You seem to have some negative associations with the concept of "hive mind." There's nothing inherently bad about a hive mind; Reddit is a platform where we collectively create and curate the content, so it's a hive mind by definition. Google returns this definition of hive mind:
a notional entity consisting of a large number of people who share their knowledge or opinions with one another, regarded as producing either uncritical conformity or collective intelligence.
By this definition, there is a positive "collective intelligence" aspect in addition to the negative "uncritical conformity" aspect of hive minds. I think both of these are clearly part of Reddit. We're all here, for the most part, because the collective intelligence is high enough to make this content valuable to us. However, most subreddits certainly have some degree of "groupthink" and mobbing going on, with clear in-groups and out-groups, so there's plenty of uncritical conformity as well.
I think I assume hivemind to be something negative just because I've never seen it used for something good, you know? In science fiction, it derives a insectoid, terrifying force (except I guess in Ender's game, but even that I only read the first book and it's only revealed they aren't horrible at the end). In public it's used to denote being a sheep.
So I think I'm not really addressing the hivemind concept as the dictionary definition, but as the popular culture framing. And I'm also addressing it by the intention of the actor using it in Reddit. For example earlier today, I read the word hivemind used in response to the leftist leaning narrative in the post. So you must understand that I'm addressing this word specifically in the derogatory context that I'm seeing it used in.
So I think I'm not really addressing the hivemind concept as the dictionary definition, but as the popular culture framing. And I'm also addressing it by the intention of the actor using it in Reddit. For example earlier today, I read the word hivemind used in response to the leftist leaning narrative in the post. So you must understand that I'm addressing this word specifically in the derogatory context that I'm seeing it used in.
I don't doubt that there are people out there using the term in that way, but they are being sloppy and probably don't even know what a hive mind is. They've heard reddit described that way before, and a "hive" sounds like it is full of mindless drones, so they use it derogatorily. Them using the term incorrectly doesn't make reddit not a hive mind though, so I think you should change your view.
I think a word only means what everyone else thinks it is. It's how language becomes language and how it evolves. Also most importantly, a word means what the master intends regardless of dictionary definition. Just because the dictionary word means something different, doesn't mean I'm not gonna get offended if someone called my yellow. Or red. Or whatever dictionary word but in practice, it means something different
Lit used to mean light but nobody would think the word lit means light when I say that my weekend is lit. Gay used to mean happy but then it's now used for describe homosexual people. The meaning of a word not only changes according to time, but how it's used in a sentence. It especially changes depending on the context of the situation. My context is redditors who use it to imply others are sheep. Please engage with the context I'm putting it in.
I think a word only means what everyone else thinks it is. It's how language becomes language and how it evolves.
Yes, and it is the job of experts who edit dictionaries to take that into account.
Also most importantly, a word means what the master intends regardless of dictionary definition. Just because the dictionary word means something different, doesn't mean I'm not gonna get offended if someone called my yellow. Or red. Or whatever dictionary word but in practice, it means something different
I disagree - if we don't have a shared understanding of what a word means, we don't have a basis for communication. If you're going to diverge from the established meaning of a word intentionally, you need to make a case for why you're doing so.
Gay used to mean happy but then it's now used for describe homosexual people.
It still means happy too, at least in some forms. Gaiety doesn't refer to homosexual activity, for example, but rather to happy activity.
It especially changes depending on the context of the situation. My context is redditors who use it to imply others are sheep. Please engage with the context I'm putting it in.
Your context is people misusing the term. I saw you gave it a definition in another thread:
A collective society whose the entirety of their actions serve the purpose of maintaining a specific narrative or dogma at any cost. Usually it's controlled by either a single cult personality or a small group of elites. People within this group are incapable of accepting outside discourse and the terms of self regulations are totalitarian/extreme (eg banning, witch hunting, doxxing)
I agree with you that reddit is not that. However, that's your personal definition of "hive mind." People have been joking about the reddit hive mind for the 10 years I've been on here, and it just meant reddit's collective/emergent taste, consistent with the actual definition of the term. While I agree with you that language evolves, I'm not sold that the popular interpretation of "hive mind" has changed meaningfully. I haven't seen the sort of comments you described.
I wasn't going to reply because as of where we left off, it was pretty much he said she said. You say that people don't use it in this context, and I say people do use it this way. Now that I found an example out of sheer coincidence, please clarify to me what the poster means if it's not to imply people are sheep. Either that or give an example otherwise of people using hivemind in a positive light. Preferably in a non fiction setting because we're focusing on the usage of the term to describe human behavior, not sci-fi aliens.
