``Where
the Bishop is, there let the multitude of believers be;
even as where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church'' Ignatius of
Antioch, 1st c. A.D
Rebuilding:
Getting Back to the Real
Have you ever thought about what your sense of yourself would be like
if you lived in a world without mirrors? Imagine how you'd go through
life if your only idea of the nature of your
appearance were had by seeing the faint glimmering of your reflection
in the still waters
of a dark pond or in a small piece of polished metal, or by seeing the
reactions of others around you. Think
of how deeply your mental image of yourself is shaped by mirrors, and
how profoundly that image affects how you think about yourself and move
in the world.
Now consider that that image you have in your mind is -- well, a
"mirror image." Completely backwards. As reflective of what you truly
look like as these words are easy to discern:
And now consider the effects of photography, what Oliver Wendell
Holmes, Sr. called a "mirror with memory" -- but a type of mirror that
is even more deceptive than the one that hangs over your bathroom sink.
That "the camera never lies" is a lie: lenses
and focal lengths distort, angles deceive, depth is lost, and lighting
can form shadows or "bleach out" features in ways that change
everything about how a photograh's subject is perceived.1
And then we have to contend with the trickery of software photo
editing. Still though, photographs are taken as representative of the
real and are used to manipulate our desires and very identities, such
as in advertising or on Instagram. "Photography's powerful ability...is
rooted in its simultaneous affinity to reality and fantasy. As Oliver
Wendell Holmes had observed, the power of the disembodied image is that
it can free itself from the encumbrances posed by material reality and
still lay claim to that reality. At the same time that the image
appeals to transcendent desires, it locates those desires within a
visual grammar which is palpable, which looks real, which invites
identification by the spectator, and which people tend to trust." 2
Photographs strung together to form video are particularly deceptive,
especially now that we have CGI and deepfake technology to trick us.
And what's been done to the eye has been done to all of our sense
organs. We
live in a world of Naugahyde posing as leather, Auto-tune making stars
out of
"singers" who can't hit their notes, currencies backed by nothing, and
NFTs -- digital files that are now being sold as art for many millions
of dollars. More and more, we live in a world
of simulacra -- simulacra which are too often taken not only as the
real, but as the ideal and attainable -- as the realer than real, the
better than real. The hyperreal.
Do yourself a favor and listen to this section of a discussion between
Benjamin Boyce, James Lindsay, and Michael Young about the ideas of
Jean Baudrillard.3 A very
abbreviated transcript is below for those who'd rather
read:
Michael Young: So imagine that
we have some wild strawberries growing in an ancient city, say in Rome
or something. And me and James, being ancient Romans, are walking
around in our togas and we find the ancient strawberries, and we pick
the strawberries, and there are some that are bigger than the others
and there are some that are smaller than the others, but they're all
ripe, and some of them are a little more juicy, but me and James are
eating the strawberries. Those strawberries are real. Me and James just
look at the strawberries, we just see the strawberries, we have
knowledge of the strawberries from walking around, then we're eating
strawberries.
We're gonna fast forward now to about -- oh, 1960. And now we
have
a strawberry factory which just grows strawberries all the time. And it
selectively breeds the strawberries so that we only get the biggest,
juiciest, reddest, loveliest strawberries, and then we pick them. And
then only the biggest, reddest, juiciest strawberries imaginable get
sent out. So the average person sitting in their home only knows the
flavor and the taste of the biggest, reddest, juiciest strawberries. So
we have what you might call a productive copy of the strawberries.
Right?
We're making the strawberries, but they're still, in a sense, they're
real
strawberries. It's just strawberries on evolutionary steroids.
But then, James and me, having our knowledge from ancient
Rome, 'cause we're still alive, say, "Hey, we can make strawberry
candies." So what we do is we distill out of the strawberries the
flavor of the strawberries, and we double the strength of it so it's
way
stronger than any strawberry that you can ever have wanted. It's way
stronger -- it's twice as strong, or ten times as strong -- and we're
going to add sugar to it. And we're going to create a strawberry
candy.
