Virtual Mask

I act like a fool. I expect from my entourage a laugh or, at least, a smile: this is the role that my attitude requires. Two possibilities open to my interlocutor: to consent to play the role that I impose to him, even if I am not funny he can laugh or smile by politeness, or he can also refuse toI act like a fool. I expect from my entourage a laugh or, at least, a smile: this is the role that my attitude requires. Two possibilities open to my interlocutor: to consent to play the role that I impose to him, even if I am not funny he can laugh or smile by politeness, or he can also refuse to play this scene with me. The attitude of others is therefore imposed on me as a theatrical requirement, which is why the presence of the other is often experienced as a burden. We can thus enjoy the pleasure of solitude since we are no longer obliged to put ourselves on the stage.
Today's social networks are multiplying this staging since we are not only the actors in our lives, but we also become the directors. I cast my friends, I suggest some reactions: a photo of my dog or my children will necessarily cause a burst of "I like" or comments like "too cute". If I post the picture of a dish we say "yum", I will answer "it's orgasmic". It's my birthday ? a  "HB bro" a little in a hurry. I publish an amazing news ? a  "WTF" a little stressed. Our virtual relationships are codified and predetermined; like Pavlov's dogs, we are almost a set of actions and reactions.
This finding could certainly be interpreted as an accusation. We could say, and we often say that facebook is fake, we simulate, we are not ourselves, we invent a life. This is partially true. However, to refuse to play a role on facebook, to remain silent or even to refuse in principle to have a facebook account, is always to play a role. The role of the genuine guy, the role of the intellectual who does not stoop to these nonsense, the role of the busy guy who has no time to lose or the subtle role of one who does not want to play any role. However, whether we like it or not, we are still playing a role. It is therefore wrong to contrast the authenticity of real life with the inauthenticity of facebook. Facebook only accentuates what we are in everyday life. Of course, we play a role on FB, but we do it in our everyday life. There is thus no difference in nature between the virtual and the real, but a difference of degree.
But to speak of the inauthenticity of our life and facebook, is it not already going too far? This would presuppose thate self behind all our masks and we would assume, at the same time, a gap between our true being and our masks. Now, the mask we have chosen to wear, is it not a projection of ourselves? Is there someone real and authentic behind all our masks or are we the sum of all our masks? Is there a single "I" or am I " multiple "?

TAIAMANI HUCK

Commentaires

  1. J adore celui la! Un tres bel exemple presenté avec l appui des reseaux sociaux. Bravo T. 😊

    RépondreSupprimer

Enregistrer un commentaire

Posts les plus consultés de ce blog

Socrates and Dorian Gray

Se libérer du jugement

Le don de la mort.