.html). This could come about because of improper use of the social networking site, jealousy from spouse regarding who you are chatting with and from users to just blatantly say things that they don't necessarily mean or wouldn't ordinarily say in the normal social setting. A lot of people would regard this sort of behaviour as being rather childish in that it makes people behave more openly and feel less restricted between what they say to what they think due to the removal of social barriers when one converses normally in real life. Facebook creates an all to comforting social environment where one could easily say the most stupid of things without analyzing the severe long-term repercussions of doing so. This is a big problem for a lot of people. People are looking at pictures of friends/family/relatives and they are becoming jealous, envious of others who may appear to have a better life, a better more understanding boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband and a better career. It brings about Man's most primitive urges, makes him jealous, makes him laugh, makes him angry but it stops him from thinking, at least objectively as well as logically.

Edited January 20, 2011 by Voltman

[Ringer]

A while ago, I remember hearing somewhere that an estimated 1 in 5 divorces in the US were attributed to facebook usage somehow (found the link http://www.tomsguide...,news-5418.html). This could come about because of improper use of the social networking site, jealousy from spouse regarding who you are chatting with and from users to just blatantly say things that they don't necessarily mean or wouldn't ordinarily say in the normal social setting. A lot of people would regard this sort of behaviour as being rather childish in that it makes people behave more openly and feel less restricted between what they say to what they think due to the removal of social barriers when one converses normally in real life. Facebook creates an all to comforting social environment where one could easily say the most stupid of things without analyzing the severe long-term repercussions of doing so. This is a big problem for a lot of people. People are looking at pictures of friends/family/relatives and they are becoming jealous, envious of others who may appear to have a better life, a better more understanding boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband and a better career. It brings about Man's most primitive urges, makes him jealous, makes him laugh, makes him angry but it stops him from thinking, at least objectively as well as logically.

 

No It's from appropriate usage from people who shouldn't be using it in that way. Obviously the people who cheat are going to use things like these to do what they do. That doesn't mean the site in itself is bad, it just means those people use it in a way they probably shouldn't. Your statement would be able to extend to almost anything, sex is wrong because it causes divorce when someone has sex with a person outside of the relationship.

[Mr Rayon]

No It's from appropriate usage from people who shouldn't be using it in that way. Obviously the people who cheat are going to use things like these to do what they do. That doesn't mean the site in itself is bad, it just means those people use it in a way they probably shouldn't. Your statement would be able to extend to almost anything, sex is wrong because it causes divorce when someone has sex with a person outside of the relationship.

 

There is a root-cause for every action/behaviour. These people can't help but behave the way they do when they use this site. For example, why do many priests commit rape crimes? ...because they have been predisposed in a certain way to be more susceptible to undertake this behaviour/action then the general population (e.g. because of a life of celibacy in a sexually stimulating environment where sex sells, but remains as sinful temptation). Similarly social networking sites predispose people to cheat on their spouse and make them act childish. These sites, particularly Facebook are the prime causes for "childishness" exhibited in adults. I'm sure there are a lot of things in this world which can make a person childish, however it doesn't stop Facebook itself from causing people to be childish. There will be many who will resist this temptation to act childish or cheat on their wives when the opportunity presents itself, but this is undeniably the result of Facebook and the types behaviours it encourages people from all walks of life to do.

[John Cuthber]

"These people can't help but behave the way they do when they use this site."

That's their problem, not Facebook's and not mine (as a FB user).

 

"Similarly social networking sites predispose people to cheat on their spouse "

 

I can't be bothered to find the xkcd cartoon for "citation needed".

Adults behave in a childish manner quite a lot when they get the chance. They used to use pubs, parties, April fool jokes etc. Now some of them use Facebook, but the jokes are essentially the same sort that were previously photocopied and passed round the office. Things like this http://www.ahajokes.com/eng011.html

 

"There will be many who will resist this temptation to act childish or cheat on their wives when the opportunity presents itself, but this is undeniably the result of Facebook"

So, nobody cheated on their wife before Facebook?

I await with interest the first man to claim in court "it's not my fault- a well known social networking site made me do it!".

Do you not think that some people will think that his real reason was boring old lust, and he is trying to use Facebook as an excuse.