Well, fast forward to the 1990s, and the Jolly Rancher
company says, "Hey, look, what we're going to do is we're going to do
that same thing, but you know what? The strawberries are really
expensive, so we're going to design a thing that tastes like the
strawberries, and we're going to replace that wonderful, natural cane
sugar that you guys used -- we're going to replace that with high
fructose corn syrup, and then we're going to make the Jolly Rancher. So
now the Jolly Rancher is the strawberry Jolly Rancher that tastes like
the strawberry candy that tastes like the wonderful 1960s selectively
grown strawberries which taste like the original strawberries.
But whoah, wait, someone's going to come along and they're
going to make a soda -- a Jolly Rancher soda, a Jolly Rancher
strawberry soda --mmmm -- which tastes like the Jolly Rancher which
tastes like
the candy which tastes like the strawberry which tastes like the
original wild strawberries. But hold on a second, we're going to make
-- 7-11 comes along and says we're going to make, hey, you know what
would be really good? If we made a Slurpee of the Jolly
Rancher strawberry soda! So eventually the Slurpee of the Jolly Rancher
strawberry soda takes off. Man, everyone just loves it. And everyone's
drinking it, and eventually -- you know what? I have a son, and my son
loves the Jolly Rancher strawberry Slurpee from 7-11. And my son is out
walking, drinking his strawberry Slurpee, and that's all he's ever had.
I don't buy strawberries for my kid, because there's Covid, so all he
ever has is the strawberry Jolly Rancher soda Slurpee from 7-11. And
now as he's walking around one day, he looks over and he sees this odd
bush of, like, green and red things that are growing, and they're kind
of funny, and they're kind of misshapen, and he goes, "Oh, those look
like -- that look kind of like the logo here of a strawberry!" And he
goes and he picks it and he [tasting] goes, "Well, it kinda tastes like
my Slurpee, but the Slurpee's way better. The Slurpee is cold and
refreshing, and oh, it's so sweet and the flavor is so powerful. That's
what a real strawberry tastes like."
So now we've gotten to the point where we started with wild
strawberries and we ended up with an ice-cold sugary corn syrupy thing
which tastes like a cold soda carbonated water fructosey-syrupy thing
which tastes like a candy fructosey-syrupy thing which tastes like a
strawberry sugary candy thing which tastes like a selectively grown
strawberry which tastes like a wild [strawberry]. And we are completely
divorced from the original strawberry. And now the flavor of strawberry
is associated with the Slurpee. Right? That's the thing. The Slurpee is
the thing that we care about. It's more real than real. It is a
hyperreal thing...
... The poet Philip Larkin declared that sexual intercourse
wasn't invented until 1963 because prior to that we had something else.
We have now birth control pills, we have recreational sex coming up in
the '60s, but before that, we didn't have that. So sexual intercourse
as a casual phenemon disconnected from family was not invented until
1963, right? This kind of -- that kind of analysis is going to be
really useful because they're going to look at the trans movement
that's currently happening, and they're going to say, look, back in
ancient Rome when me and James were picking the strawberries, we see
women, and they're just women. And then we fast forward -- zip! -- to
the 1960s, and all of a sudden we have women, but they're wearing
make-up. And their hair is done. And they're on birth control. Hang on,
she has make-up on. Her skin is better than skin. It's more real than
skin. Her hair is prettier than real hair. Then -- wait a second, she's
on birth control. So now we're having a sexual act which is not a
reproductive act. So is it really a sexual act? And then what we're
going to do is we're going to keep pushing that 'til we get to breast
implants and chin implants and more facial feminization...
