The Generation Gap

Today's post will on the magic of generational differences-but only on the subject area in how technology changes the way generations work, play, and live.

My generation (generation.com, not the millenials or gen X) was the first generation to grow up with personal computers, Internet, porn sites, and all things digital. This must be prefaced now, in that our generation understands common modern technology better than any other-from how to activate blue tooths, to syncing all your electronics to a cloud, to even figuring out what in the hell your IP address is. We are used to computers and all the advancements they bring about

A tangent on computers: The technology has revolutionized every field of research, art, and industry the world over. We have advanced scientific machines that can process infinitesimal amounts of data by specific computer programs; there are blogs and post sites to allow immediate documentation to occur in media and private sources; there are cameras and microphones for immediate, trans-global communication to occur; mobile devices that can create an augmented reality for amusements sake; computer generated images (CGI) that almost appear lifelike (and some not so much). In short-if you can imagine a field of interest, computers have augmented it in some serious manner or another, and people of my generation have come not just to respect that, but to expect that.

Our generation is one of progress at a digital speed. We expect every 18 months for our world to be changed and advanced. Admittedly, we have attention problems, but we also know better than anyone how to find out what we want to know. The world is literally at our fingertips and we take full advantage of that fact. We play with lasers, we video chat with our phones (capt. Kirk, eat your heart out), we manage all our information on a thick sheet of paper (basically), the longest average life spans in history (due to medicine technology), and a friggin host of millions of other things. Our generation is the one of science fiction, and basically the best that has ever lived. Ok, that may not be true. But we are still going to be most industrious generation in over a century.

Which brings me to the main of this post. My generation is now entering into the professional working force in full force. The late generation X has done their part as well in developing the technologies of today and tomorrow, lest we forget that Google, Microsoft, and Apple were all created by early Gen X'ers. But as my generation really takes center stage, we are faced with what many generations face-adversity from the older fellas.

To explain what I mean, I am going to give a short history. Technology and advancement is always considered to be new and dangerous until tested-this is how humans function. Now remember earlier how I said that there hasn't been a generation as industrious as mine in over a century? I was just trying to attempt a pun, as well as be partially serious. The generation that created the industrial revolution to spark were a generation that saw the world in a new light, understanding that there was a whole realm of progress they could take charge of and change the world with (they had the best intentions, but no knowledge of things like hazard safety or environmental concerns...concepts we advanced in the 20th century). They were frightening to their previous generation because they were game changers, they not only altered the realm of economics into a completely new route (capitalism I mean).

The mentality those industrialists brought remained for decades, until a new lifeblood of economic, as well as societal growth was refined. I speak of Mr. Rockefeller and his oil industry. The crude oil was fine for keeping machines going, and then he discovered how to burn it and make things go. Not only was mass transit a household possibility, it was economical, and the oil also had more applications-heat, lubrication, food, lighting, electricity...it was another game changer. Now that mentality has remained until the 1990's, the Rockefeller legacy of course is still one of the richest that ever existed in the history of the world. The oil barons were considered new money-they capitalized on a natural resource, something that had never successfully been done to a great degree (ore's were mined of course, but never to a rich vein and by one company/person either). They also remade the legal aspects of how companies functioned-they brought about conglomerates and international corporations that spanned the world. Companies were publicly traded because what they sold was immaterial, so they could sell immaterial stocks.

The 90's brought about the next major game changer-the personal computer, and the late Gen X. The computer was novel-it made office work and statistics and money management simple and affordable-professional level without the professional costs or wasted paper. But the computer itself only goes so far-the Internet was the ultimate in game changing. Now technology had presented a way to capitalize on information. It's taken over 20 years for it to become stable, consistent, and secure enough to really be efficient. In those 20 years, the next generation came about to use that technology- to create sites that you could make a brilliant amount of money in just cheap advertising alone. We changed the game again- now giants had to compete with people not needing them anymore. Mass marketing, mass communication, and self advertising were all possible without those conglomerates that Rockefeller helped to create.

Now these companies are mad that they aren't needed anymore. Look at how the world has hit an economic slump, the world needed a viable solution of bypassing companies that needed massive bailouts to keep their function alive, and the internet provided that solution-with intelligent entrepeneurs from a younger more creative generation who could see the full potential in the technologies of their time. We created sites, and technologies, to go around those large companies. Giant websites became fortune 500 companies, billionaires were created under the age of 30, let alone 40. Like everytime the game changes, the older generation is afraid of change, and try to stop the change from happening.

There are new bills out in Congress right now that are supposedly for the protection of the people-by policing the internet and preventing pirates from getting away with stealing. However, these bills have no teeth, they are only meant to control the content of what Americans are allowed to put on the internet-all because some large companies are mad that they won't be top dogs anymore. So it goes, and so it will always be. I don't want this post to be about the SOPA and PIPA bills being tossed around right now because I know they won't succeed, and neither will their inevitable successors. We of the generation the bills are specifically tailored to combat, know our technology too well and efficiently to be stopped by older generations who don't know the same tricks, or value the smaller things that people appreciate. Such as blogging, Youtube videos and the like-would all become policed and extremely restrictive towards content.

With that being said, welcome to the world of tomorrow. We, the Dot Commers, are coming to be in charge of this blue ball we call Earth, get used to it.

What is in a Mind

Having spent a long time in college, and even longer analyzing the human condition, I have noticed that people think in different ways. I follow closer to what common psychology models as the four areas of personal thought- being on two sides: Concrete/Abstract and Random/Sequential. Not that I believe something as complex as the human psyche can be condensed so crudely, but that it does give a common ground to which we can analyze and interpret the ways in which we all think, work, react, dream...

