GameBanshee Forums

This morning I have been doing some research on Google that I suppose can be loosely described as "medical."
Initially I was looking up information on eczema. While I have been in remission for a long time and rarely have any flareups, it is something I have lived with since very young. Thus, I can fairly say that I already know *a lot* about the condition.

I also was looking up various neurological disorders and similar conditions because I'm wondering if a 'family member' behaves the way she does for reasons that have nothing to do with rudeness or insensitivity. But in this regard I'm entirely out of my depth, and I'm well aware of it. I do not know about this area from either a professional or personal perspective, so I'm just making stabs in the dark.

This got me to thinking about the role of the internet in acquiring knowledge. Is it a good thing, a bad thing, or somewhere in between?

Certainly, I do think it can help people to gain some level of control over a medical condition, providing that they can recognise legitimate sites from the chaff.

However, I also think it can lead to people making wildly inaccurate pop guesses. Or, it can encourage people to self-medicate and not seek the treatments they actually need.

I'm not sure, I see pros and cons to all of this.

Opinions?

Well - it is both good and bad in my view (uhh - how decisive of me )

What I mean is that a wealth of information is now availble at ones finger tip, where before one had to wade through lexica, ask people and go to the library and so on. Now it is simply to log on to the web and spend some time searching.
It also means that people can challenge other peoples ideas and opinions - and thereby their own - and communicate across borders and races.
So it is easier to acquer knowlegde now, or rather ... information, because knowlegde is not simply finding the infromation. It is how to use it.
However, this is the "optimal" scenario.

The net has also provided many people with the means to afferminate their bias and conceptions, because frankly - anything you can think on, and it is likely on the Internet. So people have easier time to find others with similar opinions and can then sit and confirm themselves they are right and everybody else in the world is wrong. So in that aspect - information - can be misused as well. Sort of the good ole saying (if you can use old in regards of a technology which have only been commonhold for about 10 years) that "If it is one the internet, it must be true". That is definately a negative aspect.

As for your medical aspect (which where what you actually was asking), then I don't discard that it might be true, that more people might try to selfmedicate, but I'd think - withouth any proof - that such people would be the one trying to do so anyway, and would avoid going to the doctor as much as possible and read medical encyclopedia from their shelves of from friends/family etc. And I don't doubt some people would blindly follow what they read - but then again - I would think people did that before as well with books and encyclopedia.
I also personally read some medical information once in a while, when feeling down to find out indicators as to what might be wrong with me.


Overall - I think the masses of information availble on the Internet is a generally positive thing, but I'm likely very biased by the fact that I normally "live and breathe" information from the web.
I use it in my daily life both work and outside work. For work I read techincal information, share my knowlegde with others as I soak up others from message boards and articles and finding inspiration how to solve problems. Outside work I use it for relaxation (such as this board) and getting news, stockmarket, communicating with friends and relatives and all that. It would be impossible if it wasn't for the vast amount of information on the web, because then it wouldnt' have been as usefull as it is.

I use the internet as my main source of info on a lot of things - its just quicker than going to the library

As far as medical stuff, I tend to think that the internet can make people hyperchondriacs. So many illnesses have similar symptoms and self-diagnosis over the internet could easily result in misinformation. I think there is no harm in looking up medical stuff, as long as a doctor is also consulted.

I find the problem with information on the internet is seperating fact, fiction and opinion.
And places like Wikipedia don't help.

That's not to say eronious information can be found in books from a library, but at least there are not so many that can have such differing thoughts/info/opinions.

The problem with the net is that anyone can post anything in anyway they like which may not be in anyway related to what they really feel etc (ie they can be lying). And then anyone can use that arcticle as a backup for they opinoins ideas.

Also though the internet claims to have billions of pages of information not everything is on it, or maybe on the net but very hard to find.

I also don't like how some information services that are part of mainstream media don't have as much information on their net services than they normally do, as in a newspaper acticle in the form you hold in your hand has more text than the same article in that newspapers website (same for TV sites), and even in dedicated web news places articles are woefully less than what I'd expect.
(I'm aware that TV & Newspapers etc have a vested interest in having less info on the net than on their proper sales items in order to keep funds up, but only on-line sites have no excuse.)

