Et Capital Culture

1.1) Three Terms Defined

​

In three terms, the method is a mix of classicism, romanticism and science. While I recognize “Cartesian” mechanisms or patterns of human life, I also recognize the enduring irrationality of humanity. This irrationality is the crutch between a predictable mankind and an organized, but chaotic nature. Irrationality is the place where the scientist and humanist need to further confer with one another.[2] This crutch prompts my admiration for the classics, the romantic school of thought and science writ large. 

 

Classicism expresses the use of classical texts as not only valid sources of information, but extremely valuable sources of information. That logic extends throughout all of time. Romanticism is a particular school of thought found throughout all of time. 

 

Romanticism emphasizes the raw sensuality of humanity that we, or rather "I" suffer, enjoy or enjoy suffering. We are a humanity defined as much by things, facts and patterns as by the individual's experience of it.  The Romantic views the relationship between sense and understanding as an epic of total proportions. And it all begins with the subject: one human. From there it may grow and must grow. 

 

I believe as Isaac Asimov did, “that every human being with a physically normal brain can learn a great deal and can be surprisingly intellectual.”[3] And who disagrees, but the pessimistic misanthropist, who does not even deserve our pity. Spared the paralysis associated with hating mankind, I seek to enliven constructive discussion and curiosity. 

 

For this reason, I emphasize the use of sources that are free and easy to find. Whenever possible, I opt for audio-visual sources as well as publicly accessible sources. In this way, the majority of the work here qualifies as “open source.” I encourage the reader to follow my citations, explore the available information and take advantage of our information abundant time.

 

1.2) Three Critical Takeaways: 

 

1. The human mind is the same as it was 2,500 years ago. Therefore, genius insight into the complex mess of human affairs from and since the inception of written documents is worthy of discussion and citation. 

 

2. Sources such as lectures, speeches, interviews, debates and round-tables are as authoritative as the speaker(s). Obviously, these sources are not peer-reviewed. Thus, their use is restricted to the value of their expertise. [4]

​

3. Digitally expressed ideas and displays are regarded as extensions of publicly expressed ideas and displays. The digital profile is the public persona. 

​

2) Truth & Meaning: Discovery & Discernment

 

To build a truthful image of life on earth, we must be diligent about how we construct the image. We must also be discerning with respect to what materials we use to construct it. We value actions above words, but acknowledge that words have their place as expressions of the heart and mind.[5] We appreciate theory and its illuminating effects upon the multitude of subjects, but we also appreciate the results of theory in practice. Following the Platonic tradition, we will suspend judgement until the best assortment of facts are arranged by the most appropriate form of logic and sensibility. 

 

Science and the humanities wrangle with the truth. Science discovers the fact of the phenomenon and the humanities discern its meaning relative to humanity. Rene Descartes was hopeful when he said: “There cannot be any [truth] that are so remote that they are not eventually reached nor so hidden that they are not discovered.”[6] With improved instruments of observation, humanity has made great strides in the studies of astro-physics as well as bio-physics.[7] With a clearer understanding of the basic mechanisms of life, we may, with care, update the doctrine espoused in the humanities.This is no small task. We resolve to discover and discern the truth little-by-little.[8] No matter how long it takes. Inch by inch, the scientist discovers and the humanist discerns. 

 

3) He is the Same

 

Bearing in mind that we possess improved instruments of discovery, we must be wary of knee-jerk applications of new discoveries to doctrine. In the first place, we must not be so conceited as to think that every ‘discovery’ is indeed a discovery. There is so much that is observable, intuited and deduced, of this world by geniuses long dead, whose ideas were so impeccable and discerning, that we must heed their work as much as we congratulate ourselves about our own. In the second place, let us appreciate the genius of humanity in its entirety, from antiquity through today. The electron microscope gave new sight to atomic life, but Democritus (B. 460 BC) logically deduced that life is supported by motes and atoms, formulating what we refer to as the first ‘atomic theory.’[9] We have satellites orbiting the earth taking pictures of our round home confirming its shape, yet Eratostenes (B. 276 BC) discovered that the Earth was round with no more of a device than his intellect.[10] In the third place, no matter what device is developed beyond today, we are the same humanity residing on the same planet as our ancestors. There is much to be proud about, undoubtedly! Our world is full of ingenuity and discovery! But in so reveling, we must not get caught in a vain distrust of our ancestors, whose wisdom await our discovery. 

 

That does NOT mean that I will raise ancient scientific findings and cite them as comparable to modern scientific consensus. I raise the point of scientific precedence to reform the bridge between the ancients and the moderns. We may well disregard the ancient atomic theory as our instruments of observation become more advanced. However, some will disregard the work of Eratostenes and even deny the photographs of Earth taken by satellites.[11] The concern is that when we throw away ancient science, we throw ancient wisdom out with it. 

 

It is a methodological precept that we assume humanity is wrought with the same afflictions, pathologies and intellect as those who wrote on tablets and papyrus. Since humanity has kept a record, the same questions and problems seem to rise. Modern philosopher Pierre Grimes politely replies to the moderns:

 

“Excuse me, same problems. Man is caught in the same kinds of problems. The techniques and our technology are different, but we are the same and therefore we must experience the same in a new way. Just as they discovered a new way.” [12] [13]

 

This is an important assumption. If man is the same as he was, cognitively, then history and philosophy have a significant role to play in evaluating modern human affairs.[14] That means that methodologically, the work of the ancients, the moderns and everyone in between can bring potentially insightful knowledge to bear in our own discourses.

 

4) Sources

 

Et Capitis Cultus (“C&C”) uses traditional paperback sources and new digital sources. When I refer to traditional paperback sources, I refer to books, papers and reports that were available in paperback prior to the digital era. As for the new digital sources, I refer to lectures, presentations, interviews, and round-tables that were rarely available, if not at all available, prior to the digital era. 

 

Except on the bluest of moons would a lecture titled “England, Britain, and the World: Economic Development, 1660-1720” be broadcasted on television. Despite the boom of television with thousands of channels of so wide an array of entertainment options, televised lectures are still nonexistent and interviews, presentations and round-tables still all too rare. But the online format has changed all of that.

 

The digitalization of audible and visual media from the early twentieth century through today, makes available extremely valuable insight into human affairs. Audible and visual media like tv, radio and online streaming, are the most widely consumed form of media. It makes sense, then, to refer and cite sources that people are more likely to explore. Therefore, it is the position of C&C to utilize and promote select content of this nature for wider consumption.

 

The virtue of audible communication is that it tends to have a demystifying effect on complexity. The onus is on the speaker to break down a large and complex idea into its most fundamentally sound form. In this form, the genius and hopefully the simplicity of the idea comes to the fore. 

 

With the help of visual aids, the viewer is more likely to understand the idea and recall it later. From this solid ground, we engage with the ideas and others like it or contradictory to it. In lieu of video, C&C still aims to utilize visual aids to help illuminate the insight and pith of an argument.

 

Going forward, we must distinguish the kinds of sources available to us and how we ought to treat them. 

 

4.1) Primary and Secondary Sources

 

In order to accurately tell stories, historians use two kinds of sources called, “primary” and “secondary.” A primary source chronicles a person or event in one manner or another. If authentic, it provides insight into the day, hour or minute relevant to the topic. 

 

Let’s say I’m writing about the life of Abraham Lincoln. His memoir is a primary source, because it is his telling of his life. I cite his memoir in order to clarify how he felt or thought about one or another person, thing or event. However, we are wary of Lincoln’s humanity and the fault and vice that that existence contains. Can we trust it?

 

Although ‘Honest Abe’ is said to be perfectly truthful, we remain skeptical about the veracity of his writings. After all, it is his account and whether he is ‘Honest Abe’ or not, he is a human of one mind and body. Not only is he capable of stretching the truth, but he is liable to get the facts wrong. Even if he is in error only occasionally, the right thing to do is to verify his statements using other sources, primary or secondary. 

 

Imagine Lincoln ponders about the feelings of his wife Mary Todd. We may cite his interpretation, but limit it only as such. For example, Lincoln writes that today while out gardening, Mary Todd told him that she is ‘fine’ or ‘okay’ and duly remarks that things are going well between them. If we trust Lincoln’s intuition, we may run into a sorry trap. She may neither be ‘fine’ nor ‘ok,’ despite her having said so. If we have Mary Todd’s memoir we may find the corresponding day or week to verify her content or, more likely in this case, her dismay at Abe’s obliviousness to her true feelings, coded though they were. 

 

Now consider the account of, say, two neighbors, a couple, who overheard the above interaction from over the property’s hedge. She has a much keener intuition with respect to Mary Todd’s expression and finds the detail scintillating. She rushes off to gossip that Abe and Mary Todd are not doing well. From end to end, the neighborhood is convinced that Abe and Mary Todd have a rocky marriage. 

 

The other observer, possessing a similar intuition as Abe, wrote off the occasion and found nothing interesting about it, except that Abe and Mary Todd are doing just ‘fine.’ When a neighbor asks him about the veracity of the gossip, he is confused. He quickly turns the subject to carpentry or his Buffalo rifle. This second observer may never write a thing about the event. The absence of an account of this interpretation presents an interesting quandary. There are more accounts detailing a rocky marriage than not. If we follow the gambit of trusting the sheer number of accounts detailing the marriage as such, we risk raising the many secondary sources above the primary. And we may well, such as in this case, believe the gossip and abuse what may be the true nature of Abe and Mary Todd’s marriage. 

 

If we listen to the account offered by the last house, for example, a secondary account of the interaction, we accomplish two things: one bad and one good. First, we haphazardly conclude that Abe’s marriage to Mary Todd was a dramatic enterprise full of passion and distress. Second, we take a second hand account of the event and apply it to the story of Abe and Mary Todd. This may be helpful in describing the life of Abe, because even if the account of the last house is wrong, it captures the neighborly environment Abe resided within. 

 

Abe, Mary Todd and the immediate neighbors are primary sources. The neighbors who heard the story second hand and left us the story by whatever means, by letter for example, are secondary sources. Yes, including the last house.

 

Primary sources are superior to secondary sources, because the further removed the source is from the occasion of interest, the further it is likely to be from reality. Maybe Mary Todd was upset, but only mildly. A year later Abe woke up from his obliviousness and reconciled with Mary Todd. The marriage was never rocky. 

 

An additional secondary source is the historian. She has reviewed the entirety of both Abe’s and Mary Todd’s memoirs. She assessed the letters exchanged around the neighborhood divulging every last scintillating detail of the event. All of her work amounts to one paragraph of work with a list of citations, primary and secondary, concluding that people are strange, but that I’m ‘fine’ or ‘ok’ is universal code for I’m not ‘fine’ or ‘ok’ even if it is only a mild case. 

 

We may review her sources to interpret the story ourselves or resign ourselves to an agreement. If the specialists in the field of Abe Lincoln’s life are in general agreement upon this fact, then a consensus is built. And by all intents and purposes, we have a trustworthy account of the event. In this case, a moment in the life of Abraham Lincoln. 

 

C&C uses primary and secondary sources to build trustworthy accounts of historical, philosophical and economic stories and trends. We strive to use as many publicly available documents and data as is possible and reasonable to encourage discourse related to the topics discussed. 

 

4.2) Types of Sources

​

The historian is availed the use of artifacts to tell a story. An artifact is any document, image or construction that is humanly devised. Newspapers, memoirs, posters, personal letters, government chronicles like the Congressional Record and government reports like those from the Congressional Budget Office or the Department of Defense. The list goes on. 

 

Today, the opulence of available sources is truly amazing. This includes access to private and public online databases, nonprofit studies, think-tank periodicals, professional associations’ periodicals, and of course, a litany of niche of niches scholarly journals and monographs. The digitalization of records is a huge benefit to researchers all around the world. 

 

It is easy to imagine the benefits! The documents stored in Cairo, once only available there, physically, for one pair of eyes at one given time, are now accessible everywhere at all times, so long as there is a stable internet connection.

 

5) Digital Records, Appreciated

 

It’s 1763 and the western world has just ended yet another imperial war. The Anglo-German alliance has won the day and the world is again at peace. I’m a weary soldier, who has seen and smelled too much death and destruction. I return home to Koenigsberg, at the eastern most reaches of the Prussian kingdom, hungry to understand life beyond war. 

 

I turn to philosophy. 

 

In Koenigsberg I am one of the luckiest soldiers turned students, graced with the luckiest geographic placement. At the local University, I attend the lectures of a well-reputed philosopher, Immanuel Kant. If Kant’s student’s transcriptions of his Lectures on Ethics are any indication of his oratory talent, I suppose I could be well-satisfied with the lectures of this one great Professor.[15]  I take especially well to his interpretation of naturally ordained morality and the concept of categorical imperatives. 

 

But would if I want more? 

