The vortex of the metaverse (Part 1)

Toward the end of October, this headline appeared on most news sources, “Facebook changes its name to Meta as part of company rebrand.” Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg (MZ) announced that Facebook and related social media platforms would now be part of a new metaverse-focused parent company called Meta. To make the news sound better than it is, he also announced at the same time the planned hiring of 10,000 people across Europe to help bring this idea to fruition.” Sounds good?

By all accounts, metaverse is a concept of a 3D virtual reality version of the internet where real people are represented by avatars living in a seemingly real world but, in fact, is digital. MZ’s demo video of what he has in mind features avatars of himself and others.

Avatar itself is an interesting word. It is from Hinduism (Sanskrit) and refers to a manifestation of a deity or a released soul in bodily form; an incarnation or embodiment of a person or idea (OED). The concept is popularly used in video games. More about this later.

In explaining the metaverse concept, MZ said, “It’s a virtual environment. We can be present in digital spaces, and you can kind of think about this as an embodied internet that you are inside of rather than just looking at.” He goes on to say, “With the metaverse, you can build a hang out, play games with friends, work, create, and more.” Then he adds that people “will be able to do everything that you can do on the internet today, as well as some things that don’t make sense on the internet today like dancing.” According to MZ, the defining quality of the metaverse is “the feeling that you’re really there with another person or in another place.” But where are you really?

There are three elements to being somewhere. To be totally in a place you must be there physically, mentally, and emotionally. You can physically be one place and your mind in another place, or your emotions (longings, feelings, desire, affection) be in another place. That often happens, for instance, when someone working a job they don’t like daydreams about being somewhere else. People are rarely totally in one place. We humans are used to being, at most, only two-thirds in one place—physically and only one of the other two. The idea of the metaverse is to allow a person to really be two-thirds in a place (mentally and emotionally) and deceitfully physically, making it seem to be totally there. But where are you really?

The word meta is another interesting word in this scenario. According to MZ, it is from a Greek word meaning “beyond”. It does mean that, but like most Greek words, it can mean many other things also. A complete meaning includes “superior to”, “more comprehensive”, transcending”, “changed”, “altered”. In its philosophical use, it can mean “states of affairs transcending human experience”, “on a higher level”, “over and above”. In my Greek lexicon, it can be used with the genitive of mental feelings, desires, and emotions and can mean exchange, transfer, or transmutation. I wonder how many of these varied uses MZ really has in mind.

Now, what will happen to people when digital reality becomes virtual reality? Digital reality is one step removed from reality itself. Virtual reality is two steps removed from reality. Is it a point of no return?

On November 7, 2021, AP published an article exposing the dystopian dangers of the metaverse. That is a very real and present danger. However, the danger that concerns me most is the psychological danger of being a citizen of the metaverse.

The first smartphone was introduced in 1992. It was smart because it had a memory and it could send emails over the internet. The next big move was to the Blackberry Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) in 1999. It was an instant status symbol but with a limited consumer base of mostly business executives. When Apple introduced its first iPhone in 2007, the innovations and with that the markets and competition, skyrocketed. iPhones and other less expensive brands that functioned like iPhones proliferated. From a phone you could make calls and send emails on without wire connections to a metaverse in which you can live took about 30 years.

At what point did it become a psychological danger? Having lived through the entire smartphone history as an adult, I would say the danger point started with the iPhone and its personal consumer base. Not that the device itself is dangerous, but the effect it has had on people is not good. Owning an iPhone quickly became a status symbol in society. Status symbols are a wedge driven between the have and have-nots of society. Brand status is very important to millions of people. The brand doesn’t need to be a superior product or even a useful product. In my research, I ran across a company that makes clothes and equipment for skateboarders called Supreme. Their brand became such a status that they were able to sell a red brick with Supreme written on it for $30, and after they sold out, they were selling for as much as $1,000 on eBay. Will owning a metaverse headset be the same kind of brand status symbol that the first smartphones were? More importantly, will it divide society between those who want to live real life and those who want to escape?

In the next post, I will write about the psychological dangers of the metaverse and the likelihood of it becoming a vortex that sucks people in.