Two thinky books

[darkemeralds]

I just finished Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives, by Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler, and found it such compelling food for thought that I turned around and dived into What Technology Wants, by Kevin Kelly.

Sometimes I get in these moods.



Connected synthesizes a whole lot of statistical analysis and meta-studies (is that what you call it when you collect data from studies other researchers have done for other purposes and examine it for new reasons?) into a narrative about the power of connections in human life.

In a nutshell, it says that we are statistically more likely to be influenced by people at the second and third degrees of connectedness--by our friends' friends' friends--than by our first-degree friends. Our friends' friends' friends can make us sick, cause us to gain or lose weight, make us smoke or quit smoking, influence us to vote or not vote--even if we've never met them.

It's a bizarre notion on its face, but as I worked my way through this long and somewhat iterative book, I began to see myself as part of a seething anthill of interconnected human minds and instincts, and my sense of actual individuality took a bit of a beating. Implications that we may inherit our connectedness (our position near or far from the center of our networks) and that many aspects of our wellbeing and success will be determined by this position, are clear throughout the book.

It's worth reading, and (dare I say it?) it's paradigm-shifting, but I recommend approaching it with caution if you're spiritual, religious, or even a bit emotionally fragile this week, because it does not celebrate your rugged individualism. At all.

The audiobook is read by Christakis, who does a lively, enthusiastic and professional job.


What Technology Wants, which I've just started, is more of a think-piece, written by a non-scientist whose credentials are of the "been involved in technology for a long, long time, and here's what I'm starting to conclude" variety.

So far, in the intro and chapter one, he's making a compelling philosophical case for technology being on its own evolutionary track as a living entity. I can't tell yet whether he's going to say that resistance is futile or possible, desirable or pointless, but the journey promises to be thought-provoking.

The audiobook is read by a guy called Paul Boehmer, whose vast catalog seems to be heavily weighted to fantasy and other story-driven fiction, and who therefore makes a really odd choice for this piece of thinky non-fiction. To borrow a term invented by vampirefan, he's a bit "enunciate-y" for the author's conversational style.

Comments

[communicator]

My feeling is that the individual self is just one level of granularity, and we can just as easily be conceived as bundles of smaller systems - mental processes - or components in larger systems. But do my emotions reflect that philosophical position - no - I am totally ego-driven. Ah well. I really should read that book.

[darkemeralds]

I find that the only way I can live with the "anthill" concept is to bring my awareness back home constantly, to seek physical comfort and emotional satisfaction, to "be here now."

The book isn't as bleak as I've probably made it sound: the authors do hint that the human thing is poised on the brink of an evolutionary leap, a new order of complexity, and it has an exciting, true ring to it.

[tehomet]

I suppose one could say that we are all individually all three things, that is to say, each human is a bundle of smaller systems, an individual, and a component in a larger system, at the same time. If I thought about it too long, my brain might melt out my ears, though. It's like the Egyptian view of the human being: I could never keep all the different souls each of us is supposed to have straight in my head. :D

[darkemeralds]

Maybe the ba, the ka and the--um, the third thing were the Egyptians' conception of precisely the trinary relationship to the whole that we each have.

That's a very interesting notion--that the same sort of thing has been conceived over and over again by various cultures.

[alex_beecroft]

I've never believed in rugged individualism anyway. I'm pretty much aware that most of my ideas come from other people's books. But I've had a 45 year bombardment of other people's ideas and I haven't kept all of them. The ones I've kept have become my own.

[darkemeralds]

Oddly, Connected doesn't pin influence on the transmission of ideas. It's very cagey on that point--you keep expecting them to explain the mechanism of the influence, and it never does.

Transmission of ideas by language certainly seems the most likely, but the authors aren't copping to it.

[kis]

Fascinating. I wonder if the reason we're more influenced is that the impression of friends' of friends opinions is more black and white? And we don't get to think "Yes, well, Kis is a bit of a flake about x so she's bound to think y'? The FoF opinion seems more objective, even though it isn't? Of course, that still doesn't explain how it's transmitted but I'd imagine it's through throw-away comments that sound like 'facts' because they're tangential to the core of conversations.

[darkemeralds]

The authors really avoid the whole question of how the transmission happens, because they're talking about so many different kinds of transmission: there are disease vectors as well as behavioral messages, political actions--anything.

I suppose that if you're in the center of a network of people, statistically there are just MORE people in the FOAFOAF ring than in the F or the FOAF ring, so there are that many more opportunities for germs to spread, for instance.

But in the realm of transmission of ideas and beliefs, your notion makes a lot of sense.

It's a really interesting read.

[tehomet]

Connected sounds very interesting. I'm sticking it on my To-Read list. Thanks for the review.

[darkemeralds]

I hope you find it as thought-provoking as I did. It's one of those books that, if you stick with it, gives you one or two really perspective-altering tidbits to carry away with you.