So finally we come up in the...1960s with the make-up, the
hair and everything else, and then you're going to move forward to the
1980s where you're going to have breast implants. Now you have the
make-up, and the hair, and the breast implants, and then you're going
to move into the '90s, where you have the make-up, the hair, the breast
implants,
and the Photoshop. And then you're going to move forward 'til they have
the make-up, the hair, the breast implants, the butt implants,
everything is shaved perfectly, you're going to have labioplasty, and
then you're also going to, on top of that, have Photosop, and then
you're going to, on top of that, have a feminization filter via Twitter
and Instagram which is going to give you a nice glow which is filmed
from every concievably perfect angle. And they're going to say, "Look,
it's a simulacrum of feminity," and then you're going to have the trans
movement, and what are they doing when they're trying to transition
from male to female? The target they're aiming for is the Instagram
version of the simulacrum of femininity. And then around that, they're
going to form an identity. So its a hyperreal identity that's not even
based on anything that really exists. They took all the stuff that was
added -- they took the hyperreal picture of what feminity is,
abstracted that out, and then said that's the new thing we're aiming
for, which creates itself a new effect.
Benjamin Boyce: It's more woman than woman...
Michael Young: ...The typical porn star actress is the
strawberry Slurpee of
women...
While I disagree
with some points made, and think that we can and should keep searching out the real (more
on that below), the diagnosis is spot on: we live in a world in which
our tastes, desires, and very ideas of who we are -- or who we should
be -- are shaped by
simulacra. In addition to the outright propaganda that poses as news
and entertainment, there are very subtle ways in which our minds
are being trained to think only in terms of that which doesn't really
exist at all.
You may be thinking, "But I like Strawberry Jolly Ranchers and
Strawberry Slurpees!" Well, I wouldn't refuse either if they were put
before me, and Catholicism isn't a Luddite religion: what concerns me
isn't the ordinate enjoyment of simulacra and various hyperreal
phenomena; what concerns me is our increasing inability to distinguish
between the real and hyperreal, and how that inability affects our
relationships with others and how we perceive ourselves. Consider the
young men who desire the female equivalent of the strawberry Slurpee,
and the young women who desire the male counterpart. Their tastes
shaped by porn and Hollywood movies, neither will settle for a real
person; they want hyperreal fantasy instead. They want what doesn't
exist. And consider how each sex knows what the other sex wants, and
tries to become that which can't really exist at all. That's where we
find ourselves.
Then there are the problems of the media by which so much of the
hyperreal is
delivered to us. Because of the very nature of digital technology
itself,
we're being made more and more unfit to live in the real world.
The older
generations living today—digital immigrants—developed their basic
physical skills before the Internet. Millennials, on the other hand,
became the first digital natives: they were socialized in an
environment that rewards not effort but mere presence expressed by
clicks. Since clicks are so easy to make, the exposition of people’s
presence to one another becomes enormous. The reward of recognition,
promised by a click, sinks in an incredible noise. In the old physical
world, people competed through the intensity of effort; in the new
digital world, they compete by the intensity of presence. Hence the
movement toward extreme opinions, rage on social media, and political
polarization, only natural in a society that rewards the intensity of
self-identification more readily than it rewards effort.
This development affects the entire society across
generations. But older people remember when physical restrictions and
face-to-face communication imposed both positive and negative
incentives not to exaggerate personal differences. Mitigating
differences and compromising were a winning, or at least more or less
safe, strategy in the physical world. In the digital realm, the active
signaling of an identity is the condition of successful socialization.
Studies show that digitalization of social networking not only
intensified peer pressure but also confused social and physical reality
for younger people.
If digital immigrants firmly distinguish the old physical
world from the new digital world, for digital natives it’s all a single
hybrid reality where offline activities and old-fashioned face-to-face
communications are the somewhat disturbing, but so far unavoidable,
continuations of a more comfortable digital existence. Compared with
the digital world, which confers instant rewards for a mere click, the
physical world requires too much effort. Since more and more activities
migrate into digital, digital natives increasingly withdraw from the
physical, the most unpleasant part of their hybrid reality. The hybrid
reality contributes to the so-called delayed adulthood: millennials and
Generation Zers have less or later sex, start fewer families, drive
fewer cars, leave parental homes later (if at all), and so on.
