The internet sucks. There are too many idiots on it who think they know what the hell they are talking about. But I know better. It seems like anyone can create a website, write something, and feel important. This all started back in high school when we were taught how to identify "credible sources". My disdain for the internet only grew as the years passed. I now have three websites that I visit everyday (excluding Google) and two of them are the essentially the same. They are: Rottentomatoes, IMDb, and Wikipedia.
Having said that, you're probably thinking that I am a huge hypocrite. And I am to some degree, I won't deny that. Those who need help understanding why I am a hypocrite need only visit Wikipedia.org once. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that is compiled by everyday websurfers. What makes this interesting is that, while you can cite it, articles can be added by ANYONE. Wikipedia is not reliable by any means but that is not why I enjoy it. No, there is a more primal, instinctual appreciation.
Wikipedia is set up with a variety of links on every page. These links are usually related to the current page but some go off on tangents both great and small. I prefer the bigger tangents though because they will transport me to a page that I would not have visited otherwise. One can be looking up cooking tips and be transported to Pro-Pedophilic Activism in a matter of seconds. Once I was "researching" chloroplasts for my biology class last semester and, through no fault of my own, I was taken to a page dedicated to the "Art of Murder". Coincidentally, just as I had clicked the link my roommate walked in on me looking at a page called "Art of Murder" and asked what exactly it was I was doing. And the great thing was I didn't have an answer. The only thing I could mutter out was, "Dude, it's wikipedia."
And that's what I want to talk about really. The techo-psychological correlation between wikipedia and a phenomoeon called stream of consciousness.
We all do it. When we are alone or walking to class or whatever, we think about the most random shit. And the topics vary from somewhat related to completely off-the-fucking-wall. A good example of this is in the film THE WEATHER MAN with Nicolas Cage during the scene where he goes to get tartar sauce. We think of something and, for one reason or another, we begin to think of something else.
But it's hard to study or analyze stream of consciousness because a) You're not really thinking about whatever it is you're thinking about. It's a lot like staring, just because you're looking at something doesn't mean you know what you're looking at. Unfortunately this gets guys in trouble with the ladies on many occasions. And b) It's nearly impossible to backtrack your thoughts because of point A. You're not thinking about it, so you can't recall why you ended up on a thought that made you think, "Why the hell am I thinking about this!?!?!"
But with wikipedia, this is possible. If you find yourself in a daze and browsing through wikipedia and you end up on "Gay Male Pornstars of the 80s" when you started on particle acceleration, you can simply click the "back" button on the browser and see how you came to your current page.
The main difference between stream of consciousness and wikipedia is reassurance - reassurance that you are not insane. If you start thinking about one thing and end up on something horrific and/or taboo, you can start doubting yourself or your mental health. But on wikipedia it's okay because you can simply retrace your steps and go back to where you started. If you choose to do this, you can at least lie to yourself that you are not out of your mind or a goddamn psychopath.
No comments:
Post a Comment