 

I wish to explore the role of human sensibilities, moral and ethical, in the negotiated construction of society. I find Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments a pertinent read. If I want to hear Smith elaborate beyond bound paper and ink, I must seek out his tutoring or lectures in person. In order to do so, I must travel all the way to the University of Glasgow in the kingdom of Scotland, matriculate, source a pen, ink well, and scroll to begin. As an ally in the recent war, I may find a good reception there. 

 

What else?

 

I could track down a book written by the scandalous Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The year prior, in 1762, he wrote the The Social Contract, which opens most powerfully with: “Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains. One thinks himself the master of others, and still remains a greater slave than they. How has this change come about?”[16]  Well, I want to know?! 

 

May I go to Paris where he is and all but accost him? I hope my modest Prussian style is well-received in the nation I just fought to defeat. Perhaps I should stay in Koenigsberg. I hope my veteran’s pension can afford the cost of so pretty a book. Even if I can afford it, is it safe to assume that the book is printed and distributed to this eastern town I reside in? And of course, is it translated from French to German or English already? 

 

Well, don’t you see it as I do?

 

Scholars have not only elaborated extensively upon the works of Kant, Smith and Rousseau in dissertations, articles and monographs, but have also lectured upon the same! If I have any slight inclination, I may in whatever garb, or none, it’s all the same, plop myself in front of my computer and access the world’s library of scholarship in one far from lonely instant. 

 

I may visit Google’s subsidiary site YouTube where thousands upon thousands of lectures await my viewing. With no effort at all I may plop my notebook and pen in the front row of one the world’s most esteemed scholars. In one moment, I’m lapping up the lectures on Hellenic culture, warfare and politics. The next moment, I’m an observer of a roundtable of preeminent economists and juris doctors debating this or that government policy: monetary, social or foreign. 

 

Whatever I desire! 

 

May I quote these lectures and round-table discussions? They are not peer-reviewed, but they are opinions of authoritative figures, whose knowledge is in many a case peerless. So why not? I’ll give an example of why a speech, lecture, presentation, televised interview or round table discussion ought to be taken seriously as a source- a secondary source, mind you. 

 

A hint. In time one lecture or speech is appreciated more than another.

 

6) Spoken Word Sources:​ Speeches, Lectures, Presentations, Interviews and Round-Tables, Appreciated

 

The year is 1893 and Americans occupy the land from coast to coast. Railroads and telegraphs bring the continent into one contiguous nation.[17] At an academic conference, historian Frederick Jackson Turner presents his thesis, “The End of the Frontier.” Within the presentation, Jackson Turner contemplates the impact of the harsh frontier upon the mind, body and will of the American (frontiersmen). He believes that the hardships of frontier life have hardened the men and women who have conquered it. But since the frontier has ended, he implies that the industriousness of the American way may decline. Specifically, his vigor for an independent life may wane when the hardships of the frontier “soften” to a more city like comfort and appeal.[18]

 

Jackson Turner’s driving thesis rings similar to the writings of Tacitus on Germania.[19] Tacitus laments that the specifically republican virtues of independence, personal responsibility and unrelenting resolve are corrupted by the softness of civilization and the cornucopia it lavishly bestows her citizens.[20] Tacitus compares and contrasts soft Romans to hard Germans and soft Germans to hard Germans.[21]

 

Tacitus claims that harsh conditions ennoble the human spirit and invigorate virtuosity while softened conditions, in contrast, duly soften hearts and hands, corrupting the capacity to virtuosity. It is a rhetorical trope (or straw man if you like), but no less, Tacitus maintains that despite their ‘savagry,’ the German commitment to liberty and independence is worthy of honor and emulation. So it is clear. The Germans who fall under the umbrella of Roman influence by way of bribery and wealth, become listless in the torpor of peace and extravagance. In contrast, the Germans who resist the Romans remaining free are strong, industrious and principled.[22] Tacitus' audience would be gravely concerned with the next comparison. Tacitus applauds the free Germans as noble and worthy of honor, but boos the civilized Roman as corrupted, soft, dependent and worthy of shame.[23] 

 

How does this relate to Jackson Turner? Tacitus and Jackson Tuner share the opinion that the environment in which a person lives greatly impacts his likelihood to be virtuous or vicious.[24] The material circumstances of a society greatly impact the characteristics and ethics of a people. 