Interestingly, instead of the terms “digital natives” and
“digital immigrants” that Marc Prensky introduced in 2001, David S.
White and Alison Le Cornu suggested in 2011 the terms “visitors” and
“residents” as better descriptions of different people’s (and
generations’) engagement with new technologies. Indeed, younger
generations reside in the digital, while predigital generations just
visit it, though increasingly often. However, the opposite is also
true: digital residents just visit the real world for some residual
needs, but they always hurry to return to the digital environment.
The old world is still putting up a fight. Legacy systems of
family upbringing and education still require sizable effort in
exchange for delayed rewards. But such a balance is unnatural for
digital natives. Parents bribe their children with tablets to keep them
entertained and buy themselves some time. The touchscreen devices
stimulate children’s curiosity with the click’s irresistible instant
reward and thus shape their sensorium and their moral evolution.
Digital natives are fit for their new environment but not for
the old one. Coaches complain that teenagers are unable to hold a
hockey stick or do pull-ups. Digital natives’ peripheral
vision—required for safety in physical space—is deteriorating. With
these deficits come advantages in the digital realm. The eye is
adjusting to tunnel vision—a digital native can see on-screen details
that a digital immigrant can’t see. When playing video games, digital
immigrants still instinctively dodge bullets or blows, but digital
natives do not. Their bodies don’t perceive an imaginary digital threat
as a real one, which is only logical. Their sensorium has readjusted to
ignore fake digital threats that simulate physical ones. No need for an
instinctive fear of heights or trauma: in the digital world, even death
can be overcome by re-spawning. Yet what will happen when millions of
young people with poor grip strength, peripheral blindness, and no
instinctive fear of collision start, say, driving cars? 4
Indeed. Young people today don't know how to carry on conversations and
haven't mastered basic social skills. They're bored and restless unless
they have phones to gaze into. Their attention spans are too short to
allow them to read books. They're unable to
do basic things like change a light bulb, tire, or baby's diaper.
They're becoming obese and unhealthy. They're terrified of the opposite
sex, and don't know how to approach
members of it. Because of the hyperreality of porn, thirty percent of
young men under the age of 40
suffer from erectile dysfunction, formerly an issue associated only
with older men. 5
We've got a huge problem, and we'd better fix it before it's too late.
Fixing Things
If you have children, do not allow them to use digital media at all until and unless they've
mastered reading, basic math, basic social skills, basic physical
skills (e.g., throwing and catching), and have shown competence at a
low-tech skill of choice, such as playing a musical instrument,
building things out of wood, drawing, etc. When they have shown
themselves to have mastered such basics and you do allow them to use
computers, restrict their use to no more than an hour a day or
whatever's necessary to complete homework,
keeping any computer they have access to in a public part of the home.
Limit television to an hour or so a day. Don't get them smartphones,
and don't allow them on social media. If
they must have a phone for some reason, get them phones that only make
phone calls or allow texting and email. Get them involved in scouting,
camping, and other groups and activities that have them active and
learning skills in the real world. Surround them with the tools and
materials they need to engage in hobbies and master things they're
interested in. Make sure they have access to plenty of books, whether
by purchasing them or by making frequent trips to the library.
If it's too late for all that, I propose nine week long
"Re-Boot Camps"
that have the purpose of "re-setting the nervous system," forcing it to
slow down and not rely on instant gratification and hyperreal stimuli. 6
Imagine a group of cabins in the country -- in a place where the Book
of Nature can be easily opened -- all outfitted with the
basics
(running water, plumbing, etc.), but with no technology that didn't
exist before 1990. In addition to the sleeping cabins are two large
community cabins, one, with a kitchen, where meals take place; the
other where classes, games, and dances are organized. The three main
rules of the camps:
1. No phones
2. No internet
3. Participate
Campers are encouraged to bring with them the (low-tech) things they
need to indulge their hobbies and interests -- e.g., musical
instruments, art supplies, books, etc. They're also instructed to bring
one item for a "show and tell" (more later).
