More Simple or More Complex?
by Caroline McCarty
This is a response to S. Ray’s recent entry about Augmented Reality and the evolution of human consciousness. Many questions are posed- you are invited to respond to these questions, as public discussion is the festive and appropriate next step.
As information's accessibility increases, does it simplify or complicate our social conectedness? Photo by Mike J. Burke
Augmented Reality has allowed us to modify our individual perspectives of the world. Because of our access to the world via the internet and our cell phones, blackberries, IPhones, etc. we are able to “see” or be connected with the rest of the world in a more intimate manner. As a result, we are able to see the world in a way that I, as many other observers, like to call “global localism”. This phenomenon will forever change a connected individual’s perception.
Not only are we more in tune with local issues and trends in our own towns, we are more in tune with what’s going on around the world on a more local level. We have more access than ever to news, history, trends, and culture in the smallest of villages around the world. On top of that, we can access our own local news from anywhere in the world, as long as there is a phone line or internet connection. It is surprising how accessible phones and internet are. Who isn’t connected these days? A sattelite phone provides a signal from even the most remote of places.
Does this enable us as citizens of the world to all be closer to the same wave length? Is this the telekinesis and telepathy that is realistically possible across cultures so we can be on the same level? Maybe it will allow us to relate to each other on a higher level. For example, look at the current discrimination situation (what a rhyme!) in the U.S. with same sex marriage. Same sex marriage is a regular, accepted idea in many countries around the world. In many places, it would be taboo to forbid it! Our connectedness to the world could enhance social views and quell the unfortunate stigma that many people attach to same sex marriage.
On the contrary, does this make humanity more complex due the profound abundance of information? Does this accessibility create more opinions?
What is it going to be like for the humans who are born in 2010? How are the new technologies (including the technologies that are yet to come) going to shape this generation? I wonder if the next generation of children will miss out on the wonders of building blocks and tree forts; perhaps they will be more intent on connecting with peers, being network-driven. Perhaps this Augmented Reality will forever change the concept of (non-political) socialism.
I know many people who worry that this is a regression, but I believe that it is up to us to treat Augmented Reality as an advancement rather than a regression. We can allow the habit of Augmented Reality to become a vice, or we can use it as a tool to further improve our quality of existence.
We are evolving especially thanks to technological advances and its affect on our access to information. Global consciousness is an ocean that we have merely dipped our toes in. We just need to make sure that we use it as a tool, as opposed to a toy.
well said
” Remapping The Brain
In the end, the shift from hard-copy maps to computer apps may be changing the way we think. Brain researchers tell us that most humans travel from known geography to unknown geography in two different ways — by using spatial strategy (such as reading maps) or by stimulus-response methods (such as trial end error or interacting with a GPS system). When it comes to a preferred tack, the population is split about in half.
Writer Alex Hutchinson explores this phenomenon in a recent issue of the Canadian magazine The Walrus. “Neuroscientists are starting to uncover a two-way street: our brains determine how we navigate, but our navigational efforts also shape our brains,” Hutchinson writes. “The experts are picking up some worrying signs about the changes that will occur as we grow accustomed to the brain-free navigation of the GPS era.”
Hutchinson explains that someone who prefers spatial navigation relies on the hippocampus, a part of the brain that plays an important role in memory. And someone who moves around by stimulus-response methods tends to rely on a part of the brain called the caudate nucleus, a center of motor control. He bases his work on research conducted by neuroscientist Veronique Bohbot of McGill University and others.
Extrapolating from studies of mice in mazes, Bohbot “fears that over reliance on GPS, which demands a hyper-pure form of stimulus-response behavior, will result in our using the spatial capabilities of the hippocampus less, and that it will in turn get smaller,” Hutchinson writes. “Other studies have tied atrophy of the hippocampus to increased risk of dementia.”
“We can only draw an inference,” Bohbot tells Hutchinson. “But there’s a logical conclusion that people could increase their risk of atrophy if they stop paying attention to where they are and where they go.”
And for generations heading into old age, that is alarming. If forgetting how to read maps leads to forgetting everything else, then that is where we — and our brains — may eventually end up: in a cul-de-sac of forgetfulness. “- Linton Weeks
Read the entire story at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124608376
good find bro D! the article you quote further backs up the official high con stance that nav units are, technically speaking, fucked. we’ve all had some fun with them but there is no substitution for good orienteering and navigational skills.