- Joined
- Feb 10, 2024
Every so often, I am reminded of this quote from Epictetus, and the extent to which it actually holds up.
When looking at lolcows, for example, it's well known by now that some are such autism magnets they end up attracting orbiters who exhibit as many autistic tendencies, or otherwise more than, the actual person they were latched on to - Chris Chan and his downright psychopathic a-logs, Yandev and the circle of fan games from equally unwell creators, the list can go on. This is generally less a matter of the lolcow influencing an A-Log, but instead simply drawing those who were already like-minded into the scene.
However, this could also be extended to the modern (albeit often online) nature of irony, and how the line between sincerity and irony, in some spaces, is so often blurred by absurd humor and discourse that it tends to result in those who initially engage in something "ironically" adopting it with sincerity later on.
Of course, if it was exactly such that we become whatever we subject our attention to, then by that logic the forum in its entirety would be filled with troons, deathfats, delusional grifters, and so forth, yet this is not at all the case for a large part of the userbase, who tend to have an actual life outside the forum. Interest toward lolcows can come from several reasons, but sometimes it is piqued precisely because some may see an attribute in a cow that reminds them of their own self, of one familiar to them, or of personal situations that could have been.
I feel that this statement is significant enough that to limit it to the scope of lolcows would be selling it short.
There is no doubt that people are shaped by their environment, yet there are additionally certain things that we permit or refuse into our environment; friend groups, diet, forms of entertainment or other media, and so forth. In a sense, these are things that would demand attention to persist in one's environment, and consequently, potentially influence one in some way as well.
But is it apt to take the statement, "You become what you give your attention to", and treat it as a rule - as if an inevitable slippery slope binds one to imitate that which they take in? Or does the accuracy of the statement simply depend on the individual?
When looking at lolcows, for example, it's well known by now that some are such autism magnets they end up attracting orbiters who exhibit as many autistic tendencies, or otherwise more than, the actual person they were latched on to - Chris Chan and his downright psychopathic a-logs, Yandev and the circle of fan games from equally unwell creators, the list can go on. This is generally less a matter of the lolcow influencing an A-Log, but instead simply drawing those who were already like-minded into the scene.
However, this could also be extended to the modern (albeit often online) nature of irony, and how the line between sincerity and irony, in some spaces, is so often blurred by absurd humor and discourse that it tends to result in those who initially engage in something "ironically" adopting it with sincerity later on.
Of course, if it was exactly such that we become whatever we subject our attention to, then by that logic the forum in its entirety would be filled with troons, deathfats, delusional grifters, and so forth, yet this is not at all the case for a large part of the userbase, who tend to have an actual life outside the forum. Interest toward lolcows can come from several reasons, but sometimes it is piqued precisely because some may see an attribute in a cow that reminds them of their own self, of one familiar to them, or of personal situations that could have been.
I feel that this statement is significant enough that to limit it to the scope of lolcows would be selling it short.
There is no doubt that people are shaped by their environment, yet there are additionally certain things that we permit or refuse into our environment; friend groups, diet, forms of entertainment or other media, and so forth. In a sense, these are things that would demand attention to persist in one's environment, and consequently, potentially influence one in some way as well.
But is it apt to take the statement, "You become what you give your attention to", and treat it as a rule - as if an inevitable slippery slope binds one to imitate that which they take in? Or does the accuracy of the statement simply depend on the individual?
