I thought I'd get on and post just some of my thoughts from our first class. Don't worry, I'm not normally such an overachiever.
The thing that kept hitting me as we watched what can be done using Second Life is the fact that the possibilities are endless. I had thoughts comming in which are completely absurd now as I realize I can do much more. Most in Anthropology don't take the time to look at "these types" of technologies. As if the use of something designated "gaming" is somehow going to sully the "good" name of Anthropology. In truth, we Anthrops tend to get a little defensive. You would too if upon meeting someone you have the following conversation, every time...
"I study Anthropology"... "What's that?"... "The study of culture." ... "Ok, so what part of culture do you study?"... "Well, I look at.... (glazed expression covers face of other person)...." "Well, what exactly can you do with it?" ... "I plan to flip burgers."
We've also dealt with the stigma of being a "fake" science - or rather being told that what we do is not science. The problem with that is that we employ research methods that follow along the scientific method. It just tends to make us a little irritated.
Now I find myself looking at Second Life from another perspective. The archaeologist that can recreate the structures from a site and then walk through them, as well as allow others to do so. An educational center could be created to allow speakers of Native American languages that are being lost to hear native speakers and perhaps even speak with them, all the while they are walking through a ceremonial center. I think of the Native American children taken in the 70s and 80s from thier homs because the government deemed they did not have a stable situation (cultural misunderstanding is what they call it now). Those people that strive to learn of thier genetic heritage, but are stopped short by an inability to reconnect. This could allow an opportunity to explore thier past from home. Then I started thinking of the medical applications as well as educational. At Shands, we have children in the hospital that are immune compromised as they undergo cancer treatment. These kids miss school, and if they manage to beat the odds and survive, they are so far behind. Why should they have to be? There are tutors and "schools" set up, but it's not the same as having your own teacher explain things too you. In second life, not only could a student meet thier teacher, but they could have streaming video of the class or lecture there, or post reading assingments, etc.
Anyway, it was a little eye opening for me to realize that the possibilities are so vast I cannot quite reconcile myself with them yet. My father has worked with computers and programing since I was very young. He has a degree in electrical engineering and was one of the first people to examine Linux. He told me years ago that the world would change because of things like Second Life. He urged me to examine the community there and to understand that it is a community. While we discussed it, I was too firmly stuck inside my own box to comprehend what he was saying. I focused on the removal of human contact from everyday life as people flocked to these "fantasy worlds." Now I find myself thinking along the same lines as he (a scary thought, really), that it isn't a lack of human contact, as much as a broadening of what human contact entails. Is contact less satisfying because the person you speak with is thousands of miles away? Is there something missing from the intereaction? I still can't answer those questions. I think there has to be a level of trust which is harder to achieve without being able to read expressions and look into someone's eyes, but with Second Life, can those aspects be part of the virtual world experience?
Those are my rambling thoughts for the day. What did you all think? Do you feel like you're mind is broader with acceptance of new possibilities?
Amy
5 comments:
Amy, I always thought that any round table discussion about the creation of a new society would require the active participatory presence of an anthropologist. After all, don't you have to immerse yourself in the experience in order to study it?
I always wonder what the role of Margaret Mead was at the Macy Conferences that I mentioned in class.
Although I myself am not a proponent of relocation to Second Life, in response to your comment about the lack of human contact I refer you to the obvious notion of a telephone contact (no one uses the prefix "tele" any more, have you noticed?) Is the person on the other side less close to you simply because of eye contact? what about a technology like Skype?
You also mention the 'level of trust' because you don't have eye contact or can't read body language, I think this is a real issue that needs further exploration in the case of "anonymous" presences like in SL. It also reminds me of an experience I had at an Oliver Sacks conference I attended; the audience save a few exceptions like myself was all deaf-mute. The large auditorium was full of activity of people signing to each other, some people quietly "whispering" some "shouting" I imagine if it was a non-deaf mute crowd the noise would be so high!. I realized that you could then "hear" a private conversation that was going on on the other side of the room simply by looking! I also thought that since they are so attuned to body language and subtleties of expression it must be very hard for them lo lie! So when the time for question came I formed on the line to take my turn. I asked both questions. In response to privacy, although they said that it was in fact possible to conduct a private conversation (even hiding from view of course) that in general they thought that they were more open to others in sharing their thoughts than people who could hear and listen. On the lying question the entire audience laughed and the translator "listened" (I don't know what word to use here, my bad)to some members of the audience with the eerie silence that is characteristic of their reunions and came back to say that indeed I was right, it was harder for them to lie, but oh yes, they could! and everyone laughed again.
Amy and Arturo, I am struck by something you both mention... this idea of honesty and sociality.
First a short story... While I was growing up, my mom would have these really long conversations with her sister, my aunt. We lived in Missouri and my aunt lived in Fort Lauderdale. The one side of the conversation that we heard led us to believe that they were the best of friends. Ten years ago, my aunt moved to Missouri. Low and behold, my mom and my aunt don't get along at all! Something about the distance and the removal from real life make the social interaction very different.
Kind of like online dating... people get really involved and connected, but if and when they meet, sometimes reality does not work out quite as well.
Also, I was reading Dean Koontz' latest book a couple weeks ago (The Darkest Evening of the Year) and there was a character in the book who escaped his miserable life by becoming his Second Life character.
So, what does everyone think about this issue? It is not a new issue, but I am interested to know what everyone else thinks...
The possibilities are endless, but that doesn't mean that other literature from the field of anthropology can't lead to interesting applications/studies. Just because virtual worlds haven't been around for a while doesn't mean that other technology-induced societies/communities haven't existed.
Just my two cents. By the way, I'm acting like my dad more and more every day, and it scares the heck out of me :).
I too am interested in the impact that the lack of subtle nonverbal cues may have on social interaction in virtual worlds. One of my many interests in Second Life is conducting research exploring the effectiveness of SL as a tool for teaching social skills to students with significant emotional and behavioral defecits. A primary concern is the lack of nonverbal cues that are present in RL that are not in SL. However, I am hopeful for 2 reasons: 1) after watching Shrek the third I realized how close we really are to making animation lifelike. As time goes on the interface and realism are only going to get better. 2)Many proven social skills curriculums are successful despite any attention to nonverbal signals in the curriculum.
I guess the research will help sort it all out!
Greg, in regards to non-verbal cues, or body language and gestures, it is a matter of creating a library of animations which represent the cues you are interested in displaying. These are animations created in a variety of tools OUTSIDE of SL. Programs like Poser or any other program capable of creating animations and exporting in the Biovision Hierarchy format .bvh for short will allow you to prepare this animations to upload into SL. Check https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Animation for more info. This applies to animated clothes and other things as well. As you mentioned this is in constant development and rapidly approaching a high degree of realism specially with the use of motion capture systems that are used not only for body movements but for minute facial expressions as well (think of the Gollum character In Lord of the Rings which is entirely driven by an actor down to the facial expressions.
Just a note, making animations for SL is not for the faint of heart. It requires a great deal of perseverance, skill and resistance to frustration!
Post a Comment