Kami, no Kaye, who cares…so sue me

I am currently reading the book “the blank slate: The modern denial of human nature” by Steven Pinker. The thing that I find most interesting about this book is that human beings are not born with a mental blank slate, that there are innate circuitries present as the beginning of each person’s existence. Pinker points out that while the argument of “nature vs. nurture” has not be resolved, it has been societies response to accept that “nurture” is responsible for most human action. However, upon experimentation, scientists have learned that the “prefrontal lobe and the limbic system (the seat of the emotion) anticipates the consequences of one’s actions and selects behavior consonant with one’s goals.” It may be that due to our inherent wiring so to speak, we are simply incapable of performing the type of behavioral acts that others would expect us to perform. Further, if an individual is raised “right” and taught “right” then the response will be “right.” As a result, we don’t understand when there are those who insist on doing wrong.

Now let me back up a bit, I am not saying that we should excuse all aberrant behavior and learn to live with it because others cannot control themselves. Moreover, I am saying that we need to be more cognizant in our encounters with other people; not everyone functions from the same paradigm or with the same level of capacities as others. In addition, both physiology and psychology play a big part in who and what people become.
With that being said, how does this relate to identity, deception and accountability? Well, first of all, human nature is what it is, in a virtual world or a real world. I know, Donath addressed the issue of how deception is more difficult in the real world, but I have to say that for those who are innately “good” they will not abuse the virtual world and for those who are innately “bad” they will be opportunists in any environment.

I think that it would be interesting to do research on the behavior of trolls in a virtual world and then study their behavior in a real world. I would hypothesize that there would be a strong correlation between their behaviors in both worlds. However, I acknowledge that accountability does have an impact on the behavior of people who need societal constraints to behave correctly.

It is my opinion that trust, accountability and deception are societal constructs and one’s ability to adhere to them is both psychological and physiological. Last week I had a conversation with a girl on IRC, who as it turns out was a teenager. At the beginning of our conversation, I assumed she was just like me, around my age and with functioned with my same value system, etc (I know, very egocentric of me). However, as our conversation progressed, I could tell in her conversational patterns and use of colloquialisms that she was much younger and immature about a lot of the topics on which she was professing expertise. I don’t think that she was intentionally trying to misrepresent herself, but rather, that the self she was representing was the only one she knew and that she knew that she was correct and right. I didn’t want to break it to her that it was actually me that was all omniscient, not her, ha ha.

For me, my interactions online are short-lived and so I do not have the time for a person to build up a history of trust with me. It is for this reason that I have to acknowledge the Internet for what it is, and that it provides a venue for communication for people from every walk of life. I cannot assume that everyone has the same purpose in their interactions with me and so must consider their comments and information with some degree of suspect. Donath’s comments are helpful as guidelines on how to identify trustworthiness based on some of the subtle signs that she recommended. Further, these guidelines should be headed until more time can pass to establish a history of credibility. And, this is done by demonstrating accountability overtime to build trust, which in turn enhances cooperation.