Is social media making society more mentally ill?

Are there more mental illness now vs. before Social media was discovered? — TheQuestion

Social media is nothing else but a branch of "information technology".

To understand it's implications one has to answer 2 questions:
1. What's the purpose of information technology?
2. How did information technology evolve over time?

First information technology ever is the discovery of a letter.
Thanks to discover of a letter we have been able to conserve knowledge and discover new inventions that require concentration of existing knowledge.

It's not a secret that discovery of a letter is the biggest discovery ever, one without which nothing would be possible that we have today.
Discovery of a letter is a break point of human invention.

I don't know the motive behind this discovery or whether it was accidental discovery, but evolution of information is lead us up to discovery of computer, that is writing information down with 0 and 1.
Instead of reading zeroes and ones directly, we have simulation programs that let us enter into virtual reality.

Therefore "information technology" leads us into a new reality and endless possibilities and applications.
However as with any technology there is a negative side of a coin.

Discovery of printing press, television, internet etc. is also used by one group to gain advantage over other group.

Propaganda, censorship, algorithms etc. is the tool used to limit free speech, and push agenda that serves no one else except those who push them.

This is major reason why social media is wrong, since it's easier to talk with other people over social media (ex. due to distance or lack of time), it is now possible to limit and eliminate thought that may be considered as "harmful" or something that is against some ones else agenda.

This answers your questions:

* Fake News and how it is normalizing, paranoia and delusional thinking.

* Division in our Society - promoting prejudice thinking

* Creating a culture of wanting to be right

* How Social Media can distort our cognitive perspective because of algorithms — TheQuestion

Mental illness here should be better called "enslavement of our mind"

Is social media making society more mentally ill?

Are there more mental illness now vs. before Social media was discovered?

Such examples as....

* Anxiety and Depression

* Fake News and how it is normalizing, paranoia and delusional thinking.

* Division in our Society - promoting prejudice thinking

* Creating a culture of wanting to be right

* How Social Media can distort our cognitive perspective because of algorithms — TheQuestion

I guess that social media CAN make people more mentally ill, but i would guess that just about any form of media or propaganda that came before it is as or almost as capable of causing just as much damage. I'm also guessing that part of the problems is that some people reading stuff on social media don't realize that anything there has as much validity to it as what people write in a bathroom stall.

I may be wrong but it seems to me that the issue itself may not be with social media itself, but with the way it is used and with the way our society is today. Social Media is merely a tool and like all tools created before it (like books, newspapers, movies, television, etc.), it can help or harm depending on what people want to do with it and whether or not such actions can harm others.

IMHO if the issues with social media is more of a symptom of a problem (ie since social media is a tool used in causing harm not the source itself) not the problem itself the better question to ask, what (or who) is real source of the harm or problems that are caused using social media and can anything be done about it.

Is social media making society more mentally ill? — TheQuestion

I think social media and technology in general are lessening the quality of the interpersonal interactions conducted through them, and this lessening of the quality then can have adverse psychological effects.

Handling the technology takes up too much brain power, so less of it is left for quality of the interpersonal interactions.

I wrote this on a smsrtphone and I feel like a retsrd now.

Apparently you can’t use emojis unless you have given money to the forum. Didn’t know this before now. — Leghorn

Neither did I.

People's inability to resist an easy dopamine hit is more of the root problem here imo rather than social media per se.

I may be wrong but it seems to me that the issue itself may not be with social media itself, but with the way it is used and with the way our society is today. Social Media is merely a tool and like all tools created before it (like books, newspapers, movies, television, etc.), it can help or harm depending on what people want to do with it and whether or not such actions can harm others.

IMHO if the issues with social media is more of a symptom of a problem (ie since social media is a tool used in causing harm not the source itself) not the problem itself the better question to ask, what (or who) is real source of the harm or problems that are caused using social media and can anything be done about it. — dclements

Agree.

Social media is a natural extension of human sociality and isn't some monolithic good or bad thing but a reflection of how we relate to each other in modem society and similarly complex and nuanced in its forms and effects.

Are there more mental illness now vs. before Social media was discovered? — TheQuestion

I wonder whether we can know how prevalent mental illness was in times past, which is to say, any time prior to creation of the internet, or earlier. Some of what is now considered mental illness wasn't discussed, or even taken note of, not all that long ago. Psychiatry and Psychology are fairly recent developments, in fact. For all we know the percentage of those with mental illness when compared with the population was greater two hundred years ago than it is now. Records of mental illness then and earlier would be sparse and likely limited to extreme cases. Those with mental illness didn't have the means to make others aware of it then to the extent they can now.

