Do we really want to know?

I'm thinking on what role the virtual networking explosion of the last several years might have in transformation to the post global-economic-&-financial-crisis (call it GEFC) world.

The social networking phenomenon seems in many ways to be superficial and egotistical: Look at me: I am; I have friends; I am respected, recommended.

It seems kind of desperate in its extreme with individuals’ networks too big to sustain significant depth: almost like a web of shorthand relationships; more about connection than deep change or collaboration.

In New Zealand the TXT phenomenon is huge amongst young people who continually TXT each other. With an iPhone they can be constantly connected to their virtual world.

I wonder if this phenomenon will wither or flourish with GEFC. Wither with a realisation that depth is essential to productive relationships, or flourish with increased need to talk; to relate in crisis.

I ‘m reflecting on why I began this blog; why I’m on Facebook and LinkedIn: what am I trying to achieve? Am I and others fundamentally seeking connectedness in a deeply disconnected world?

Maybe we can discover new organisational modes, themes, tunes, rhythms and harmonies in the possibility-rich, apparent-noise of transmission and interconnection.

Through my sometime association with Computer Clubhouse in New Zealand (http://www.clubhouse274.org.nz/ ) I can appreciate how connectedness is fundamental to community and individual health and creativity: opportunity for empathy, relationship, learning, growth and innovation.

Problem is, I have way more information coming at me than I can productively utilise; way more opportunity to connect than I can respond to, let alone develop into productive relationships.

I have to decide which to attend to; which to pursue; to somehow achieve a balance of confirming and disconfirming influence so that I am challenged but not destroyed; to leave room for serendipity rather than attempt to control it all myself. . . . . . . . . . . I also need silence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .