# Globalisation/Internet - are they damaging our knowledge of Geography?



## maxiogee

pedro0001 said:


> Once a chinese asked me if Brazil was the Capital of Argentina. I also laughed but that's the current situation in this world.
> Can you imagine how would all had been before the Globalization, before Internet?





maxiogee said:


> I don't see how globalization or the internet relate to the state of people's ignorance of other nations.
> When I was a child we had geography lessons. They taught us where countries were and what the capital cities were. (Then the British and other colonial powers went and gave their colonies independence and they changed their names!)





pedro0001 said:


> I do see how, but that would be a topic for another thread.





almostfreebird said:


> I agree with maxiogee but vote for Pedro.
> Sorry I couldn't resist, Napoleon Dynamite.



Okay, here we go. What am I missing about globalisation/the internet which  raises people's geographical ignorance.



--edit--
sorry for the typo in the title.


----------



## fenixpollo

From my point of view:
The only way that the internet could help our knowledge of Geography is as a reference guide. If a person has access to the internet, he can find reliable sources for looking up geographical information.
The way that the internet could hurt our knowledge of Geography is that those of us with access to the internet don't have to *know* anything anymore. The internet makes knowledge cheap and frees us from memorizing the capital of Brazil (or Argentina).

Two related issues: 
Most people do not have access to the internet.
Globalization may or may not be related to the internet.


----------



## pedro0001

I've extracted some points from Wikipedia (I hope this is allowed): I I recomend to read the complete text.

"The concept (Globalization) has been referred to as The shrinking of time and space."

Characteristics of the Globalization:
Greater international cultural exchange,
Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity, for example through the export of Hollywood and Bollywood movies. However, the imported culture can easily supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity through hybridization
Greater international travel and tourism
Moderator Note: Forum rules limit quotations of text to four sentences.  Please follow Pedro's suggestion and read the entire entry.


----------



## fenixpollo

Then, I suppose that Globalization will help our knowledge of geography because more people will be able to tell you where Bollywood is.


----------



## cuchuflete

Hybridization is a source of diversity in nature.  The quoted material implies that hybridization is the same as homogenization.  A hybrid is a new form of something.  It doesn't necessarily supplant or kill off its parents.  

The internet and globalisation have little, if anything, to do with how well or badly most people know geography.


----------



## cirrus

I would have though that far from damaging our knowledge, it would expand it. Just click on google earth and watch time vanish as you fly over whole countries!  If anything I find that instead of countries and capitals being mere lists, I find that I am interacting with people from all over the world.  Many are from places I would struggle to visit and probably hadn't even heard of before.  Take as an example the increasing number of Chinese people who participate in this forum - could you have imagined that ten or more years ago?


----------



## Tsoman

African geography quiz

http://www.ilike2learn.com/ilike2learn/africa.html

I got an 85%


----------



## fenixpollo

As cirrus said, there's a difference between the static knowledge necessary to pass a quiz and the applicable knowledge that actually enriches one's understanding of the world.


----------



## pedro0001

fenixpollo said:


> Then, I suppose that Globalization will help our knowledge of geography because more people will be able to tell you where Bollywood is.



You can laugh, but yes. I don't say that Globalization will solve the educational problems of a country. I just say that thanks to the globalization and internet the people have much more chances of knowing and realizing new things of this world. And you are right. Most people don't have internet. Most people don't even know what Internet is. But even so.

I will give you an example. Today I watched some news about Romania w.r.t. the integration to the EU. One of the topics was which impact would have the agriculture of the country after the integration. The farmers couldn't give many opinions about that because they didn't even know what the EU is. Don't you think that thanks to the integration they will have now the oportunity to know that exist an EU?

It may be a stupid example, but is a valid one, and which shows my point of view.


----------



## cirrus

pedro0001 said:


> One of the topics was which impact would have the agriculture of the country after the integration. The farmers couldn't give many opinions about that because they didn't even know what the EU is. Don't you think that thanks to the integration they will have now the oportunity to know that exist an EU?



Do you think globalisation and European integration are the same process then?  I think of them as separate.


----------



## pedro0001

cirrus said:


> Do you think globalisation and European integration are the same process then?  I think of them as separate.



No, I don't think that is the same process. I think that the EU is a consequence of the Globalization.


----------



## Alxmrphi

What an odd question!