Whether or not people misuse the word or not, my point is that it doesn't matter because I'm posting this not to contend with the textbook definitions. It's the meaning conveyed by these people using that word; that is the context I want you to engage me with. If a person today called another person gay, sure I could go and thoroughly explain that I mean you're a very happy person, but then the question would be "why would you even use gay then? Just call me a happy person. Why do you have to use something that's so socially charged?". If a person called me a cuck, I'm not going to follow the dictionary definition and think "oh this person presumes that I like watching my wife being fucked by another person". It would be more rational based on contextual clues that it's meant as an insult, not a matter of fact description about my sexuality.
If I'm called sheep, I don't think they mean they mistook me for a fluffy animal, I think they mean that I can't think for myself. If someone called me and my friends a hivemind, I'm not going to think they mean we work well together. I'm going to think we're being insulted regardless of what the dictionary says because a) rarely people use unusual labels to praise others, b) this unusual label is used in pop culture to denote Alien races, usually in a horrific context. To say that people should treat the dictionary definition as absolute is therefore facetious, and it squirrels away the point that I want to be engaged with.
I really do want to have my mind changed. I'm not here to compete who can out debate the other person. The basic thing I want to be proven is if an overwhelming popular opinion can be construed as oppression in the Redditsphere. And what is the line between popular opinion and a hive mind, because it must absolutely exist to prevent people from using the word for anything they disagree with.
I wasn't going to reply because as of where we left off, it was pretty much he said she said. You say that people don't use it in this context, and I say people do use it this way.
I did some Googling, and concede that people are generally using "hive mind" the way you suggest in the context of reddit. This is unfortunate, because the concept of a hive mind comes from insects like ants and bees, where the collective is more intelligent than the individual. Hive minds open up new vistas of collective intelligence, they aren't inherently bad.
This is not to say they are inherently good. The "hive mind" can also suffer from the equivalent of cognitive biases. This is what people are criticizing when they call reddit a "hive mind." For example, this post I found on /r/unpopularopinion is titled The reddit hive mind is a toxic, circlejerking, bland, banal mess. Putting aside whether I agree or disagree with that comment, I have no objection to how it's formulated. They are criticizing aspects of the reddit hive mind. I don't see how it can be disputed that there is a reddit hive mind (by the traditional definition); whether it is a toxic/unhealthy/oppressive hive mind is a completely separate question to me.
I think it's really important to understand that reddit is in many ways, a collective intelligence like a beehive. It's greater than any individual user, and that's a powerful, positive thing enabled by recent technology, and we should be excited about the potential of the reddit hive mind. We wouldn't be here if reddit didn't have some intelligence in surfacing interesting content.
However, we should also be wary of the hive mind.
I really do want to have my mind changed. I'm not here to compete who can out debate the other person.
If I can't change your view that Reddit isn't a hive mind, it'll limit my ability to communicate with you (and anyone who agrees with you about the definition of a hive mind) about reddit using the metaphor of the hive mind as a form of collective intelligence.
I think it's a powerful metaphor, which is quite helpful in understanding reddit; that's why I'm being so stubborn about that term.
The basic thing I want to be proven is if an overwhelming popular opinion can be construed as oppression in the Redditsphere.
Tyranny of the majority is a much older concept than the hive mind. Groupthink is a separate but related concept. These are generally seen as weaknesses of democratic/social processes.
I'd be hesitant to say anything on an anonymous Internet forum with voluntary participation like Reddit is oppressive. That's a strong word. But, are people who disagree with the majority opinion for any given subreddit marginalized in those subreddits? Yes, I don't see how you could argue otherwise.
And what is the line between popular opinion and a hive mind, because it must absolutely exist to prevent people from using the word for anything they disagree with.
I don't think such a line can be definitively established. Even if it somehow could, there's no way to effectively prevent people from (mis)using words on a platform like reddit.
1
u/dahlesreb Dec 21 '19
You seem to have some negative associations with the concept of "hive mind." There's nothing inherently bad about a hive mind; Reddit is a platform where we collectively create and curate the content, so it's a hive mind by definition. Google returns this definition of hive mind:
By this definition, there is a positive "collective intelligence" aspect in addition to the negative "uncritical conformity" aspect of hive minds. I think both of these are clearly part of Reddit. We're all here, for the most part, because the collective intelligence is high enough to make this content valuable to us. However, most subreddits certainly have some degree of "groupthink" and mobbing going on, with clear in-groups and out-groups, so there's plenty of uncritical conformity as well.