If no one will stick up for groupthink, I will.
For the uninitiated, “groupthink” is a term coined the 70′s that the old and crotchety have begun attacking the internet geneartion with. The argument is that as communication networks have grown, teenagers and young people rely on the opinions of others to form their own identity and stifles the creation of truly unique thought.
However, most would do well to remember Steven Johnson’s national bestseller “Everything Bad is Good For You”, which argued for the merits of bad habits everywhere. Videogames, Television, almost nothing was out of bounds. Although there was a lot of criticism against the book, the lesson learned was that for every bad habit that takes away from the old way of doing things, a new skill is learned.
As for groupthink, what from outside seems to be an increase in intellectual internet-based collectvism doesn’t take into account the huge percentage of people who are not participating but watching and learning the difference between genuine ideas and agenda-motivated ideological pushing.
Or put simply,
because we are connected and constantly observed and aggregated, the truly talented and special know how to stand out and be an individual.
So the next time you hear someone bemoan the loss of original creative thought, don’t be afraid to feel a little entitled to feeling part of something new. A generation so aware of its collectivism that we’ve learned to discern out the real gems of humanity. And more cat videos than you could shake a stick at.
Popularity: 3% [?]
I agree that while we perform these “bad habits”, we are simultaneously gaining some skill in the process. That is encouraging. However, are the “new skills” we are learning better than the old skills we learned through the old ways of doing things? For example, instant messaging (new way) vs. talking (old way, before instant messaging).
Older folk might criticize today’s youth for instant messaging online. While instant messaging, there is no direct, personal contact with others, and you can spend as much time as you want thinking about what you are going to say. Thus, one could argue that instant messaging is an impersonal, cheapened form of interaction compared to talking on the phone or talking face to face. However, instant messaging does teach you how to convey emotion through nonconventional mediums (i.e. emoticons), handle miscommunications, improve your typing speed, etc. Conversely, talking to people (on the phone or face to face) teaches you to think on your feet, convey emotion vocally, confront people directly, etc.
The question is: which set of skills is most desirable; the skills that we learn online or the skills that might be learning offline? The answer is certainly subjective, but these are choices each person makes every day. I can only qualify the dilemma and say that every activity has advantages and unique skills to offer.