The internet has made me SO SO SO SO much more aware of geography, I have played on map quizes, called "The geography game" series, I look at more pictures of maps when I'm online (I wouldn't do anyway)

I am so open to much more information and knowledge, I can't bring my head to understand what would make you open this thread, without the net, we'd be chatting to other people in our own local areas, what would we learn there that's better than the internet?


----------



## ElaineG

I agree with Alex and Cirrus.  I know many more people from around the world thank to the Internet.  I hear directly them from about their countries, cultures and experiences.  Beyond communicating directly on forums like this one, the proliferation of blogs makes it possible to read the views of a Kenyan, an Iraqi, a Filipino etc. etc. all while sitting at your desk.  One stunning example was the Where is Raed blog, where a young Iraqi man blogged about his and his family's experiences throughout the American invasion from Baghdad -- pre-Internet it would have been simply impossible to read that stuff, no less in real time.

Plus, now, when I have a question about geography, I look it up.  Growing up we had this decrepit old atlas from when my mother was in school in the 1950s that had pre-post-colonial Africa and Asia in it.  I had to do a report on Togo once, and it wasn't in my atlas.  By contrast, a 7 year old friend of mine the other day had a question about Australian aborigines after seeing a movie at school, and we were able to find articles, maps, pictures and history within seconds.

For those in the world that have the Internet, and the number is not _that_ small -- in late 2005, 1 billion people worldwide had Internet access: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/18/060518163500.mk2075cs.html, I can only believe that the Internet is broadening their knowledge of the world and its geography.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Alex_Murphy said:


> I am so open to much more information and knowledge, I can't bring my head to understand what would make you open this thread, without the net, we'd be chatting to other people in our own local areas, what would we learn there that's better than the internet?



About our local environment? ABout the people who live near us? How to organise to do something about the corruption in local government?

At least we'd be out in the fresh air talking to real people!


----------



## Alxmrphi

Welshname said:
			
		

> About our local environment? ABout the people who live near us? How to organise to do something about the corruption in local government?
> 
> At least we'd be out in the fresh air talking to real people!



How do you think Fathers for justice or the Anti-war rally were arranged? By phone calls? Nope.... Internet.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Alex_Murphy said:


> How do you think Fathers for justice or the Anti-war rally were arranged? By phone calls? Nope.... Internet.



When farmers grow crops and babies get their nappies changed on the internet, then I'll be convinced


----------



## Alxmrphi

Convinced of what lol? That doesn't mean that the internet is very important in exposing corrupt government or unpopular policies


----------



## duckie

With the internet (and globalization in general) people have a greater incentive to learn about geography than they used to. They also have much better opportunities to facilitate their interest.

Worshipping at the altar of Google Earth.. praise ye pixels & coordinates for in thee our river of knowledge floweth


----------



## maxiogee

So if the internet and globalisation are seen as 'aids' to a knowledge of geography —> how poor is the level of geography teaching? It is widely bruited that American children do not know their way around an atlas.


----------



## Alxmrphi

maxiogee said:


> So if the internet and globalisation are seen as 'aids' to a knowledge of geography —> how poor is the level of geography teaching? It is widely bruited that American children do not know their way around an atlas.



Well that's pretty much a universal fact anyway, but I don't think "awareness" and "teaching" equate here, I forgot about GoogleEarth like duckie said, however, "geography" teaching might be bad/worse but that certainly isn't because _*of*_ the internet.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Alex_Murphy said:


> Convinced of what lol? That doesn't mean that the internet is very important in exposing corrupt government or unpopular policies



I wouldn't deny that the internet is an excellent learning tool (for those that have access to it). But it's not real life


----------



## Alxmrphi

But it organises SO many things that actually happen in real life, that wouldn't happen (or not on the same scale) without the internet, it is a vital key to real life.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Alex_Murphy said:


> But it organises SO many things that actually happen in real life, that wouldn't happen (or not on the same scale) without the internet, it is a vital key to real life.



But it can't be, because so many people - billions still - who don't have access, still lead a 'real life'. It's a great tool, and I use it a lot (it means I can work from home), but I also remember how things were before it took off and recall being able to function perfectly well


----------



## maliliana

I don't see how  Internet and globalization can be a menace to geography or knowledge of our political position in the world. 
To me internet and globalization are helping us to understand the wolrd in all aspects including geography of course. These two matters are providing us information about everything we need to know to understand the world by having a much faster approach to it.
If there were any relation between what you say I don't see it anywhere.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

maliliana said:


> I don't see how  Internet and globalization can be a menace to geography or knowledge of our political position in the world.
> To me internet and globalization are helping us to understand the wolrd in all aspects including geography of course. These two matters are providing us information about everything we need to know to understand the world by having a much faster approach to it.
> If there were any relation between what you say I don't see it anywhere.