 

It is the duty of the scholar to connect the work of Jackson Turner to Tacitus, even if neither read the other.[25] The extent to which we find that they ‘speak’ to one another gives reason to further compare and contrast the circumstances that spurred their works. In the case of Jackson Turner’s presentation, we would hope that if all were counted in terms of impact, scholars would cite his transcribed speech. They do and so will we.[26]

 

Authoritative experts make speeches, lectures and presentations daily. As a part of that, they reflect upon their studies and comment on current affairs. Rather than wait 100 years for a speech to appreciate and see whose opinion wins the day. If today, an authoritative speaker makes a quote that ‘speaks’ to others’ works, it is reasonable that we attempt to compare and contrast it. To the furthest extent possible, we must also be fair in quoting in order to capture the spirit of the comment. We must not betray the confidence of the authoritative speaker. We will not. 

 

C&C will utilize every type of media to increase the amount of authoritative voices in discussion. It is a significant, but not a critical mission, to increase the awareness of the public to educational resources available online. Every citation is evidence of accessibility. Every citation of a speech, lecture, presentation, interview or round table, solidifies the normalcy of the practice.

 

6.1) Pros & Cons 

 

The length of a speech or interview limits how in-depth a topic can be discussed, but it forces the speaker to be pithy and concise. As Peter Robinson of Uncommon Knowledge regularly warns, “we cannot do the book justice, because this is video and not print, but we are going to do as well as we can.”[27] There is no substitute for a book sized argument, but in speech people tend to capture the pith of their ideas and arguments without too much trouble. And in getting to the pith of an argument, in speech, the readability of the content ironically increases. 

 

The readability and comprehensibility of complex and elaborate arguments are eased by the tactful ‘unpacking’ required of the speaker. Professor Milton Friedman reflected upon his life’s works and hypothesized that his book Capitalism and Freedom was so widely circulated because: 

 

“the fact that it was based on lectures, instead of written. Spoken word is different than written english. And then those lectures were transcribed into the book by Rose [his wife] and she took the transcripts and converted them into the text of the book… If I had started from scratch to write it would be much more technically oriented, it would be less readable I believe.”[28]

 

Why not follow such a successful model?

 

Milton Friedman was no stranger to televised lectures, debates, speeches, interviews and round-tables. There is no doubt that because of his enterprising spirit and capitalization of all forms of media, that he successfully reached so many people.[29] There is a place for written work, but if the ideas expressed during a speech are pithy, precise and concise, why not cite them? 

 

Today, many academics and theorists participate in recorded debates, speeches, interviews and round tables. Thanks to this practice, there is much to listen to and much more to read. With the internet, their opinions are accessible to everybody.[29]

 

6.2) The Future? 

 

People are consuming videos at an incredible clip. So why not help direct the traffic toward worthy destinations? I don’t promise Eden, but there are great places on the internet devoted to education. Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait believes that the future of education is in recorded lecture series: 

 

“...this idea of people standing on leturens, giving lectures, physically, to groups of people, I think that will begin to fade, I think we are going to have access to the best lectures in the world over the internet. We will be able to… study with all sorts of video systems which will allow us to control the teaching, to go back to go forward, the actual notion that physical teachers will be involved, I think will begin to fade, which I think will make the system more productive. I think you will get more results with fewer people and the people that you keep will be able to do the really important value adding things.”[30]

 

Micklethwait is right and many people agree, especially online universities. The usefulness of online education is tenfold. However, lacking good judgement, people stray from good sources of information to less reliable ones. The self-inflicted phenomenon of “post-truth” as the average myopic alarmist calls it, is a consequence of poor judgement goaded by excessive emotion. Reflecting on the so-called “post-truth” world and confirmation bias, in particular, author Sam Harris optimistically qualifies the world of information as a double edged sword: 

 

“The duel effect of the internet. Half of which is perverse. That is, if you want to remain a slave to confirmation bias you can, forever, on the internet. But if you actually want to discover if you’re mistaken you can also do that pretty quickly.”[31]

 

It is up to the individual to discern reliable from unreliable sources.[32] Or to leave the task to authoritative persons usually called ‘experts.’ When it comes to the discovery of truth, people can be their own worst enemy in the defense against malign intent. The Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign proved that very little money and a lot of creativity can make a significant impact in the way people think and feel.[33] Unsurprisingly, an untrained population in the work of philosophy, though highly specialized in their own professions, can easily be goaded, if not conditioned, to trust emotional responses, or rather to indulge in them, instead of reason with topics that are typically political, but can be of a wide variety.[34]

 

