Comments on: social objects for beginners

By: Mari

Mari — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 01:37:19 +0000

AH! I understand now! Thanks for this post. ;D

By: Sean Cayton

Sean Cayton — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:29:08 +0000

Object or construct? Just scanning the remarks and there seems to be some confusion here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructionism
And I think it’s an important distinction. An object must be interpreted and mutually agreed upon. We may all agree an iphone is an amazing object to be discussed and mulled over.
But what if you don’t recognize it to begin with?
Then perhaps there is no reason for interaction. No discussion. Or maybe a different reason to interact.
‘You’ve never seen one of these? Well then let me show you!’
The construct, it seems to me, is the thing. If you can construct a reality that is generally agreed upon, then there would be plenty of social objects (phones, babies, books) that are worth while.
A more powerful marketing strategy it seems to me, is to create an object worthy enough to be introduced into already agreed upon social construct.
The construct provides a convenient reason for the social object to be discussed.
My personal experience: This Christmas was EXACTLY the right social construct for the introduction of the iphone, the ipod and a myriad of other ‘objects’ to a wider audience…including my parents. Powerful stuff.
It’s sort of like a marriage provides the reason for a baby to be introduced? And baby without a marriage is associated with an altogether different kind of construct…

By: Kris Fuehr

Kris Fuehr — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:21:58 +0000

Interesting as always, Hugh.
So let’s try it on with say, Hollywood Actors. Are they social objects themselves or simply set up to be purveyors of social objects? And, with the advent of deep social networking, (which better connect social classes), will we see the demise of Hollywood addicts…er…actors –to be replaced by connections to people we are more likely to respect and like? I guess my friends on Facebook won’t likely be featured in a blockbuster but I’m nearly as entertained for twice as long watching them on YouTube clips as I am in the movie theater paying $29 for popcorn. Then again, well-written storylines rule, don’t they? So, does all this mean that “storylines” are the fabric for all social objects?
(in which case, we need to get the WGAE Writers Strike resolved! All hail the story writers!)
PS: It’s so cute that Robert Scoble is so smitten with his baby. (per his comment above)

By: T

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:05:04 +0000

Great concept. I’m gonna have to go into your archives and dig up some posts about social objects now that you’ve provided this intro.

By: Dave Armstrong

Dave Armstrong — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:39:42 +0000

I forgot to mention — start with photographs of women you have just met. They love it. You will make new friends. nudge.
Best Wishes,
Dave

By: Dave Armstrong

Dave Armstrong — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:36:47 +0000

Hugh,
Discover photography as a Social Object. You have an undiscovered talent for it. nudge.

By: Rebecca Caroe

Rebecca Caroe — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 06:37:52 +0000

Hugh, of course one of your favourite social objects is the fountain pen! nudge.
Rebecca Caroe

By: angela penny

angela penny — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 04:24:52 +0000

So when two people first meet at a party and they don’t have anything to say to each other they ask stupid questions trying to find something IN COMMON to talk about?

By: Linda Sherman

Linda Sherman — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 03:25:30 +0000

Great discussion. I have recently been splashing the word "Social Object" all about because a lady I respect very much, Leah Jones wrote in her fabulous blog on Dec 18th that Singelringen is a "Social Object": Leah in Chicago. Leah linked your name. So I endeavored to look up your previous posts on Social Objects as I find the topic fascinating. Thank you for the further clarification here. For those of you who haven't heard of it yet: Singelringen ("The Single Ring" in Swedish) is a unisex ring that serves to remind the single wearer that they are already complete; while open to possibilities. This distinctive turquoise and silver ring is worn on the right hand or neck chain and is easily identifiable from across a room. Each ring has a unique registration number that provides access to the Singelringen Global Community. First introduced in Scandinavia in 2005, Singelringen is now worn by more than 150,000 singles in over 20 countries around the world. I am the agent for North and Central America.

By: Steve Sherlock

Steve Sherlock — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:58:59 +0000

Nicely done, even better with all the conversation around this. Which is indeed the social part of the blog object isn’t it? It is also a Western thing to make objects and definitions.
Happy new year!

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:38:58 +0000

With these definitions facebook itself sucks as a social object, not so bad (if you can weed throught the crap) as a place to share social object and therefore forming social networks.
Tom Hopkins– My only thought on the Jesus Christ is yes “he/it” is a social object, merely a social object I don’t think so. This requires more thought on my end though.
Rachel Clarke — the weather is a social object in most areas in most cultures I have been in.
Happy New Year all! Enjoy some good friends and wine! Maybe ’08 I can get some Blue Monster shipped to me! Cheers!

By: Tom Hopkins

Tom Hopkins — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 02:32:22 +0000

If social objects are actually the indicator of a search for shared meaning — as Rachel suggests — can we revisit what shared meaning means in the age of the network.
Wittgenstein thought that learning to take part in social interaction was about learning a common language of meaning (language games).
What does that mean in a world where meaning can be shared between people anywhere in the world instantaneously? And people can simultaneously belong to multiple tribes? Surely this is another example of how the internet isn’t democratising but rather is decentralising — allowing groups to form free-form around communities of meaning, wherever they are?
So now we’re not all learning one language game but multiple games across different communities of interest.
And with that, over to the most abstract of social objects: happy new year!

By: Cheekier MeSly

Cheekier MeSly — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:47:21 +0000

Great post, Hugh.
Speaking of Social Objects, one of my favorites is Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game. In the Ender series, OSC posits that we’re connected to other people and things in this universe by way of philotic twines: invisible yet tangible connections based on the mutual love we share for each other or for, as you put it, social objects.
Rachel Bellow’s comment was fantastic, describing the yearning to find in another that which we ourselves grok. As C.S. Lewis put it: “Friendship is born at that moment when one person says to another: What! You, too? Thought I was the only one.”

By: Dennis Freire

Dennis Freire — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:13:20 +0000

Well, yes… just what I needed. I appreciate your taking time to clarify the concept of social objects. As you know, I was off the mark several degrees. Happy New Year.

By: Rachel Bellow

Rachel Bellow — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:16:15 +0000

There's something about the social object concept that makes me think we're mistaking the finger pointing at the moon for the moon itself. (I haven't read Engestrom, just your own helpful illuminations of the concept). Social objects are the particular manifestation of shared meaning, right? So that suggests there's a drive underlying all these manifestations....that the social object is not, in itself, the drive. The need for meaning...specifically shared meaning...is a deep human impulse that will, invariably, manifest in some form or another. If not this social object, another. Social networks like Facebook are simply evidence of that quest. Aren't they simply forums where the quest for shared meaning can coalesce and result in manifestation (social objects)? People tend to be conscious of the social object more than they are of the underlying impulse that led them to it. The search for meaning--a purpose that radiates beyond the limited confines of the self--lies at the center of all human interaction. It seems to me that identifying the nature of that impulse, what sort of meaning is in play at any given time, is really important....and helps us create brilliant social objects to express it, specifically. I imagine that what attracts you to Saul Bellow is the way he expresses his own constant, agonizing quest for meaning...a way of expressing that angst that is similar to your own, that allows you to join him, rather than simply watch with admiration. And so the woman who likes Bellow too must want to soak in that particular bath of meaning as well...which is what attracts you to her. It's the underlying taste for that particular form of meaning that being an SB fan indicates, and to which you respond. Henderson the Rain King isn't the point. Neither is Saul Bellow. What is the point is that you and this woman share a taste for that particular worldview. That shared taste promises more social object creation between you two in the future. What I'm saying is that I think it's worth understanding at all times what form of meaning a social object is indicating....so that future social objects can can be created in its wake. Good Lord. This is the longest post I've ever written. Over.