Why is real life different than the internet ?

[Massimo2002]

Why is it that real life is physical and the internet is not ?

 

[ChristineM]

Because.

Real life is carbon/water based and analogue
The internet is silicon based and digital

 

[Eddi]

Why is it that real life is physical and the internet is not ?

The internet only exists thanks to computers and those computers are physical as I am typing this out on my phone I am using one of my thumbs and soon you will see what it is writing with your own eyes, sounds physical to me

 

[Quintessence]

Because you made the decision to define "real life" in such a way that excludes the internet from its auspices.

That's not something I do, but my ontological perspective is odd to most folks in this culture. Apparently going with a practical "if I can experience or know it in any way it's real" is odd. I think it's all of those who disagree that are the odd ones... heh.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Real life precedes the internet by some significant number of years, as I recall.

And the internet was created by real life.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why is it that real life is physical and the internet is not ?

There are a few subtly different meanings for the expression "real life". It can be living organisms that are known to exist; it can be the experience of being a living entity, as experienced by the entity itself; or more figuratively, it can be the subset of activities and experiences that is considered to be "real" (as in "valid") by some perhaps unspecificed criteria.

By the first meaning, the Internet is arguably a physical and living entity. It all depends on how you define, delimit and interpret the ideas of "Internet", "life' and "physicality".

By the second meaning, the Internet can not possibly be "real life" until and unless it is somehow (and surprisingly) revealed to be self-aware or conscious.

Finally, and perhaps most likely, using the Internet is not physical "life" (either real or non-real), but rather an activity that we know to exist in the physical world, and it is somewhat common to describe that activity as separate and distinct from those that qualify as "real life" according to some criteria.

I am not among the people who would say such a thing. At best it is a reducionist oversimplification. The claim that "Internet is not (a valid part of) real life" is actually very uninformative and demonstrably incomplete. It requires complementation with at least some elaboration of what is being considered "real life" (and real life activities) for the rather judgmental purposes of said claim.

The Internet is plenty real enough, and there is no doubt that its use is part of real life by any sane standard.

 

[Massimo2002]

There are a few subtly different meanings for the expression "real life". It can be living organisms that are known to exist; it can be the experience of being a living entity, as experienced by the entity itself; or more figuratively, it can be the subset of activities and experiences that is considered to be "real" (as in "valid") by some perhaps unspecificed criteria.

By the first meaning, the Internet is arguably a physical and living entity. It all depends on how you define, delimit and interpret the ideas of "Internet", "life' and "physicality".

By the second meaning, the Internet can not possibly be "real life" until and unless it is somehow (and surprisingly) revealed to be self-aware or conscious.

Finally, and perhaps most likely, using the Internet is not physical "life" (either real or non-real), but rather an activity that we know to exist in the physical world, and it is somewhat common to describe that activity as separate and distinct from those that qualify as "real life" according to some criteria.

I am not among the people who would say such a thing. At best it is a reducionist oversimplification. The claim that "Internet is not (a valid part of) real life" is actually very uninformative and demonstrably incomplete. It requires complementation with at least some elaboration of what is being considered "real life" (and real life activities) for the rather judgmental purposes of said claim.

The Internet is plenty real enough, and there is no doubt that its use is part of real life by any sane standard.

I disagree to me the information isn't real it's like watching a movie and thinking that the movie that isn't based on a true story is real.

 

[LuisDantas]

I disagree to me the information isn't real it's like watching a movie and thinking that the movie that isn't based on a true story is real.

Information is always real in the sense that it exists.

Whether it corresponds to any degree to anything else that has existence of a non-infomational nature is perhaps a very important question to answer. In that sense, sure, it may be necessary to distinguish models and fictions from information of a more factual basis.

I just don't think that calling some information "non-real" is not very useful.

 

[ChristineM]

I disagree to me the information isn't real it's like watching a movie and thinking that the movie that isn't based on a true story is real.

I think you may be confusing real with living.

If you can see it, feel it, measure it etc, it's real

 

[Massimo2002]

I think you may be confusing real with living.

If you can see it, feel it, measure it etc, it's real

So the film evil dead is real ?

 

[ChristineM]

So the film evil dead is real ?

Yes a real film

 

[HonestJoe]

Why is it that real life is physical and the internet is not ?

Both "real life" and "the internet" are abstract concepts (both of which can be commonly used to refer to subtly different things) so neither are directly physical. Both involve physical things though, in the forces and processes of the universe and the computers and cabling around the world respectively.

I would argue that everything we observe and interact with has both physical and non-physical elements. All of our senses are reliant on physical forces and our brains are physical material and energy but the combination of thoughts that are generated as a result as abstract, distinct from the physical world that led to them to a greater or lesser extent. Whether you're looking at a digital image on the screen, a physical photograph or the real object itself doesn't really make any difference on that basis.