In Chapter Five of
Digital Dharma, I wrote about
the impending “crisis of contagion” as our Internet connections
collapsed every wall and barrier to the Other. “Television,” I
wrote, “prods us to open our hearts to the world; the Internet
reflects the challenge of dealing with the consequences of such
openness… a sea of memes – idea fragments that flow from brain to
brain, reproducing like viruses” (DD, 90). Reflected
in the Internet are all the symptoms of a dangerously over-active
Fifth Chakra: self-righteous speech that is often arrogant,
over-reactive, dogmatic or fanatical. This unfiltered network gives
equal voice to hate-mongers, liars, and unscrupulous profiteers and
purveyors of pornography and rapidly-spreading viruses. For every
online Utopian community,
there’s another full of seduction and anger. (DD, 95)
I
balanced this dark portrayal with the hope
that we would find a way to truly see the gift in this technology
that has pushed us into direct contact with all the truths – about
our constructed false selves, our secrets and lies, and all the dark
places – that we repress, suppress and deny. As we are forced to
see the Other in every blog post, tweet or news-feed, we often
respond by building stronger defenses and boundary walls to keep the
“foreign contagion” out of our system, or countering with even
more of the same – excessive “presentation of the self” that
takes the form of nonstop talking, poor listening, or outright lying.
As our world gets more complex and integrated, where former
“outsiders” no longer keep their mouths shut, it is no surprise
that for many frightened folks, the answer is to build higher walls
and ban outsiders, challenge the idea of “truth itself,” making
all values transient figments of fleeting clashing subcultures, and
dropping down to safer forms of one-way discourse such as Twitter
(DD, 88-9).
Ten
years ago I warned that in a communications
environment where everyone has a voice, and multiple “truths” run
free, “being connected to everyone all the time” can easily
overwhelm our brain’s defense systems. In a world of what William
Gibson described as “deliriously multiple viewpoints, shot through
with misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories and a
quotidian degree of madness” (DD, 100), I suggested that simply
building bigger firewalls and loading our computers with more and
more anti-virus software, would
not protect us. We
needed to both
turn inwards and outwards: participating in smaller, intimate
communities, where we could drop our masks and ego posturing; and
also begin to build links to “trusted
sources” that
could validate
and verify the swirl of conflicting “truths” coming our way.
These
conflicting responses – more walls and more “hyper-curated
pretend-selves”
on one hand, and the pull of
staying
in safe communities, have
only increased in the intervening decade. We’ve
seen
the continued proliferation of special-interest sharing and support
forums, “the
private spaces where people gather to share information they might
not be willing to broadcast publicly, or behave in ways they might
not want their friends to know about.” Facebook
itself, whose entire business model has been focused on getting users
to “share as much information as they could, as publicly as
possible” in its electronic town square, recently turned to
promoting, as New
York Times’
business writer Kevin
Roose wrote,
“its gated subdivisions” [Behind
the Velvet Ropes of Facebook’s Private Groups
(7/16/17)].
While
these groups are a healthy response to media overexposure, and
reflect our human hunger for the safety and intimacy of trusted small
group connection, trusting
only
one’s
friends at the expense of respected experts, seems to be a new
cultural fault line. In
some communities, science
itself is under attack, and more and more people prefer to
communicate from safely within their “thought silos,” taking
their cue from their Twitter feeds and online
“taste
buddies.”
Finding
a way to step outside of our comfortable though environments without
being overwhelmed remains a core challenge.
Our
“digital dharma work” is to make a jump in consciousness – in
Ken Wilber’s words, “from relativism to holism, or from pluralism
to integralism”
(DD, 88), simultaneously living in multiple overlapping hyperlinked
networks, where everything and everyone are connected, where the true
face of the Other cannot be avoided, all while maintaining one’s
unique, but permeable, center.
One
way to strengthen our ability to live in these multiple worlds is to
strengthen our core Self through meditation practice: clearing the
memory buffers and brain chatter that confuse and distract. These
moments of silence are the “inner firewalls” against the waves of
electronic stimuli that surround us all. From
this place of deep quiet we can begin to perceive the whole web of
illusion, beyond appearances and habitual concepts, to the true state
of non-duality which modulates all reality. As media scholar Marshall
McLuhan told us 60-years-ago, pay
attention to the underlying medium, not the message.
Mindfulness
meditation is, in effect, a process of observing the instruction
codes of our consensual reality come and go, without actually
downloading them and running their embedded programs of thoughts,
emotions and attachments. From this place of unity consciousness, we
can be both a “node on the network” and an observer of the
network
cloud, with all of its lightning and data storms. In earlier
posts I suggested some “cyber-mediations”
and offered “ambient
awareness” as one way to help us with “Twitter overload.”
They seem as timely today as when I first
wrote them in 2007, and in my follow-up blog posts.