[Ringer]

There is a root-cause for every action/behaviour. These people can't help but behave the way they do when they use this site. For example, why do many priests commit rape crimes? ...because they have been predisposed in a certain way to be more susceptible to undertake this behaviour/action then the general population (e.g. because of a life of celibacy in a sexually stimulating environment where sex sells, but remains as sinful temptation). Similarly social networking sites predispose people to cheat on their spouse and make them act childish. These sites, particularly Facebook are the prime causes for "childishness" exhibited in adults. I'm sure there are a lot of things in this world which can make a person childish, however it doesn't stop Facebook itself from causing people to be childish. There will be many who will resist this temptation to act childish or cheat on their wives when the opportunity presents itself, but this is undeniably the result of Facebook and the types behaviours it encourages people from all walks of life to do.

 

Yes there is a root cause, but people still hold the responsibility. They can help but behave that way, and if they cannot handle the punishment that come from their actions they shouldn't put themselves in such a situation. Saying, "I couldn't help it, facebook made me accept this person I wanted to have sex with as a friend, talk to them, meet with them, take off my clothes, etc." is stupid, plain and simple. They would have cheated with or without a social networking site; perhaps they would have cheated with someone at work or some other common meeting place. They would still cheat. It has nothing to do with what websites they frequent. If you have any evidence that the marriages that cited facebook as a reason would not have ended without some sort of social networking site I may listen. Until then you're just making excuses for stupid people.

[Doc. Josh]

I don't feel its childish to use face book in the way of keeping up with friends and in touch with family. However the constant abuse may cause harm to relationships. I do not have one mainly due to work, im not a fan of posting up personal pictures and running the risk of investigation on myself. It sounds dumb i understand, but anything can be used as a weapon against you in a position of authority. My wife has one and bearly gets on and so far has been harmless. So i assume she's being an adult with it, in a nutshell i believe it's a great thing to be able to connect to old friends and keep informed with family, i just choose not to.

[Sisyphus]

I don't think it's particularly childish, although I never signed up for it myself.*

 

*Zucky and I are the same age, so I was the prime demographic at the very beginning, but back then it did seem pretty stupid and inane, not least because the only other people I could see and would care about were people I saw in person all the time anyway. By the time it became more useful, it also seemed more insidious, with lots of privacy problems, etc.

[JohnB]

"I couldn't help it, facebook made me accept this person I wanted to have sex with as a friend, talk to them, meet with them, take off my clothes, etc."

 

My version doesn't make me do those things. Do I need an upgrade?

 

Voltman you are making some very strong comments without any real proof.

 

For example, why do many priests commit rape crimes?

 

A while ago, I remember hearing somewhere that an estimated 1 in 5 divorces in the US were attributed to facebook usage somehow

 

Can you provide some evidence that priests are more likely to be rapists?

 

If you read the link the divorces are not attibuted to Facebook, regardless of the miseading title of the article. Petitions simply contained "references to Facebook". Facebook is mentioned because it is a communications medium. Prior to Facebook cheaters used MSM, prior to that it was texting, before that it was plain old telephone calls and before that cheaters used letters. I'm willing to bet that if you did a similar survey of divorce applications from 15 years ago, the telephone would get a mention in many, would this mean that the telephone is to "blame" for the divorces?

 

People cheat for any number of reasons, however the existence of a particular communications media is not one of them.

[lemur]

Ad hominem attacks are annoying in discussion forums because they shift the focus from content to users. The whole point of facebook is to make the users the content. It is a totally ad hominem medium. Childish at best; social ego-control at worst.

[imatfaal]

Ad hominem attacks are annoying in discussion forums because they shift the focus from content to users. The whole point of facebook is to make the users the content. It is a totally ad hominem medium. Childish at best; social ego-control at worst.

 

But that would apply to diaries, biographies, and a fair amount of historical narrative.

 

The Ad Hom argument is a logical fallacy and is frowned upon in fora such as SFN because this is an arena that exists to allow space for concepts and arguments to be tested and challenged; thus any Ad Hom detracts from an objective argument on the facts. But not everywhere is a debating club and we are not an objective species within our social environment. The vast majority of social interaction is highly personal and completely subjective. Your objection to facebook reads like an rejection of all media with content that is personality based; does this extend to a condemnation of, say, great literature like Dubliners, amazing personal accounts like Touching the Void, the intensely personal music of Joy Division - I could carry on but I am sure you get the idea.

 

 

 

 

[lemur]

But that would apply to diaries, biographies, and a fair amount of historical narrative.

 

The Ad Hom argument is a logical fallacy and is frowned upon in fora such as SFN because this is an arena that exists to allow space for concepts and arguments to be tested and challenged; thus any Ad Hom detracts from an objective argument on the facts. But not everywhere is a debating club and we are not an objective species within our social environment. The vast majority of social interaction is highly personal and completely subjective. Your objection to facebook reads like an rejection of all media with content that is personality based; does this extend to a condemnation of, say, great literature like Dubliners, amazing personal accounts like Touching the Void, the intensely personal music of Joy Division - I could carry on but I am sure you get the idea.

Imo, egoism is excessive already due to meritocratic assumptions about social-economics, etc. Ego and other reasons for displaying and interacting on the basis of personal information are not universally bad. It's just that too many people have bought into and assert the view that personality is and should be the basis for all of life. They think that life is a system of rewards and punishments based on social validation. The worse part of it is that the economy has evolved to the point where they are right for the most part. So it is a vicious cycle and Facebook is both indicative and contributing to the problem, imo. Tell me, how many facebook users have the mentality that if there was a total economic crash where 50% or more of people lost their livelihoods, house, etc. that they would "make the cut" because of things like likability and social popularity? It is disturbing when people can justify their economic privilege over others purely on the basis of their social likability.

 

edit: btw, I think biographies, (public) diaries, and many historical works do have an egoizing effect on many people who read them. People read about a famous person whom they idolize and consciously or subconsciously try to model aspects of their idol's personality/behavior and fantasize about gaining fame, historical significance, and having other people avidly reading their biography. I don't think this is cause for shame, as it is often taken to be, but it does detract people from making goals of achievement their focus instead of focussing on the personality traits of successful people.

Edited January 21, 2011 by lemur

[Moontanman]

I'm on face book, so far no one has talked me into taking off my clothes (am I doing it wrong?) I use it to find and keep up with old friends, I also make new ones because i put a lot of my stuff (pics, stories) and people who find the stuff interesting share their stuff with me. i like it!

[Ringer]

So what I'm getting from this is that facebook only wants me naked, I wonder why that is. . .

[escape_velocity]

It looks like most people think that so-called social networks are exclusively for socializing and losing one's precious time when one ought to be learning new things. This is a BIG mistake. I log in at Facebook just to visit the Walls of the Radio Netherlands Worldwide programs that I listen to weekly and make comments about their subject matters. "Earth Beat", an environmentalist program, is especially useful, but so are "The State We're In", "South Asia Wired" and "Bridges With Africa". Then there's the Walls of so many scientific journals, etc.

 

For instance, one of the most recent reports from "Earth Beat", titled "Waiting in the wings", is about inventions that are amazing but haven't been adopted widely yet, or not at all, like "food tubes", a science-fictiony network of underground rails for the distribution of food supplies that would replace trucks and save a lot of fuel (they already have the blueprint for one that would be built in Croydon, U.K. and would have a total extension of 80 km.), or "bio-couture" (lab-grown cloth), or the Philips universal wireless mobile phone charger.

 

That last matter would be a good excuse for starting a thread about the conspiracy theory involving Tesla and the wireless transmission of electricity through electromagnetic waves. If it's true then power networks are unnecessary and all that's needed is a central radio transmitter, maybe on a satellite, and a receiver in every household or business, a system of free energy for everyone. I hereby threaten to go discuss this on the Speculations Forum.

 

The interviewee explains that it's a very inefficient way to transmit energy. The two artifacts --the phone and the charger-- have to be in close contact, and if they're so much as 1 mt. apart then the efficiency drops drastically, to less than one percent: the percentage that reaches the phone is less than one percent of the emitted energy, but that's as far as mainstream science and tech are concerned.

 

The programs can be found online. I have nothing to do with either RNW or the Philips company, though. It's just that I appreciate the former's usefulness.

 

So, you see, there's more to social networking than meets the mind.

 

 

Edited January 22, 2011 by escape_velocity

[Kris K.]

Yes, it's childish and that's a good thing....

[Ladeira]

Well embarassing photos are the greatest thing on Facebook.

 

Childish is having other people checking your Facebook for your embarassing moments. Who never wanted to play jokes sometimes?

 

I guess people need to set personal life apart from professional one. Embarassing things are real life. Isn't hiding it only convenient omission?