Monsters from The Id
In 1956, MGM released the science fiction film, Forbidden Planet,1 starring Walter Pidgeon, Anne Francis, and Leslie Nielsen. The film was groundbreaking in several ways: it introduced the first faster-than-light human-created spacecraft, took place entirely off Earth, introduced the famous “Robby the Robot” character, and was the first of any film to have an entirely electronic soundtrack. Some consider Forbidden Planet a loose adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Tempest. It is one of the greatest science fiction films of all time.
But, what I saw as an amusing film as a child, and a more amusing warning against technology misused as an adult, I now see as a fairly apt description of our interplay between each other using social media.
Let’s review the film: United Planets Starship C-57D is dispatched to Altair 4 to investigate what happened to an Earth expedition 20 years earlier. They discover only 2 survivors, a scientist, Dr. Morbius, and his daughter, Altaira. Dr. Morbius tells them how the crew of the Bellerophon were killed by a mysterious force, one by one, until the ship itself was destroyed as the remaining survivors tried to flee. Only he, his wife who later died of natural causes, and daughter, survived, unable to fathom their unique “immunity”.
Dr. Morbius tells them of the Krell, the super-race of Altair 4 that went extinct overnight 200,000 years ago, and shows them the vast complex of functioning machinery they left, including laboratories with “educators”, one of which permanently doubled Dr. Morbius’ IQ level. Adams asks Morbius to share this knowledge with Earth, but Morbius refuses.
Adams and the crew return to the ship and erect a protective force field; nevertheless, something invades the ship and murders the chief engineer. Confronted, Morbius warns of worse attacks. The next night the force field illuminates the “monster” as it murders more of the crew. Morbius, asleep in his lab, is awakened by his daughter; at that moment, the monster vanishes.
While Commander Adams tries to persuade Altaira to leave, the ship’s doctor tries the Krell “educator”, and is fatally injured. Before he dies, he reveals he now understands the Krell machinery and its purpose: to create anything from thought alone. But the Krell forgot one thing: the subconscious, primitive thoughts within each of us, the “monsters from the Id”.
Morbius cannot acknowledge this until, cowering within his own lab from the monster now hunting them, he faces his Id, and is fatally injured in the encounter. Before he dies, Morbius activates a planetary self-destruct mechanism so as to prevent the Krell knowledge from leading to Earth’s own destruction.
Forbidden Planet and its “Monsters from the Id” can be a warning for how we behave in the realm of social media. Today, we give expression to our thoughts in a manner which shares them (potentially) with millions of other people, and in an instant. This is a first in human history.
But there are monsters about, and 3 factors need to be considered: framing or compartmentalization in online communication, the nature of human intelligence and how it channels our behavior online, and how human communication is limited online.
Let us deal with the first issue, compartmentalization. When one goes to an in-person social event, one does not (usually) declare one’s political or religious affiliations, or list one’s likes and dislikes with respect to movies, food, activities, etc., all within 5 minutes. Online, however, this is information you can get from a quick profile glance.
Moreover, the algorithms used for these platforms are meant to take the information you provide (your “likes”, as it were), and then present you with similar content, either based on existing associations, or proximity. Short comments, with action words and exclamations, garner attention and “likes”.
Conversely, complex, nuanced statements take effort, and therefore most people will disregard anything that doesn’t lend itself to easy digestion within 5 seconds, especially on a phone. If you write a paragraph on Facebook, and use multi-syllabic words in complex sentences, your comment will likely be ignored.
Building relationships takes effort. Building relationships with strangers is even harder. However, people similar to you are easy to bond with online, as you and your “friends” “like” similar things, and the algorithms suggest other things to further refine, and compartmentalize, your identity. Soon you are surrounded by “friends” who all like the same things. Obviously, the people that don’t like what you like are not your friends.
Second, what is the nature of human intelligence? People have the wrong idea about intelligence. Science, and the scientific method as we know it, have only really been around for about 500 years. Human intelligence has evolved over millions of years. The end goal of human intelligence is not critical analysis and problem-solving. The end goal of human intelligence is to scale complex social hierarchies in order to posture and attract a mate for reproduction.
Our brains aren’t wired for finding truth. Our brains are wired for believing people we know and distrusting those we don’t. Primarily, our brains are wired for getting us laid. In the confines of in-person interaction, all of this works, mostly. Change the scope of the group from 10 people to 10 million, and interesting things begin to occur.
The third reason human behavior on social media can be so problematic is that communication is limited online. This “short-circuiting” includes no intonation of voice, no tilt of the head, no raising of an eyebrow, no observation of your conversation partner’s stance, with or without arms crossed...and all of those other little “extras” that are part of interpersonal, in-person communication. Until very recently, we brought our entire observational arsenal to bear when meeting a new person; online we have few arrows in our quiver.
We only need to review today’s news to see how all of this has played out over the last 15 years. From revolutions in the Middle East to the breakdown of discourse at home, human intelligence plus social media has worked its magic.
It is fascinating for many reasons, but perhaps most of all for this one: we are witnessing the next step in human evolution.
The Singularity2, that point in the future “when technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable changes to human civilization”, is here.
Our “smart” phones are a type of neural connector. When we “tweet” or “like” something, we are giving almost immediate expression to something within our minds. We do share our thoughts instantly with millions.
Sometime in the not-too-distant future, Google will release “Google Mind”, or Apple “iThink”, something that removes the need to vocalize or type; prototypes already exist. You will “think” your status on Facebook. You will read, in your mind’s eye, your email. You will likely, while on a trip abroad, be able to cast a three-dimensional image of yourself next to a toddler, so Grandma or Grandpa can be home for Baby’s birthday. These are the positive aspects of our embrace of Singularity Evolution, as our carbon-based organic neural net interfaces with one made of silicon.
The negative aspects we already know too well. Twitter mobs and online cancel-culture, nascent aspects of Groupthink, the “Doublethink” of Orwell’s 1984, come into being. Thought-Crime becomes real. Consider also, what it means when Google Mind and iThink are not appliances, but implants. Eventually, the Supreme Court will debate allowing “mind-taps” within the context of unreasonable search and seizure.
Not considering all of this now is doubleplus ungood.
Perhaps we are many years from the ability of the Krell machinery to instantaneously give life to mere thought, perhaps not. What we do not need to wait for are the obstacles on our new evolutionary path. They are many.
But it need not be so. We change our evolutionary environment all the time now, it seems. A small step now would reap great reward later on. Mitigating the compartmentalization of people on social media would be an improvement. After all, one usually learns more from those with whom they are in disagreement; the positive feedback loop from all of us learning something new would be real. Facebook could provide a “Dislike” button; the fact it won’t, because it would cut into advertising profits from compartmentalized customer buckets, illustrates the tide against which we all must now swim.
But swim we must. Depending upon a corporation or government to improve the world is folly. Perhaps the true lesson of the Forbidden Planet is the personal responsibility we all must assume when we interact with others, whether in person or not. Virtual socialization, after all, is real socialization, minus presence. It is the presence of mind we must keep.
Social media could be truly social, and bring together people separated by ideas, not simply by space.
Or we can continue on our current path.
Like something. Identify with the Like. Shun the Not-Like. Identity politics, indeed.
Do you want to see “Monsters from the Id”?
Look in the mirror.