GLobalisation means above all globalisation of the mass media and the economy, and in that sense it's never going to lead to a general broadening of horizons. The American media, for example, are in very few hands, and have been impressing their conservative, pro-market, WASPish worldview on the international public (now 'consumers') for a long time now.

The internet too has a massive downside, in that it tends to make us intellectually lazy. Instead of learning things properly, we just Google for information and regurgitate it. Information overload ensures that five minutes later we've usually forgotten most of it. We think we're smarter than we are.


----------



## duckie

Saying that the internet is not 'real life' is similar to saying that:

Newspapers are not real life.
Phone conversations are not real life.
Letters are not real life.
Watching tv is not real life.
Painting is not real life.
Reading is not real life.
Commerce is not real life.

I could go on.. the notion is absurd.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

duckie said:


> Saying that the internet is not 'real life' is similar to saying that:
> 
> Newspapers are not real life.
> Phone conversations are not real life.
> Letters are not real life.
> Watching tv is not real life.
> Painting is not real life.
> Reading is not real life.
> Commerce is not real life.
> 
> I could go on.. the notion is absurd.



You could go on, but you wouldn't improve your point. Firstly, I meant it a little tongue in cheek, which one or two others seem to have had no trouble picking up on. Second, at least some of the activities you list involve face to face interaction with actual people ('real life'), which posting on internet message boards doesn't.


----------



## duckie

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> You could go on, but you wouldn't improve your point. Firstly, I meant it a little tongue in cheek, which one or two others seem to have had no trouble picking up on. Second, at least some of the activities you list involve face to face interaction with actual people ('real life'), which posting on internet message boards doesn't.



You may have meant it toungue in cheek, but you expressed the same sentiment in prior posts in this thread, so I guess your oh-so-subtle point must've escaped me.

Secondly, please point out which of the listed activities require physical, in person interaction. I happen to perform all these activities - and many others - both on a physical in-person basis as well as in physical 'isolation'.

Either way, you seem to completely miss the point that the internet is as much 'real life' as any other human endeavour.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

duckie said:


> You may have meant it toungue in cheek, but you expressed the same sentiment in prior posts in this thread, so I guess your oh-so-subtle point must've escaped me.



Evidently. Never mind; it's standard for these forums.



duckie said:


> Secondly, please point out which of the listed activities require physical, in person interaction. I happen to perform all these activities - and many others - both on a physical in-person basis as well as in physical 'isolation'.



Well, you've just answered your own query. 



duckie said:


> Either way, you seem to completely miss the point that the internet is as much 'real life' as any other human endeavour.



Oh really? As real life as reading your child a bedtime story? As a walk across a sunny meadow in summer? As kissing the love of your life? We must live in parallel universes.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

maxiogee said:


> My apology, anti, for any impoliteness you experienced, it was not intended.
> 
> My _insinuation_ is what you read into what I wrote.
> What I was _suggesting_ was that you read his words from a different point of view. I saw him using a modicum of levity to lighten what was shaping up to be a heated discussion.



OK, Maxi. No hard feelings on my part towards any of you. I don't think we were heading for a dust-up of any kind before Fenix's intervention, but I apologise for not expressing my own levity of heart very well.

A good evening to you all!


----------



## GenJen54

*Mod Note: *This thread topic has proven self-fulfilling. Sarcasm, irony and other types of humor requiring in-person human interaction fail to be translate effectively in only two dimensions. 

Let's please get this thread back on topic.


----------



## fenixpollo

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> OK, Maxi. No hard feelings on my part towards any of you. I don't think we were heading for a dust-up of any kind before Fenix's intervention, but I apologise for not expressing my own levity of heart very well.


 Well, allow me to un-intervene and to simply make the point I wanted to make in the first place.  

I agree with you, gwrthgymdeithasol, that the internet is not a place for real communication. Humans rely almost completely on nonverbal communication to extract meaning from their contact with other humans. Since there is none of that on the internet (at this point, anyway), it's not a real place.  The deleted posts above this one attest to that fact and prove your point.

Saludos cordiales.