Plus there is such a thing as too much information.

PS hope your eczema get's less irritating DW

Just ask CE, She'll know.


(Must I continue?)

ch85us2001 wrote:Just ask CE, She'll know.

Yes! Ask CE!

CE will provide us with a lovely post explaining everything we need to know, CE always knows best.

CE: Human Dictionary!

As Chock full of information, and as heartless, too!


(Come on. I'm running out of "Nicer" jokes. I dont wanna get really mean.)

ch85us2001 wrote:CE: Human Dictionary!

As Chock full of information, and as heartless, too!

Don't forget cold, but that doesn't matter when you know everything, naturally you're superior to everyone!

Damuna_Nova wrote:Don't forget cold, but that doesn't matter when you know everything, naturally you're superior to everyone!

You would think after having gotten all the warnings you've received, you might stop to think about Rule #1:

#1 - Flaming, humiliating, ridiculing, or belittling other members will not be tolerated. If you have an issue with another member, take it to private messages or email.

Since you like playing "kick the member," you can do so out of the forum for a while.

I entirely agree with Xandax post, but I will elaborate a bit:

The main problem with the "information wants to be free" concept and internet, is that it requires a lot of knowledge to be able to find knowledge, and differentiate between knowledge and false claims.

Some years ago I read this article (I don't remember the name of the author, unfortunately) written by an American professor in sociology I think he was, about the development of new social classes where information is replacing material possessions as the segregating factor. He proposed that in today's Western society, two classes are developing: those who have access to information and can use it freely, and those who don't. Those who don't are the targets for media, politicans and other interest groups to manipulate in the direction that suits their goals.

Ultimately, this is a question of freedom to act in the world and in your own life, since without knowledge, people are much more vulnerable to manipulation by incorrect information.

The following link provides a great example of the "information" the internet has to offer:
Chapter 4
EVOLUTION

I get a great deal of information from the internet, but the vast majority of material on the internet is either unsubstantiated opinion (not a bad thing in itself if you take it for what it is) or complete and utter crap. Or parodies thereof.

VonDondu wrote:The following link provides a great example of the "information" the internet has to offer:
Chapter 4
EVOLUTION

I get a great deal of information from the internet, but the vast majority of material on the internet is either unsubstantiated opinion (not a bad thing in itself if you take it for what it is) or complete and utter crap. Or parodies thereof.

Hehehe - actually a somewhat funny site.

But yes. Much information is written by "you or me" and so should always be taken with a grain of salt - leading back to the often spoken mantra when somebody unquestionable links something "If it is on the Internet, it must be true"
However, I think this is where CE's mention of the two different "social classes" comes into play.
The ones who knows this and questions material or the ones who simply accept it - for what ever reason (possible because it fits with opinions already, so feeling a form of validation).
Anybody who's spend time on search engines finding material will know that information found is not inheritly true, and that is the aspect which makes information-finding "difficult", because it then leads back to how to search as well, which leads back to technical (Internet-related) abilities.

However, one can find a lot of real factual information "out there", and thus I can live with the fact that there is a lot of nonfactual as well. It simply requiers one to think about it a little before using it.

IMHO, the 'Net is only a reflection of what people from technologically advanced countries have always been like and always done.

People have always been subjective, biased, loud-mouthed, liars, stubborn, opinionated and extremist. They have also always self-medicated, decided what is 'truth' despite facts to the contrary, and so on.

The difference is simply that the 'Net is bigger and more people can access the information.

I don't see certain things as 'bad', such as that anybody can say anything - I LIKE this about the 'Net. I feel fairly strongly about freedom of speech. The humble Blog, for example, has been known to cause politicians and traditional/professional journalists to sit up and take note. No longer are a few of us grumbling about 'the state of things' over a beer and leaving it at that. We're having a say, and if the opinions are felt widely enough, those in authority have little choice but to listen.

So I don't see what's on the 'net as the problem, but rather how we approach the Internet. There are still a significant amount of people that think it is a library. I approach it like stepping into a large room filled with people - some of these are weirdos, some perverts, some ignorant, others highly educated, others compassionate, and on and on.

The Internet is not academia, the Internet is just life, with warts and all. Long may it live.