I have spent a great deal of time the last few months in a rather deep contemplative state regarding myself, those around me, those imaginary, those whose fabrication is only third hand to me etc.

It is interesting to begin with that I believe the saying "opposites attract" is more or less complete bullshit (when regarding relationships we form with people). I mean this in a long term idea- that without more common interest than not, any relationship will be completely strained. I took for an example of a friend I used to have. He was a drummer, a metal head, a bit of an emo, wandered from girl to girl with bad relationships all around. And here I was, musical, but seeing the world as a medical professional in training, and the only reason he and I were friends to begin with was because of marching band and classes. Well of course he dropped out of college to chase a girl, which ended with him calling me several times a month with tales of him being abused (physically, emotionally, mentally) and me saying the same damn thing every time: bite the bullet, get the hell out of there.

The point is, these sorts of problems persisted, and I noticed our "common ground"-that marching band, had been the only real glue to keep us as friends. Now that he was no longer in college we had nothing in common. We were too opposite of each other to work well. He was a good person, we both liked music, but not even the same music, and therefor a simple friendship was out of it.

You always hear of couples that are "opposite," such as the outgoing social butterfly with the mousy homebody. Now honestly-have you ever actually met this couple? Did they ever actually last (meaning in any long term duration)? Most likely not. Why? Because they are socially opposed. You have to understand that how you work socially is how you recharge your batteries so to speak. If you are outgoing, you relax and unwind through groups of people, while an introvert will prefer being at home by themselves. Now consider that most people work the 9-5, with the M-F week, and so they have weekends and evening together. So what do they do to keep common interests between each other? This is a tricky situation for EVERYONE in these relationships-not just romantic mind you. These things fail because they may have the same likes in subject matters-same tastes in music, literature, art... but they fail on how they approach these.

Now to bring back the foursquare idea. You may find someone who is a concrete-sequential that works well with an abstract-sequential or concrete-random. They remain on the same side of the rainbow, just on opposite ends, or same end different sides. So you know of that friend that always thinks in terms of logical sequence-one line of thought impeccably traceable from start to end. you know exactly how they reach their conclusions and where they started from. They can work with the concrete-random person who-you can follow his sequences in logical fashion, may jump points randomly, the kind of person who goes from A-C in a way. They could also be just as happy with an Abstract-Sequential who will jump topics but still follow a solid path. The multitasker is a good way to think of this person-they can follow several topics at once and just sort of moves between them. However the Abstract-Random just will never fly. They just pop from topic and point within the topic and don't really care to follow through with them or complete them. This is because of how people perceive and reflect the world. A person who views the world very sequentially, very black and white, but orderly, would not be able to comprehend the person who gets excited about the idea of a bird flying and immediately jumps to how butterflies pollinate flowers and sees the world in varying shades of fish. They perceive the same world too differently from each other to really effectively communicate.

If you have ever been around those people diametrically opposed to you, you know exactly how frustrating it can be. You try to explain something to them that you believe is the easiest way to get the point across-and they just stare at you blankly. Then they try and explain it how they see it, and you just scratch your head and wonder how they got THAT out of what you said. Can you think of anyone like that you spend a significant amount of your time around? I doubt it, though as humans we are remarkable and unpredictable in a way.

Then you have personality conflicts. You can go big between people- like morality. You are wronged for one reason or another, and you are given the opportunity to kill the person who wronged you, and you can get away with it. Do you? Or do you just live and let live? These examples are obvious and usually noticed at the start of getting to know a person.

Or you can go smaller- think about your favorite piece of art. Think WHY it is your favorite piece- is it because of it's color schemes? The contours it creates? The period it represents? The artist? The message of the piece? Now consider the person right next to you. What is their favorite work of art? Why do you think that they think that? Think about it.

You love Bernini's Apollo and Daphne because of its soft, fluid nature depicting the familial love only siblings can know. The person next to you is far more interested in Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire because of it's tightly wound, ingenious construction of such impossible density, that only a true master could pull it off. You don't care how Bernini made the piece, you merely enjoy the aesthetics, that it is made out of an impossibly dense marble means little, that it is in a certain specific style is irrelevant; and your friend next to you doesn't particularly care how Pierrot Lunaire sounds, just merely that it is ingeniously crafted.

Now those comparisons make a stronger statement about people's personalities and their abilities to get along, in my opinion. Only because seeing the bigger things about who a person is a lot easier to find out. Most people aren't afraid to ask about life philosophies, religions, beliefs and whatnot. But then getting down to the miniscule details about how a person thinks, communicates, feels, works, analyzes, reacts, likes, dislikes, or any other number of mental engagements that factor into what makes us, "us."

This post is a simple reflection on something I have been spending a great deal of time thinking about over these last few months. It is important to me because I care about how successful I am within relationships, and the only way I figure progress can be made is to try and understand relationships personally, as well as on a larger level.

It is not to say I don't believe that you can make a relationship work with only certain people, on the contrary I believe that a person can have a good relationship with anyone, just a matter of figuring out the length and strength to give those relationships. You can make a long lasting friendship or romantic relationship work with a diametrically opposite person, as long as the both of you are willing to patiently work hard for it, that though, is entirely up to you.

A deep philisophical thought

So ya...the world is supposed to end at the end of this year. So are there going to be a bunch of Christians running around with pickets claiming the end of the world? I ask this because-the concept of the world ending is uniquely a Mayan thing...so by Christian standards, pagan.

So if you see a bunch of cross wielding picketers telling you the world is going to end, they probably are just doom-sayers. Yay!