----------



## maliliana

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> GLobalisation means above all globalisation of the mass media and the economy, and in that sense it's never going to lead to a general broadening of horizons. The American media, for example, are in very few hands, and have been impressing their conservative, pro-market, WASPish worldview on the international public (now 'consumers') for a long time now.
> 
> The internet too has a massive downside, in that it tends to make us intellectually lazy. Instead of learning things properly, we just Google for information and regurgitate it. Information overload ensures that five minutes later we've usually forgotten most of it. We think we're smarter than we are.


 
I understand but I don't blame internet or globalization for my or other's lazynness. 
I think that the original point was specifically for geography and what you say is related to that and to any other subject of knowledege, it does happen to everybody. 
Just as an example I guess it is also what happened to those nice handwrittings of other times when there were no erasers, liquid paper, typewritters, computers and such things and very few people are interested now to learn and use...but still some are, so I sguess what I try to say is that we have choices, it is up to us to look at a map, read a book or google for anything.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

GenJen54 said:


> *Mod Note: *This thread topic has proven self-fulfilling. Sarcasm, irony and other types of humor requiring in-person human interaction fail to be translate effectively in only two dimensions.
> 
> Let's please get this thread back on topic.



Had it gone off topic? Now you tell me! I thought we were carrying out a live experiment to prove me right! :-D



fenixpollo said:


> Well, allow me to un-intervene and to simply make the point I wanted to make in the first place.
> 
> I agree with you, gwrthgymdeithasol, that the internet is not a place for real communication. Humans rely almost completely on nonverbal communication to extract meaning from their contact with other humans. Since there is none of that on the internet (at this point, anyway), it's not a real place.  The deleted posts above this one attest to that fact and prove your point.
> 
> Saludos cordiales.




Thanks, yes, agreed. I hate computers


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

maliliana said:


> I understand but I don't blame internet or globalization for my or other's lazynness.
> I think that the original point was specifically for geography and what you say is related to that and to any other subject of knowledege, it does happen to everybody.
> Just as an example I guess it is also what happened to those nice handwrittings of other times when there were no erasers, liquid paper, typewritters, computers and such things and very few people are interested now to learn and use...but still some are, so I sguess what I try to say is that we have choices, it is up to us to look at a map, read a book or google for anything.



Yes, definitely. It'd be unfair to blame the internet for all of society's ills. We are what we make of ourselves. Ignorant slobs were ignorant slobs before the internet was invented


----------



## GenJen54

gwrthgymdeithasol said:
			
		

> Ignorant slobs were ignorant slobs before the internet was invented


Yes, but the Internet has made armchair intellects of us all.


----------



## divina

I had a friend back in high school who thought Brazil and Egypt were both in Europe. This girl wasn't very smart, and I was friends with her out of convenience if anything. So I believe people are either stupid or smart, and the Internet and Globalization has very little to do with that.


----------



## duckie

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Well, you've just answered your own query.



I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Oh really? As real life as reading your child a bedtime story? As a walk across a sunny meadow in summer? As kissing the love of your life? We must live in parallel universes.



All human endeavours are real life. When I paint, it's real life. You seem to be of the opinion that there's only life when two humans happen to be physically next to each other.

Let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## GenJen54

divina said:


> I had a friend back in high school who thought Brazil and Egypt were both in Europe. This girl wasn't very smart, and I was friends with her out of convenience if anything. So I believe people are either stupid or smart, and the Internet and Globalization has very little to do with that.


This makes a great deal of sense.  I would agree that the Internet itself has little to do with people's intelligence.  However, what the Internet does provide is a means of opening doors that were not always available to people.  

Think about someone living in a fairly isolate, small town.  Their local library may not have the wealth of books and references available in large city or university libraries.  Their local news may cover little more than the weather and the farm report.  For these people, the Internet can open new worlds - some bad, some good.  In this case, I would hope that at least their understanding of the world could be expanded an enhanced. 

On the flip side, people will seek on the Internet what already interests them.  I bumped into some language site because I am fond of languages and culture, so my participatioin supports the knowledge I already have...and greatly enhances it.


----------



## duckie

I disagree with the concept that people only find what they're looking for on the internet, thereby narrowing their exposure to the world. To me it's quite the opposite, I encounter so much I never even knew existed, and the chance that I would have encountered it without the internet would be fairly slim in each case.


----------



## maxiogee

To get back to the topic with which I began this thread.

