A relationship is not of an inferior quality merely because it exists or is sustained because of online interaction. A friendship is a relationship based on genuine, mutual affection or shared interests. As such, the exact methods by which two people communicate and bond do not determine whether they are or are not friends to begin with; that is for them to decide.
Some people might subjectively prefer to talk with friends in person, while others might prefer the flexible convenience of texting or some other form of digital communication. Is one kind of social orientation more legitimate than they other? One's approach reduces down to preference and circumstance, and either fundamental method of communication (conversations in person and digital conversations respectively) is capable of sparking or preserving deep relationships.
There are certainly elements of in-person interaction that are missing from other forms of social interaction, but this does not mean that even any friendships supported primarily or entirely by these alternate methods are illegitimate or incomplete. It only means that the other communication methods do not include the fullest range of physical or verbal expression. The only inherent requirement for friendship is the mutual willingness of two people to be friends.
Logical facts will not stop irrational people from continuing to make invalid assertions about friendship, technology, and the internet in general. They can encourage those who enjoy fulfilling or helpful relationships precisely because of contemporary technology, however. Those who invoke assumptions will simply be incapable of understanding the positive uses of technology for what they are. Appealing to traditional ways of life, those who are reluctant to coexist with amoral technological trends tend to be as vocal as they are unintelligent.
Do you have any tips on how to properly and maturely deal with irrational people in general? Especially if they're family?
ReplyDeleteI have found that many people in my life don't want to be thought of as irrational or as if they are unconcerned with truth, even when a three minute conversation reveals that they are selfish imbeciles who don't even seem to understand the importance of basic logical axioms. When someone won't retreat from some fallacy or moral error, putting them in situations where they are forced to talk about the issues in front of other people can get their attention. While there might not be any personal offense that they committed against you, this still follows the same basic outline of action Jesus endorses in Matthew 18 (you can move from private confrontation to confrontation that is more public in nature if they don't respond appropriately). If irrational people won't change their worldview or actions after private conversations, pointing out their errors in front of people whom they want to like them can at least convince them to keep silent, lest they be refuted openly and perhaps ridiculed by others as a result.
DeleteEver since I became a rationalist, I've had some kind of family tension because of it, and my other relationships were also deeply impacted. I only know of a single other rationalist fortunate enough to avoid having any serious family troubles due to his rationalism! I have vented to my best friend many times about interactions with irrational family members, acquaintences, and strangers, and she has done the same to me. Talking about frustration with friends is a great way to at least never let anger build up to the point where it becomes hard to control. As long as you aren't objectively mistreating irrational people and you don't wish for them to be unjustly harmed or to never find redemption, there is nothing wrong with experiencing anger, but it is very healthy to openly address frustration if it is otherwise likely to damage a relationship you still want to preserve in some way. I am very selective with the people I choose to invest in relationships with, but there have been a few cases where I still wanted to maintain contact with a fairly hypocritical or fallacious person because I liked them as individuals when they were not being irrational. Regularly talking about your frustrations with a close friend can help those relationships with irrational people survive the stupidity of the other party.
Ok thanks. I do struggle with letting what people think about me bother me so much or letting bitterness consume me to the point where it just ruins my day. Like you said anger is healthy, but it's pretty hard on me, mental health-wise. So I'm trying relinquish a little bit of that energy so that I'm calmer and less emotionally distressed.
DeleteI have never personally struggled with caring about what people think of me, but I know that it can be quite draining to deal with that concern. If you are slandered or misunderstood (as happens to many rationalists), I hope you can focus on the fact that you are very intelligent, that anyone who does not share the love of truth is beneath you, and that their perceptions of you can be ignored. I would also recommend simply distancing yourself from anyone who has made it clear that they don't care about reason or morality if you can. That lets you avoid seeing them do or say things that will frustrate you further while also giving them time to change. Most people do not tend to change for the better in any significant way, but at least you can have more peace!
DeleteSorry for responding a little late, thanks for the advice! It is definitely my goal to be at peace, especially with the season I'm in.
DeleteIt most likely is just because of my anxiety disorder, but I've had a recurring strong feeling during my panic attacks that God is distant or impersonal, and that feeling has never really terrified me before. I do understand and rationally accept the necessary proof that there's an uncaused cause of the universe and it does seem like there's strong support for Christianity. I guess it's just that I'm not emotionally registering it currently. I've let it kind of frighten me into thinking something like "oh no, am I not Christian anymore?!!"
I don't know if any of this makes sense, but maybe you've experienced something like this during one of your existential crises. Is there any truths you could help me remember and put my mind to rest? It feels silly to ask but can I know for certain that I still have a grasp on my faith in Christ, despite the intense dread I feel?
I'm so sorry for my own late reply! Thanks to work and some recent family activities, it took me longer than I expected to find the time to focus on replying.
DeleteI have indeed been terrified by the possibility of an impersonal (and even amoral) deity. Because the personal/moral nature of the uncaused cause cannot be fully revealed one way or the other by logic, I had to ask myself if I was a Christian a few years ago, given that I also explicitly admitted that belief in an unproven thing is irrational, even when there is a great deal of evidence for it. The analogy of human friendships helped me at times. I thought about how any close friendships I have might turn out to be one-sided despite all appearances to the contrary, just as it is genuinely possible for the uncaused cause to be quite different from the Biblical notion of God. Still, a plethora of evidence that a particular friendship is healthy combined with a simultaneous lack of evidence that the friendship is illusory would mean that there is no basis for treating a mere possibility without any support as if it is a likelihood. In light of the evidence, I committed to friendships that demonstrably appeared to be mutual, just as I committed to Christianity because there is blatant evidence for it (even though God might not desire a relationship with me or any other human).
Some logical possibilities can certainly be terrifying at times, but focusing on the fact that a possibility is not true just because it is possible might help alleviate some of that terror over time. I have also found that the very fact that an uncaused cause exists, regardless of its nature beyond its literal function of an uncaused cause, has some very positive personal implications: if an uncaused cause exists, the possibility of my life having the capacity for genuine meaning is not only possible in the sense that there is no internal contradiction, but also possible in the sense that very thing necessary for my life to have meaning does exist in some form. I can't prove that the uncaused cause is personal or that it has a moral nature, but I can go beyond its mere existence and grasp the plentiful evidence suggesting that Yahweh is the uncaused cause.
There is no genuine evidence at all that the uncaused cause is impersonal, just as there is no genuine evidence that a seemingly healthy friendship is a facade. I think it should also be at least somewhat reassuring that you are bothered by the situation specifically when it comes to your allegiance to Christianity. The fact that you are so concerned about your commitment to Christianity is an indicator that you are indeed still committed to Christ! I hope that you will enjoy a deep emotional connection to Christianity in the near future, but a lack of emotion certainly does not indicate a lack of commitment on your part. You have not walked away from Christianity in any regard simply because you are experiencing anxious thoughts, panic attacks, or emotional disconnects. That you would even ask me these questions serves as an outward sign that you are committed to Christianity, even despite the existential terror you are feeling!