The job of discernment is demanded more of the common consumer. While information is growing more available it is not necessarily becoming clearer or somehow more true. The influx of information has the attention of many professors. For one, the preeminent professor Donald Kagan. Professor Kagan warns that, “all this access to everything and so much of it is distracting rather than helpful.” Reflecting upon the work of the historian as an expert, Kagan explains: 

 

“The historian must select a topic of importance. Even a narrative history must organize and arrange events in such a way to reveal their significance most effectively. You must try to explain why things happened as they did and what may be learned from human affairs and behaviors in general from the events he has studied. In this respect his work must be philosophical. But unlike philosophers and their post-enlightenment offspring, the social scientist, who usually prefer to explain a vast range of particular phenomena by the simplest possible generalization, historians must be prepared to explain the variety of behavior in various ways.”[35]

 

Big data can help make generalizations. Hard sciences applied to the humanities can be incredibly helpful and illuminating. However, it is still the job of the humanities to emphasize the humanity, yes sounds redundant, of man rather than the group he or she is associated with: number, graph or bar.

 

The last quote is itself a testament to the power of internet-accessible videos. Donald Kagan produced a lecture series at Yale on the Hellespont at the time surrounding the two Peloponnesian Wars. I personally watched the series and loved it. I wanted to see more of Professor Kagan. I then watched an interview he did in which he talked about his book, On War and the Preservation of Peace.[36] I then bought his extraordinary book and loved it too.The speech above is his wise take on the current state of affairs. Professor Kagan’s opinion is highly valuable and worth a listen. It is also worthy of citation as an authority on history, culture and society. 

 

You will be hearing more from Professor Kagan. 

 

7) My Digital Profile is my Public Persona 

 

After I conduct my personal hygiene and get dressed, I am ready to present myself to the public. I dress according to the event and setting. How I appear before my fellow citizens matters, including: lover, family, neighbors, strangers, coworkers and employer. 

 

There may be a disconnect between how I think I appear and how I am received, but 9 out of 10 times I successfully present how I design. And how I design my presentation is predetermined largely by culture and society. For example, I wear a suit to present like a professional when I go to Market Street. I am signaling to others that I am a part of the professional category of people. My walk, demeanor and speech seal or disrupt whatever presumptions are made of me. 

 

There are set categories of dress that people abide by. Each set communicates a professional life, way of life, time in life, philosophy or altogether ambivalence of the whole matter, which is in itself a message that few people miss. People live up to their category regularly and without question. It is a matter of identity. 

 

In dress, identity is an expression of the self in group terms. Deviations and alterations are likely, but not altogether detaching from the group. Commonly, groups will monopolize a style of dress. If a group behaves one particular way, generally, then an association develops. 

 

The setting settles the appropriateness of any particular dress. What is normal on Market Street in downtown Big City may contrast heavily with what is normal at the Big City Suburban Neighborhood Tract. Imagine a man wearing a suit selling his wares door-to-door in a suburb.

 

The man faces two initial prejudices: (1) people are hesitant to open the door to anyone unexpected (these days) and (2) door-to-door salesmen have shoddy reputation just short of being confused with a criminal. The salesman may alleviate the fears of the suburbanites by dressing casually and giving a strictly professional, courteous and friendly pitch.  

​

By wearing a suit, the man is dressed a level of formality above what is normal in the setting. This causes apprehension among potential customers. Likewise, it is well known conventionally and even palpable to the senses naturally, that the mark of the “conman" begins with over-compensation and over-sharing. In oozing trust, he intends to build confidence to only cheat and deceive his unwitting victim. Hence giving meaning to the full version of the term "confidence man." That reputation of the type accompanies any solicitation. If the man introduces himself as a local politician, well, it’s all the same. 

 

Generally understood patterns of dress correspond with patterns of virtuous or vicious behavior, taken as the numerator, calculated with a specific cultural and ethical denominator. And as a consequence, the type of dress communicates safety or danger and trust or distrust (familiarity and comfort or unfamiliarity and discomfort). The caveat remaining the same, settings matter. 

​

...

 

In contrast, at home I am the collection of a bed head, ducktail and all, an unshaven face and a cozy body in sweats and a sweatshirt. Even in the most deplorable comfort-swayed of appearances, I maintain my public persona on my digital profile. There, I am a most prim and pristine looking fellow. At LinkedIn, I am a professional. On Facebook, I am a neighborly hoot. On Twitter, I am a pompous lout. On Reddit, I am a frustrating ‘trollolol.’ The profile fits the setting and within the site people congregate with those whom they share a similar mind, disposition and interest, just as they do in physical settings (though limited by miles and means). Only now, the user can wear all of the faces at the same time. 