Are people declining to 'learn' facts which previous generations went to the trouble of learning (be they geographical, historical or otherwise), because they no longer need to know certain things as they "can always look it up on the internet"?


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

I don't see any difference.  When I was in school, you could still "always look something up", in the atlas or encyclopedia.  If you were interested in something, you learned it and retained it.  If you were not interested, you learned it long enough to regurgitate it on demand and then forgot it.  

I don't see my own children or students using the internet as a substitute for learning material.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Isn't this site itself testimony against your point?


----------



## duckie

Testimony against it? As in people being lazy?

I come here because I'm trying to learn Italian.


----------



## pedro0001

Did someone know that southest continental city in the world is in Chile and  is called "Punta Arenas". Well, ready. If you didn't know that and you make a little effort to remember it you have already learn something about  geography (thanks to the internet) and the opposite thread question has been proven.

Even if you can't remember the name of the city, by just  remembering that it was in CHILE is enough to increase your knowledge of geography.


----------



## almostfreebird

OK now I've just posted this comment and I know I'm breathing in Japan, I'm no virtual reality thing and I think you're breathing too. It's in a way same as telegram.

I'm not a big fan of message boards, there're some I don't wanna see just like real life.

Message board is only a part of Internet which is real living encyclopedia.


----------



## maxiogee

Alex_Murphy said:


> Isn't this site itself testimony against your point?



I was querying the point I thought someone else was making when I started this thread.
I still hold, however, that there is a falling off of what used to be called "general knowledge" amongst people compared with previous generations. It may be that education has changed its focus, or that the world is a different place than it used to be.
(I don't think that this site can be cited as 'evidence' in the discussion as I believe that we regulars here would probably have been classified as "swots" or "brains" and have been in the library were there no WordRef or internet.)

Talk to Canadians who sell on eBay and hear how they encounter Americans who don't know there is a different currency or different postage rates there. Where has this lack of knowledge come from?

Somebody asked recently about "why learn another language if it isn't fun?" to which someone responded "I think it's a pretty sound comment." How many of those with internet access spend their time just 'having fun' compared to 'doing something constructive'?


----------



## duckie

Having fun is not constructive?

Oh, the things people write here crack me up!


----------



## divina

I think some people use the Internet to substitute real life, which is not healthy. However, if you have a balance and use the it as a supplemental tool, that's a good thing. It's a supplement, not a substitute.


----------



## Alxmrphi

duckie said:


> Testimony against it? As in people being lazy?
> 
> I come here because I'm trying to learn Italian.



No! lol.
What I meant was, refering to this quote:



> I don't see any difference. When I was in school, you could still "always look something up", in the atlas or encyclopedia. If you were interested in something, you learned it and retained it. If you were not interested, you learned it long enough to regurgitate it on demand and then forgot it.
> 
> _ I don't see my own children or students using the internet as a substitute for learning material._



And we are all here to help and to learn, I'm here to learn Italian too, we're both students using the internet as a substitute for learning material, as I am sure thousands of others are.


----------



## duckie

Actually I'm using this forum to complement other learning material.

What I don't get in this discussion is the thought of the internet as being something very specific. It's a means of communication and can be used in any way one chooses to, be it a public forum, a private conversation, or something entirely different.


----------



## ireney

Duckie would you be "happier" if the question was rephrased as "Is internet used badly by many of the users and instead of viewed as a useful tool it is used as a way to waste their time doing nothing constructive?" ? 
with a note after it saying that having fun is constructive just as long as a person understands that he or she cannot expect to have fun 24/7 and that things one might learn cannot be judged only by their "fun value" ?


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

GenJen54 said:


> Yes, but the Internet has made armchair intellects of us all.



Well, I wouldn't say all.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

duckie said:


> Oh, the things people write here crack me up!



I was thinking the same thing. So we *can* agree after all.


