RE: [-empyre-] Digital Spiritual

["webmaster" <webmaster@underash.net>]

> When you're using a Computer, it is very
> hard to forget that you're doing so.

That may be right but the messages that games deliver react later.

Months ago I received a very late phone call, I shocked when I heard the
weeping on the other side of line, it was a Palestinian family mother
that I had never heard her family name before, she was calling from
Israel and she told me that she was sorry for calling me late at night
but she couldn't wait till morning , she just wanted to thank us, she
said that the story of UnderAsh is very similar to theirs, and they felt
the sincerity of this game.

One side of digital spirit.

I received an email from(as claimed) an Israeli orthodox teenage settler
in Hebron, carelessly I read his blowing about how he can revenge and we
can't do anything about it, days later I received another mail from him
describing how he came near a Palestinian mother with here baby in a
carriage and how his friends tease here to draw her attention and not to
notice how he spelt little quantity of acid on the baby gentiles , the
baby cries while his mother thought that he wets himself, terrified I
read his proud full description, his story may not be truth, but I can't
stop blaming my self that this happened or may happen because my game
taunt him.

This is another side of digital spirit.


Radwan
    


-----Original Message-----
From: empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
[mailto:empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Glen Murphy
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 8:21 PM
To: soft_skinned_space
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Digital Spiritual

> When you're using a Computer, it is very
> hard to forget that you're doing so.

I would say that that only applies within the context of 'joe average'
user - it's like reading a book - many people are continually aware
that they're reading a book, but others get lost in the magic of the
words and get transported away.

For many younger users (myself included), computers are transparent -
I've spent countless nights in front of my three machines, lost in
what I'm doing, and the next day, I can't remember whether the
conversations I had were in person, on the phone, or in real life. And
then you look at the harder-core game-players; they are so easily lost
'in the zone', a definately meditative experience, where even the game
becomes transparent and you run entirely on subconsious reflex.

If you can get a user to that state, you've achieved more than most
could hope for, and I think if we're going to go down the spirituality
route, Computers can't be discounted, especially as the younger
generation is probably more comfortable, and more willing to accept
things from a standard beige desktop than they are with books, or
novel new environments.

Hm, this all sounds a bit harshly critical .. I don't mean for it to
be, consider it more of a defense of the use of Computers.

~ Glen

--
http://glenmurphy.com/


On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:20:37 -0400, David Fono <fono@cs.queensu.ca>
wrote:
> I think tapping spirituality via a Computer, [capital C], is a very
> tricky proposition.
> 
> That's because a Computer is locked down in awfully particular
> metaphors and interaction styles -- we interact with Computers in a
> very limited, superficial way, which reduces most interactions to
> superficial manipulations. This is the cognitive dissonance that
arises
> with many people when they try to converse with others over instant
> messaging -- they find it impossible to connect to the other person,
as
> they normally would. They're in front of the screen, they're working
on
> a virtual desktop, point 'n' click, drag 'n' drop, ad nauseum... using
> a Computer requires a suspension of disbelief, because you're
> communicating in a lexicon and within a context that has only
abstract,
> academic bearing on real life. When you're using a Computer, it is
very
> hard to forget that you're doing so. Thus, I think any attempt to use
> the Computer to speak to something as deep and soulful as
spirituality,
> would reduce it to something very superficial as well. When you talk
to
> your soul the same way you talk to Excel, it's hard to take it very
> seriously.
> 
> On the other hand, I think there is great potential in this realm for
> computers [lower case c]. The particularly peculiar demands exacted on
> us by Computers can and will be opened up, so we can interact with
them
> more naturally, as Environment rather than Device. At that point,
there
> will be much more of a chance to harness their informational power to
> explore something as nebulous and elusive as spirituality. This is
> actually one of the current overarching goals in the field of human
> computer interaction. One can explore these possibilities now, using
> experimental technology, and that's what a lot of the better
> technological installations do. I recently completed my first such
> effort, an Electric Confessional
> (http://www.exposedbrain.com/archives/000072.html), which uses neither
> a screen nor an input device -- and it just _feels_ so much more real,
> so much less contrived, and so much more accessible on one's own human
> terms.
> 
> Cheers,
> Fono [long time lurker, first time poster]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> 


On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:20:37 -0400, David Fono <fono@cs.queensu.ca>
wrote:
> I think tapping spirituality via a Computer, [capital C], is a very
> tricky proposition.
> 
> That's because a Computer is locked down in awfully particular
> metaphors and interaction styles -- we interact with Computers in a
> very limited, superficial way, which reduces most interactions to
> superficial manipulations. This is the cognitive dissonance that
arises
> with many people when they try to converse with others over instant
> messaging -- they find it impossible to connect to the other person,
as
> they normally would. They're in front of the screen, they're working
on
> a virtual desktop, point 'n' click, drag 'n' drop, ad nauseum... using
> a Computer requires a suspension of disbelief, because you're
> communicating in a lexicon and within a context that has only
abstract,
> academic bearing on real life. When you're using a Computer, it is
very
> hard to forget that you're doing so. Thus, I think any attempt to use
> the Computer to speak to something as deep and soulful as
spirituality,
> would reduce it to something very superficial as well. When you talk
to
> your soul the same way you talk to Excel, it's hard to take it very
> seriously.
> 
> On the other hand, I think there is great potential in this realm for
> computers [lower case c]. The particularly peculiar demands exacted on
> us by Computers can and will be opened up, so we can interact with
them
> more naturally, as Environment rather than Device. At that point,
there
> will be much more of a chance to harness their informational power to
> explore something as nebulous and elusive as spirituality. This is
> actually one of the current overarching goals in the field of human
> computer interaction. One can explore these possibilities now, using
> experimental technology, and that's what a lot of the better
> technological installations do. I recently completed my first such
> effort, an Electric Confessional
> (http://www.exposedbrain.com/archives/000072.html), which uses neither
> a screen nor an input device -- and it just _feels_ so much more real,
> so much less contrived, and so much more accessible on one's own human
> terms.
> 
> Cheers,
> Fono [long time lurker, first time poster]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre