CreateDebate


Debate Info

7
11
Online is better Face-to-face is better
Debate Score:18
Arguments:16
Total Votes:18
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Online is better (7)
 
 Face-to-face is better (9)

Debate Creator

BogdanOD(5) pic



Online communication and loneliness

What do you think about online communication and loneliness? Which communication model is better against loneliness? Online or Face-to-face? When do you feel better? After communication with friends online, or after hanging out with them in the real world? Which communication model will help alleviate mood loneliness more?

Ultimately, which communication model is better? Online, virtual, computer mediated one or the "old", classic, F2F, real world one?

 

This debate is public, made as a part of a student project at the Faculty of organization and informatics, University of Zagreb, Varaždin, Croatia. 

Online is better

Side Score: 7
VS.

Face-to-face is better

Side Score: 11
1 point

some times it can be better face to face but come on aslong as you are not being a butt hole you can say wat ever you want, never have to worry about people not liking you because of how you look, but i must say i am a bit younger then most i think that times are changing and that face-to-face is geting kinda ...well old :(sorry): love, tracy

Side: Online is better
1 point

some times it can be better face to face but come on aslong as you are not being a butt hole you can say wat ever you want, never have to worry about people not liking you because of how you look, but i must say i am a bit younger then most i think that times are changing and that face-to-face is geting kinda ...well old :(sorry): love, tracy

Side: Online is better

Shy people depend on on-line chat rooms because they fear meeting someone in person feeling that the person won't like he or she.

Side: Online is better

definately face to face. there is more to comunication than text. i even feel awkward on the phone. its justmore personal face to face

Side: Face-to-face is better
1 point

Human beings need direct interaction and contact with other people, it is just in our nature.

Communicating online is essentially fake interaction, as a tennis player playing Wii Tennis is essentially the same in that the player isn't really playing tennis and the player will feel as though something is lacking and that is the reality of the situation: they were only pretending to play tennis.

Side: Face-to-face is better
Peekaboo(710) Disputed
1 point

I don't think that is a very appropriate analogy. Wii Tennis is nowhere near imitating actual tennis playing due to technical limitations - there isn't nearly as much skill involved. Hence when we play Wii Tennis, it feels like an inferior alternative. It also largely fails to provide something that tennis is prized for: physical activity. Standing in front of a TV flapping a remote left and right gives you minimal exercise. Tennis playing is essentially a physical activity, a sport, and any sport would naturally feel less satisfactory if there isn't actually much physical activity involved.

But communication is different. It can be, but isn't necessarily, rooted in physical activity. Rather, the essential characteristic of communication is that of people giving and receiving information between themselves. Online interaction is a very recently invented method of communication, but why should that mean it is fake or necessarily less satisfying?

Yes, there are things possible in face-to-face communication that aren't possible in online communication - like observance of body language, subtle changes in tone, or the generally quicker speed of spoken compared to typed conversation.

But online communication also allows you to do things that you can't in face-to-face communication. For example, imagine having to fly to the other side of the world every time you wanted to talk to an emigrated friend! You also tend to suffer less from awkward pauses, difficulties in understanding strong accents, peer pressure, and have smoother conversation in general with people who write better than they speak.

And not everyone naturally finds oral communication to be their preferred way of chatting under all circumstances. For example, I personally find it easier to express complex ideas in writing than in speech, because I get the time to work out how I want to say it, and I can visually see how my entire comment looks before sending it on. I also comprehend complex ideas faster in writing, hence my preference in university for reading textbooks rather than attending lectures.

I get where a lot of the distaste for online communication comes from - it's the idea that you're participating in a virtual reality rather than, well, real reality. But I don't think that is the case. When you open up MSN messenger and start typing, is your interlocutor virtual? Is he fake? Does he reside in a lesser plane of existence than the person sitting in your room? Are his ideas less valid, his emotions less touching, his life less precious?

You're talking to a flesh-and-blood human, no different at all from a person you meet face-to-face. You're talking to them via a different medium, that is all. Maybe some people don't like chatting online as a matter of preference, and I can understand that, but that doesn't mean online communication is objectively less satisfying than another means of communication.

---------

Now speaking of me personally, I'm fine with both types of communication. I use them at different times for different purposes. I usually talk in person with my family members because we live in the same house and so it's easier for me to find them in person than wait for them to login to a chat program. For other people I generally prefer socialising online. I know and chat with people from around the world, people of different age groups, world views, and ways of life, which adds a lot more flavour to my social life than if all my friends were local people I met in university or work. This would be extremely difficult to achieve if I didn't regularly use the internet to communicate.

I also love lengthy discourses, as you can no doubt tell from the length of this comment. That would be very difficult in instantaneous face-to-face speech (I can't form paragraphs' worth of arguments on the fly, and even if I could, I'd lose my voice reciting the resulting monologue). Internet discussion groups and forums give me the perfect way to express long opinions.

I almost never get lonely; I get more than my fill of socialisation each day, and I'm not such an extroverted person anyway. But when I am lonely, almost anything would make me feel better - talking to someone in person, chatting online, even watching a movie or daydreaming.

Side: Both are fine
1 point

Touché.

I don't think that is a very appropriate analogy.

It wasn't one of my best, I was at a loss for a good analogy. However I personally feel that the general idea is the same, I believe that the point of the debate isn't if you get both. It is if you solely socialize online that is a link to loneliness. To which in my mind ( with no studies to back it up ) could indefinitely be a direct correlation to loneliness, as it is in human nature to socialize.

It can be, but isn't necessarily, rooted in physical activity.... fake or necessarily less satisfying?

According to what you have told me you get equal doses of both forms of communication, therefore neither are less satisfying. However you would need to step in another's shoes to be empathetic with the idea of solely socializing online. From personal experience when I was ill for two weeks my only form of communication was via my computer, I can tell you even with all of my "online friends" I found myself in a slight form of depression.

Though I still stand by my initial ideal, I do believe you make solid points.

Side: Face-to-face is better
Abbott(162) Disputed
1 point

like i said b4 online is better but not by much and just to let you now wat do you think your doing now (hint: i have never seen or met you b4) and another thing I LOVE WII TENNIS! Why? because i live in a bad neibor hood so i don't go out side but i can stay looking healthy by doing wat ? PLAYING WII! OH YEAH INTINDO ROX MY SOX!!!

Side: Online is better
DaWolfman(3321) Disputed
2 points

like i said b4 online is better but not by much

That is your opinion and I respect that, however people differentiate from eachother. It is within human nature to have direct contact with fellow humans, however those that find they do not need this contact fall under the category are exceptions.

wat do you think your doing now

I think I am engaging in a form of online debate.

hint: i have never seen or met you b4

You are correct, however whether or not I am getting social stimulation from this is totally different.

and another thing I LOVE WII TENNIS

It was an analogy.

because i live in a bad neibor hood so i don't go out side but i can stay looking healthy by doing wat ?

Might I ask how old you are before I get to deep into this?

Side: Face-to-face is better
1 point

I think face to face communication is much better 'cause people can see each other's faces and nonverbal signs that can say much without person saying anything at all. I also think people are much more devoted to other person when communicating face to face. In contrast, in online communication, there is always something that can disturb you while talking.

Side: Face-to-face is better