Meals -- which are generally high in protein, low in carbohydrates --
are communally eaten at tables of six to invite socializing.
"Conversation cards" are on each table to also stimulate conversation.
For the
first two weeks, seating is assigned and rotates at each meal.
Thereafter, campers choose their own seating. At each breakfast, a
"Book of Nature Bingo" card is handed out to each student so that they
are
motivated to really look at
what they see outdoors; at dinner, whoever has the most filled-out card
is the winner for the day.
Throughout the day, group activities are available -- horseback riding,
hiking, canoeing, archery, birdwatching, swimming (to avoid problems,
everyone is asked to wear knee-length shorts and a long, dark-colored
T-shirt instead
of bathing
suits), etc. These activities are focused on getting the campers to use
and "reintegrate with" their bodies, to socialize, and to experience
the natural world in different ways. Strength-training, boxing, and
grappling for boys are also available, meant to increase their
confidence and sense of physical competence.
Two classes dedicated to basic life skills are offered: cooking classes
start with the very basics, such as how to measure, basic cooking
techniques (broiling, boiling, sauteeing, braising, baking, pan-frying,
deep-frying, etc.), and result in students being able to follow any
recipe with skill; shop classes get students comfortable using
different tools and teach them to be able to make basic objects from
wood, such as boxes or birdhouses. The two mandatory classes are "Basic
Logic" and "The Cardinal Virtues,"
and each is offered in a way that compels and that demonstrates the
importance of reason and the moral virtues to the campers' lives and to
our nations.
Evenings are filled with bonfires, stargazing, game nights, dances, and
weekly classic movies that demonstrate a more "slowed-down" way of life
and old-school social interaction and manners. There's also a "Show and
Tell Night" on which participants have to talk about an object they've
brought from home, explaining its meaning and importance. The purpose
of this event is to get campers used to speaking in front of a group of
people and answering questions on the fly in such a situation.
There is Mass on Sundays -- the traditional Mass, it goes without
saying -- and confession is available multiple times during the week.
By the end of the nine weeks, campers will be "de-toxed" from the
digital world -- able to endure silence with greater equanimity, read
long texts with less mental distraction, and feel more comfortable in
face-to-face interactions with others. Any addiction to online pornography
will be gone, their bodies will be healthier, and their minds clearer.
Footnotes:
1 When I was young, around 14, I was
talking to a cousin by marriage who was a Hollywood camera man (one who
worked on one of my favorite movies, "The Outlaw Josey Wales"). He told
me that I'd be surprised at what some Hollywood actresses actually
look like. He said that some people are just photogenic, and some
aren't, and that those who are beautiful or not-so-beautiful in real
life can fall into either group. As a 14 year old girl, and as someone
who has never been photogenic, I was very relieved to hear that, I
assure you.
2 Ewen, Stuart. All Consuming Images: The Politics of
Style in Contemporary Culture. Basic Books, Inc., 1988
3 This audio comes from a discussion
Benjamin Boyce hosted, on his
Youtube channel, between James Lindsay, Michael Young
(a.k.a. "Wokal Distance"), and himself. The name of the video is
"Critical Critical
Theory Theory | with Wokal Distance and James Lindsay," URL:
https://youtu.be/iLoKoySvxys. Retrieved March 3, 2022.
4 Mir, Andrey. "The Medium is the Menace."
City Journal.
URL:
www.city-journal.org/ubiquitous-digital-media-threaten-to-erode-sensory-and-social-capacities
Retrieved: March 7, 2022.
5 Nguyen, Hoang, Gabrielson, Andrew,
Hellstrom, Wayne. "Erectile Dysfunction in Young Men-A Review of the
Prevalence and Risk Factors." Sex Med Rev. October, 2017. URL:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28642047/ Retrieved: March 7, 2022.
6 I chose a length of 9 weeks because it's
been demonstrated that bad habits take an average of 66 days to break.
See "How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real
world," European Journal of Social Psychology Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 40,
998–1009 (2010) Published online 16 July 2009 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com)