----------



## .   1

ElaineG said:


> I agree with Alex and Cirrus. I know many more people from around the world thank to the Internet. I hear directly them from about their countries, cultures and experiences. Beyond communicating directly on forums like this one, the proliferation of blogs makes it possible to read the views of a Kenyan, an Iraqi, a Filipino etc. etc. all while sitting at your desk. One stunning example was the Where is Raed blog, where a young Iraqi man blogged about his and his family's experiences throughout the American invasion from Baghdad -- pre-Internet it would have been simply impossible to read that stuff, no less in real time.
> 
> Plus, now, when I have a question about geography, I look it up. Growing up we had this decrepit old atlas from when my mother was in school in the 1950s that had pre-post-colonial Africa and Asia in it. I had to do a report on Togo once, and it wasn't in my atlas. By contrast, a 7 year old friend of mine the other day had a question about Australian aborigines after seeing a movie at school, and we were able to find articles, maps, pictures and history within seconds.
> 
> For those in the world that have the Internet, and the number is not _that_ small -- in late 2005, 1 billion people worldwide had Internet access: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/18/060518163500.mk2075cs.html, I can only believe that the Internet is broadening their knowledge of the world and its geography.


Thank you Elaine.
I was just about to write a response so similar to yours that it could have been a twin.
It is beyond my powers of comporehension to understand how more information availability could reduce knowledge.
I can remember when Australia was basically cut off from the rest of the world by the tyranny of distance and Aussies were basically ignorant of the rest of the world.
Back then I did not know that Chile was a country and I had never heard of chile as a food.
I am now able to read and research to my heart's content.
Knowledge frees us from ignorance.

.,,


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

pedro0001 said:


> Sorry, but I'm following your discussion and I haven't either understood what you ment when you said
> 
> 
> 
> That was on reply nr. 29



OK, let me juxtapose a couple of snippets:



gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> Second, at least some of the activities you list involve face to face interaction with actual people ('real life')





duckie said:


> Secondly, please point out which of the listed activities require physical, in person interaction.





duckie said:


> I happen to perform all these activities - and many others - both on a physical in-person basis as well as in physical 'isolation'.




I.e. Duckie admits to doing some of them himself in the way I'd described in the very same paragraph he asks me to explain!


----------



## pedro0001

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> I.e. Duckie admits to doing some of them himself in the way I'd described in the very same paragraph he asks me to explain!



Ok, but I think that his point was that all activities in the list can be carried out without any direct interaction with other people, i.e. people interaction is not a requisite for doing the activities in the list. 

That is what I understood.


----------



## .   1

gwrthgymdeithasol said:


> The internet too has a massive downside, in that it tends to make us intellectually lazy. Instead of learning things properly, we just Google for information and regurgitate it. Information overload ensures that five minutes later we've usually forgotten most of it. We think we're smarter than we are.


I do hope that you are not including me in your we.
My retention span is far greater than five minutes.
I believe that it is spurious to claim that information gleaned from the internet has less ability to inform than other sources of information.
I am well able to discriminate between knowledge and dross.

.,,


----------



## duckie

ireney said:


> Duckie would you be "happier" if the question was rephrased as "Is internet used badly by many of the users and instead of viewed as a useful tool it is used as a way to waste their time doing nothing constructive?" ?
> with a note after it saying that having fun is constructive just as long as a person understands that he or she cannot expect to have fun 24/7 and that things one might learn cannot be judged only by their "fun value" ?



Well, my views tend to differ from the consensus in this area. I think life is at its most constructive when it is enjoyed and embraced. Both the hard parts and the easy parts. When I'm learning or creating income I do my best to enjoy it. I consider it wasteful and a shame not to enjoy life to the best of one's ability 

If someone is happy playing their musical instrument of choice all day and do little else, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy reading books all day, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy playing games all day, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy, who am I to say she is wrong? Seems to me they are right.



pedro0001 said:


> Ok, but I think that his point was that all activities in the list can be carried out without any direct interaction with other people, i.e. people interaction is not a requisite for doing the activities in the list.
> 
> That is what I understood.



Yes, exactly. All the examples I listed are things I do both alone and in the company of others. To me they are equally real, there is no distinction. One is not better than the other. They are all part of my life.


----------



## ireney

duckie said:


> Well, my views tend to differ from the consensus in this area. I think life is at its most constructive when it is enjoyed and embraced. Both the hard parts and the easy parts. When I'm learning or creating income I do my best to enjoy it. I consider it wasteful and a shame not to enjoy life to the best of one's ability
> 
> If someone is happy playing their musical instrument of choice all day and do little else, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy reading books all day, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy playing games all day, who am I to say she is wrong? If someone is happy, who am I to say she is wrong? Seems to me they are right.



