In this one…I get into the chaotic, absurd world of the "Hegelian E-Girl Council" drama—a bizarre saga that epitomizes the kind of online cultural labyrinth I'm all about.
I enjoyed listening to this podcast, I had a few thoughts while listening.
It was interesting to hear how the podcasters you mentioned invoked philosophers without having any deep or nuanced understanding of their work. I think this is the fallout of websites such as Instagram putting such an emphasis on aesthetics. Instagram is often referred to as a “highlight reel of life” with users posting select content rather than a true reflection of their lives. This surface level understanding of philosophers was displayed with the podcasters arguing against the user of specialized language.
With the availability of near infinite information on the internet it seems many content consumers assume they can consume any content. I believe this is why so many people will read an article, or just a headline, from a science site and feel they can describe the intricacies of quantum mechanics. The unbelievable amount of information available to us has resulted in many pseudo-intellectuals, which I believe the podcasters discussed may be. One of the most interesting parts of this was how these woman utilized philosophers as tools, stripping them of their relation to the ideas they aimed to convey and instead branding them with the ideas the podcasters aimed to discuss. This resulted in a strange use of these philosophers by name to create an authority, an authority that was then erroneously used in a logically fallible appeal to this authority.
I do agree with you that it was hypocritical for these women to judge Disney and Star Wars fans for using the imagery as a signal of being part of an in-group, while doing the same with the mention of philosophic figures to position themselves within an in-group. I believe this is one of the greatest downfalls of the profile-ification of so many interests. In the age of technology people have lost many opportunities in the journey of finding themselves. To fill these gaps people seem to adopt aesthetics and surface level interests in topics they find aesthetically pleasing, as a metal fan I’ve seen this first hand. But this can result in issues such as people voting for politicians and polities that are detrimental to themselves because their political ideologies have become integral to their sense of self. The misuse of philosophic figures as tools to generate authority in an effort to discuss topics of interest is a strong example of placing aesthetic over authenticity.
You mention a meeting of internet personalities that was unsuccessful because internet norms didn’t translate to real life norms, but that’s what this is. There is now a culture that is exclusive to the internet, one that the ‘terminally online’ help create and participate in. This culture prioritizes aesthetics over most other things, and longs for authenticity. This is best displayed by the Dunning–Kruger effect when the podcasters discussed inaccurately referenced historic figures. You don’t need to like philosophy, you just need to appear like you like philosophy. To the uninformed appearance is authenticity.
Commenting on your post rather than in our Notes thread to hopefully help a little bit with your discovery in the algorithm.
I enjoyed listening to this podcast, I had a few thoughts while listening.
It was interesting to hear how the podcasters you mentioned invoked philosophers without having any deep or nuanced understanding of their work. I think this is the fallout of websites such as Instagram putting such an emphasis on aesthetics. Instagram is often referred to as a “highlight reel of life” with users posting select content rather than a true reflection of their lives. This surface level understanding of philosophers was displayed with the podcasters arguing against the user of specialized language.
With the availability of near infinite information on the internet it seems many content consumers assume they can consume any content. I believe this is why so many people will read an article, or just a headline, from a science site and feel they can describe the intricacies of quantum mechanics. The unbelievable amount of information available to us has resulted in many pseudo-intellectuals, which I believe the podcasters discussed may be. One of the most interesting parts of this was how these woman utilized philosophers as tools, stripping them of their relation to the ideas they aimed to convey and instead branding them with the ideas the podcasters aimed to discuss. This resulted in a strange use of these philosophers by name to create an authority, an authority that was then erroneously used in a logically fallible appeal to this authority.
I do agree with you that it was hypocritical for these women to judge Disney and Star Wars fans for using the imagery as a signal of being part of an in-group, while doing the same with the mention of philosophic figures to position themselves within an in-group. I believe this is one of the greatest downfalls of the profile-ification of so many interests. In the age of technology people have lost many opportunities in the journey of finding themselves. To fill these gaps people seem to adopt aesthetics and surface level interests in topics they find aesthetically pleasing, as a metal fan I’ve seen this first hand. But this can result in issues such as people voting for politicians and polities that are detrimental to themselves because their political ideologies have become integral to their sense of self. The misuse of philosophic figures as tools to generate authority in an effort to discuss topics of interest is a strong example of placing aesthetic over authenticity.
You mention a meeting of internet personalities that was unsuccessful because internet norms didn’t translate to real life norms, but that’s what this is. There is now a culture that is exclusive to the internet, one that the ‘terminally online’ help create and participate in. This culture prioritizes aesthetics over most other things, and longs for authenticity. This is best displayed by the Dunning–Kruger effect when the podcasters discussed inaccurately referenced historic figures. You don’t need to like philosophy, you just need to appear like you like philosophy. To the uninformed appearance is authenticity.
Commenting on your post rather than in our Notes thread to hopefully help a little bit with your discovery in the algorithm.