 

My digital profile is my public persona. 

 

Every website has the potential to be like a storefront, newsstand, pulpit, club or dirty alleyway. And every site has the traffic like that on any street: proper professional, dirty and grungy, dark and dangerous or some mix of it all. If you’ve ever been to a big city there is just about always a man on his street corner pulpit screaming at the passersby about the chemicals in the water or the cancer causing radio waves. There’s a man mumbling to himself rushing through the thick crowds of suits and jabber. Pick pocketing or change begging vagrants speckle the street, dimly, with eyes soiled and gray, swirling with the projections of minds in turmoil. But look! A dog and his master walk by and all gush and awe at the flappy fluffy happy pup. 

 

Only, on the digital street there is no smell. 

 

The analogy is not perfect, but the precept for study is significant. For every dodgy street peddler, selling illicit wares, there is a “dark web” where the same is conducted. What of the anonymity on the internet? What of using an alias at parties, a pseudonym for editorials or dressing up like a stranger to see a grunge concert? The ways we disguise ourselves in the real world are comparable to those in the digital world. 

 

There are as many means to avoid identification in the physical world as there are in the digital world. The means are different, but the ends are the same. When people are caught and identified doing vicious things anonymously, they are punished. Such as it is in the digital world. Get caught spouting lies or inciting violence, anonymously, and take the risk of being discovered and feeling the wrath of the world upon you.

​

Now let's get out of the Big City and head to the Big City Suburban Tract. We present ourselves as put together and friendly. And we are feeling inquisitive. 

 

Let’s go for a walk. Around the block we get to talking about all kinds of things. We see our kind neighbors tending to their yards and enjoying their porches. We ask our neighbors questions, “what is the price of oil?”And the next “where can I find a lawn mower?” And lastly “who is the prime minister of Lithuania?” They provide us with an informative answer, a reference, hogwash or nothing. In any case, we take the reply weighed against the authority of the neighbor answering. That said, a fact is a fact and anyone can be right in any case. If we do not get the answer we desire, we may seek another source of information. 

 

Now, what do these curiosities reveal about me? Perhaps I am an investor, who is interested in Lithuanian oil policy and my mower broke down. Or absolutely not, but I am curious about such things today and never again. No matter how boring, bleak or rude the information, it is not enough to say it is an extension of the consciousness.

 

Do we say that my daily curiosities such as these make up my internal process? Hardly. Anything could have led me there. We speculate too much when we assume that questions like the above are any more private than the questions we pose to friendly neighbors (or find in textbooks). In this way, the internet is a giant index (websites) with a bank (digital footprints) that plays both the parts of library card and bookmark. 

 

No matter where we go on the internet, the digital profile shows a neat, prim and collected person. It is a means to network, share and learn. The profile is the face of activity, but not the mind. Simply, not all thoughts are expressed. In the public sphere as well as the digital sphere, everything is self-monitored and oriented toward self-promotion, including self-preservation. 

​

...

​

Digital activity is now a necessary part of the pubic experience. Methodologically, I assert that studies of the public, culture and society, must include digital activity, because the digital realm is a supplement to the physical world. Likewise, the internet itself is a dynamic tool used in bits and pieces to assist us in other parts of life. Like the internal combustion engine, electricity or the printing press, this particular tool is a catalyst of changes nestled in the passionate hearts of an irrational humanity starved for meaning. Hungry to accomplish something or to become someone, the internet is a means (and a place) to satisfy the desire to do something and to be someone important. There, folks showcase humanity's frailty, ambition, compassion and cruelty. 

 

I wont go as far as to argue, as some have, that our phones, for instance, are an extension of our consciousness. I also don’t support the argument that we are all “digital citizens” in the World Wide Web.[37] I am contented, however, to assert that the digital realm is an extension of our public personas. It is simpler to argue only that digital activity, honing in on digitalized society, especially connectivity, is an extension of public display: guarded, prim, intentional and neat. Again, the digital profile is the public persona. 

 

The digital realm is a supplement of the physical world of display. For want of space and in line with conventions, there is only so much that a profile reveals. Directed toward one purpose in one setting, the digital profile is the public persona. This is how we will understand human affairs relative to the digital realm. Methodologically, the digital sphere is a part of our culture, politics and economics. It warrants study as a legitimate source of public display.