I thought this was a very interesting post on the topic. I would be interested in seeing what you and the other readers would think about how the stability of the speration of offline/online presence may be affected or influence some of the findings that the Daedalus Project has come out with. In particular, I’m thinking of their finding that relationships in virtual worlds are frequently developed backwards from intimate revalations to less intimate details (physical appearence for example).

Also I think that even if the social structure doesn’t change because of the addition of the Internet there may be some gains for individuals who are not “normal”. In particular, the ability to find and embrace subcultures that may not exist in many smaller regions of the US and the emotional support and social skills development that they derive from online communication.

I think you make two important points.

We do love the pecking order and in the absence of real status differences one upmanship is important (it is said of US workplaces too by people from cultures where there are large wealth differences).

We use social media purposefully. Beyond “finding something out” or “a substitute or television” we are carving out an identity which must have meaning at other points of the continuum as well. I even believe that people watch TV to watch TV with other people. The idea of the whole country watching East Enders together is comforting.

I agree with Clay Shirky that status markers are changing and the choices for engaging in the world are much wider. I “borrowed” a picture from Steve Jurvetson and was startled by whom I was writing to. Imagine a non-entity borrowing a photograph from a leading venture capitalist 5 years ago?

What this means is that of two young people can sit in high school: one can follow a set path and go from grade to grade, job to job, etc. The other can actively carve out a life path and connect people around it. The stakes have changed and youngsters need to engage, filter, synthesize, evaluate is much more than ever been before. With freedom comes responsibility. Some will languish, some will flourish.

And more will flourish if find ways to include them.

I beg to disagree, a little, on two points.

First I can imagine a meaning of “normal” that would fit you (kidding).

Second point is related to distance, physical distance and emotional distance. The two a correlated, a lot. But this correlation is decreasing over time, as technology improves.

In some distant but foreseeable future, as people spend more and more time “on line”, they may very well start to live in a social environment that redefines the notion of “peers”.

An interesting question is: Would one rather exist in multiple social circles or should one rather focus on a single “main” environment? And, consequently, will there still be a Grand Social Piazza in the future or will it become a big anonymous place.

Philip K. Dick had a definition for reality that may be transposed to better understand what society means to individuals. It was: “Reality is that there exist subjective realities and a consensual reality”.

I believe the “Consensual” society is becoming thinner and thinner. I suspect that this phenomenon is the reason why so many people are stressed and depressed. Yet, there is no way backward, we get to go ahead. Fascinating.