So learning to play a musical instrument or read books for example is all fun? There's a lot of anguish involved in learning both. I don't carry any cultural or other baggage that would make me look at time spent having fun as a waste of time or anything similar. I do however carry a whole lot of baggage that make me think that doing only things that are fun is impossible for the great majority of us. 
I also think that there are very few things that can be done with any level of adequacy without spending some frustrating days (at least) trying to learn how to. Play music, read (both take years actually). It's not fun, you are not enjoying playing the scales again and again (and again at nauseum)  but you do it because you want to. 

On topic, spending time on the internet having pure unadulterated by any other purpose fun is OK in my books. Depending on how much time you do it.

Not learning all the details about the geography or history of a place because you can find them with a little bit of searching (not the very, very usual "open wiki or any othen one page -believe whatever you read") is OK too. Doing what enough people do and not bothering to learn even basic things because they are "one click away" is wrong. To formulate your own ideas you need data stored in your personal processor not a removed one.


----------



## pedro0001

Almost everyone has concentrated answering half of the question
(and many of us less than that). What about globalization? 

Helps the globalization to increase our knowledge of geography?
Or maybe the contrary?
...


----------



## duckie

ireney said:


> So learning to play a musical instrument or read books for example is all fun? There's a lot of anguish involved in learning both. I don't carry any cultural or other baggage that would make me look at time spent having fun as a waste of time or anything similar. I do however carry a whole lot of baggage that make me think that doing only things that are fun is impossible for the great majority of us.
> I also think that there are very few things that can be done with any level of adequacy without spending some frustrating days (at least) trying to learn how to. Play music, read (both take years actually). It's not fun, you are not enjoying playing the scales again and again (and again at nauseum) but you do it because you want to.


 
Did you read what I wrote? Allow me to repeat:

_I think life is at its most constructive when it is enjoyed and embraced. _

I choose to embrace the process. I enjoy the process. The process is me. I am the process.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

duckie said:


> Did you read what I wrote? Allow me to repeat:
> 
> _I think life is at its most constructive when it is enjoyed and embraced. _
> 
> I choose to embrace the process. I enjoy the process. The process is me. I am the process.



You (brusquely) ask 'did you read what I wrote?', but you're not being very clear. You're now saying that you embrace the process and that you're the process -- i.e. that you embrace and enjoy yourself. What does that mean??


----------



## duckie

Sorry if I'm not being clear, or if I'm being rude.

I tried to explain that 'fun' is too limited a word. I believe that when doing something one should embrace it instead of push it away as a bad thing. Learning to play an instrument takes a lot of energy and repetition - I agree. Does that make it 'frustrating' or 'unfun'? It doesn't have to. Enjoy the process of learning, let learning be your goal and the process of learning be what you enjoy.

Fun is too limited a word. Enjoying life explains it better.


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

We seem to have left the original topic somewhere behind us .... and Pedro has posed a valid question.


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

Chaska Ñawi said:


> We seem to have left the original topic somewhere behind us .... and Pedro has posed a valid question.



I answered in post #25. (And possibly elsewhere, but I've had so many posts deleted today, it's hard to tell.)


----------



## gwrthgymdeithasol

duckie said:


> Sorry if I'm not being clear, or if I'm being rude.
> 
> I tried to explain that 'fun' is too limited a word. I believe that when doing something one should embrace it instead of push it away as a bad thing. Learning to play an instrument takes a lot of energy and repetition - I agree. Does that make it 'frustrating' or 'unfun'? It doesn't have to. Enjoy the process of learning, let learning be your goal and the process of learning be what you enjoy.
> 
> Fun is too limited a word. Enjoying life explains it better.



OK, I get it now, thanks. (But we've come a long way from the topic!)


----------



## duckie

pedro0001 said:


> Almost everyone has concentrated answering half of the question
> (and many of us less than that). What about globalization?
> 
> Helps the globalization to increase our knowledge of geography?
> Or maybe the contrary?
> ...



It helps me. I get to know people in all parts of the world, and that increases my interest in those parts by giving me an emotional attachment to them.


----------



## cirrus

For me it is a question of what we mean by globalisation. Some people seem to think it is a recent novelty. People have been on the move since before civilisation started. Trade isn't new either, nor are empires.  What is different about today's globalisation - is not the issue that today's technologies make the process more obvious?


----------



## duckie

Just think of it as _increased_ globalization  Any interaction across the globe is essentially 'globalization' in my view.


----------



## tvdxer

All I can say is that the internet has immensely helped me learn about geography and culture, to the point that I can hardly imagine having the knowledge I possess on these subjects without it.


----------