What hasn't changed over the last several hundred (many thousand) years is basic humanness. Part of that is a variable ability to cope with stresses. Some people manage coping very well, others not. There are mental illnesses that apparently arise without excess stress, coped with or not, like schizophrenia and bipolar. Migraine and epilepsy have long histories. Intelligence varies now and has varied in the past.

I think we can assume that there has been a more or less constant level of mental dysfunction. It may not have been recognized (or recognized as something else), and may have been more or less debilitating.



I find most social media to be tedious and annoying. I don't like to have information 'pushed' at me; I don't like the chaotic sharing of significant, trivial, and often enough completely false and misleading information.

Social media applications are designed to engage -- and keep users engaged -- for extended periods of time. It supplies rewards; new posts generate just enough pleasure/stimulation to keep you on site. A "sort of addiction" develops. That is slightly true even for The Philosophy Forum. One continues to use static sites (like dictionary or encyclopedia sites) because they supply a certain kind of service, but they aren't "addicting" to 99.999% of the population.

What social media and advertising are particularly good at is arousing us, to a greater or lesser degree. The arousal doesn't have to be pleasant or positive -- it can involve irritation, cognitive dissonance, strong disagreement, disgust, embarrassment, anger... all sorts of reactions.

Some people become over stimulated, excessively aroused, and so on. Excessive arousal and over stimulation over a long period of time are unhealthy and very wearing. Outright false information (Donald Trump won the 2020 presidential election) is believed by some share o the social media audience and can lead to social conflict. People who believe Trump won, that Covid 19 was a fraud, that vaccinations are very dangerous, and so on may run into a lot of friction when they air their false beliefs.

People whose base line mental status isn't all that stable to start with can end up much worse off from engaging in too much social media.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/08/us/tiktok-hand-signal-abduction.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

It seems to me is "Freedom of Speech" that went hay wirer. Not saying Freedom of Speech is bad but if you add anonymity to the equation. Society will be more keen to express themselves compared to someone who is identified.

Take my avatar name I wish to remain anonymous because I have questions about topics that may come across as absurd or to put it simply "stupid". Also, I don't wish to validate my reasoning or sanity if I want to express a random thought either. It is a way to say what I want without any real consequence except for the occasional embarrassment or foot in the mouth.

But it does lead me to believe that corporations has exploited this attitude as a means to make a profit and create a sort of "Emotional Milking Farm" in other words they figured out how to profit off your feelings.

Think about YouTube Platform for a second and how every time you like a video and subscribe to the channel the owner gets paid. The channel gets commercials and everytime commercials are viewed the owner gets money.

But here's the catch the audience needs to stay engaged. That's where "Emotional Milking" comes in. By providing information whether it is true or not that is irrelevant to the platform, is all about the reaction of the audience.

In other words "negative thinking sells" it doesn't care if the information is true or not it just wants a reaction from the audience to rank up its ratings because ratings means "$$$". Negative reaction proves to be more profitable than positive thinking.

Compare it to tobacco, alcohol and cannabis companies down playing the negative effects to promote good business. Like in the 50's they advertised cigarettes are good for your health and you should smoke at least a pack a day. Now we have Lung Cancer and COPD.

I am wondering is Social Media is the new tobacco company? And the health side effect is on the mind?

Just the philosophy forum is bad for your health

Is any media good for your health?

Ne quid nimis (Nothing in excess) & Dosis sola facit venenum (The dose makes the poison) but then there are some things so toxic that botulinum with a LD50 value of 1 ng/kg seems as harmless as a dove.

Alle Dinge sind Gift, und nichts ist ohne Gift, allein die Dosis macht dass ein Ding kein Gift ist.

All things are poison, and nothing is without poison, the dosage alone makes it so a thing is not a poison. — Paracelsus, 1538

I don't think social media is designed to propagate human well being. I think it's largely designed for commercial purposes. As such, I don't think we should be surprised at all if there are substantial ill effects.

Social media I think might in many cases increase the level of fragmentation, scattering the mind to a greater level than a population has ever experienced. Fragmentation of information could do nothing but fragment the thinking, I fear this may be so, any thought on it out there?