Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
We will divide the question into two parts: 1 using social networks( school, university, training sites( foreign language, mathematics and other areas that give access to subject knowledge and the acquisition of practical skills.
Here you can add metered communication with native speakers, forums of leading Universities in the World. This is a basic need.
Second. But aimless walking on empty and unnecessary sites and so on is a blessing, it should be CLOSED – THESE ARE EMPTY LIKES, TORMENT IN SOME DANCES – All this is harm and empty.
All these generalizations seem to be a very vague concept. Young people, like other age strata, are very different. And social networks are a place not only for entertainment, but also for work, all possible forms of communication.
And how this tool is used depends on a lot.
By the way, the so-called older generation, Skype, for example, is used only for communicating with their grandchildren. And some directors of companies, who may belong to a solid age, hold meetings and negotiations in Skype and Whatsapp.
The world is not black and white. Young people are different. Social networks are a tool for online communication between people all over the world.
The question, in my opinion, is formulated incorrectly.
A problem for whom? For the future of society? Yes.
For their moral and moral development? Yes, absolutely.
But not for them. There is no problem where what is happening is not considered a problem by those who do it
The problems of the Internet are not where most people see them.
The main one is changing the way information is perceived.�
An information environment like the Internet allows you to change the focus of attention several times a minute. Nothing like this has ever happened in the history of mankind before. Even the TV has more inertia.�
In addition, the information acquisition model is being transformed. Instead of your own knowledge, it is enough to find an answer or ask a question to a collective user.
A separate problem is socialization. Both from the point of view of personal isolation and virtualization of communication, with all the consequences that follow from the form of communication itself.
You can also talk about reducing physical activity. Now it is easy to occupy yourself for a few hours without changing your location at all.
This could be called a problem if the Internet was not so integrated into our lives.
and now on how you sit in the social network, you can earn money to build.
yes, people spend their time there.
do adults not spend money? just don't tell me that everyone goes to the theater and dances, and did not lie down for another 10-15 years and did not watch TV.
I'm sorry, but most people aren't very active.
this is their normal state.
This can only be considered a problem in the sense that young people miss out on opportunities for personal communication. In the West, this problem has been noticed for a long time. American sociologist Sherry Turkle wrote a book about this back in 2011 (“Alone Together”). The book has not been translated into Russian, but its main idea is very simple. Social media communication is NOT a substitute for face-to-face communication. It seems to be the same thing, but her research shows that this is not the case.
This is indirectly confirmed by the fact that few people manage to find a life partner through social networks. Although many people put a lot of effort into this. It would seem that social networks are very well suited for this. They extend the selection space to infinity. But that's exactly the problem. There are too many options. There's no point in seriously investing in a relationship that hasn't gone far yet. You can always switch to the next option. In such a situation, a serious relationship cannot arise in principle.
Of course, there are exceptions. But this is always a situation where at least one of the participants uses social networks incorrectly. He builds communication exactly as he would build it offline, and focuses all his efforts on one person, and does not spread out into many parallel options. However, these are exceptions.
In my opinion, this is not a serious problem. The fact is that 90% of young people will always find time to, I apologize, fuck up. They used to sit on the street walking from morning to night. Now they are wasting their time in social networks and computers. There will be some kind of revolutionary technology-young people will start wasting their time there. This is normal.
How to solve it? It's very simple-to give your children time, instill a love of books and self-development. Most parents have bred something, but they don't want to devote much time to it-now it's like this:”on sit in the tablet, just get the fuck away from me”, when it's like this: “on watch TV or go for a walk, get the fuck away from me” If this is not done at an early age-then everything, it's too late. Either the teenager himself will take up the head, as it was with me, or it will be according to the scenario known to us.
Yes, I think so. Information noise is destructive in nature. Redneck rappers, scandals, intrigues, investigations of bloggers about shit and urine, do not carry at least some benefit or benefit. We need to disown all this. People refuse to think and use their heads.
When young people use social networks, they communicate with people, watch movies, listen to music ,watch videos, watch pictures,and play in apps. This is modern communication, alas ,there is no escape from it, social networks are the future. Anyway, if you look positively – this is the exchange of information, if negative-zombification.