Being very SOCIAL while being antiSOCIAL

“distracted from distraction by distraction” – T.S Eliot

As you read this blog, are you aware of whats happening around you? Is someone next to you trying to get you attention while your head hangs over your smartphone or are your eyes staring at the glare of the computer screen? Are you at a dinner table and that the conversation is so boring that you decide to switch to your more social life, which is your smartphone. Is there even a conversation at the table, or is everyone too busy to interact.

So now you may not agree with me, and tell me that I need a fast track ticket to the 21^st century, where everything is digital. You may even inform me that you may be on your phone because the next person is on their phone and that you won’t even bother trying to talk to them. Hey I know that few families sit at the dinner table nowadays, which some have argued that there is no time, and that you are busy.

I am not ignorant to say that now we must all just drop our phones and all forcefully talk to each other, for starters you phone doesn’t have a bad breath, and it’s much easier to ignore someone on social networks, and instant chats without being rude. Well this was true until whatsapp came with “the last seen at tab”, which kind of makes it more difficult to lie about that.

The point I am trying to make, as a society we should start to get worried when people laugh literally face to face by saying LOL. This I do not understand. Are you even really laughing? Do we even do things that make us truly happy, or are we doing it to make our friends envious and followers worship us by posting statuses? Look I understand that if like you just did something awesome in your life and need to share it, that’s understandable. It becomes a problem when I know what you’ve had for breakfast, or you are angry at John Soap for what he did. Clearly John Smith doesn’t have phone to be texted, or called. A saying I like, is that everyone’s life seems perfect on Facebook. If only.....  And the more we live this virtual world of ours, where everything is perfect, where do we find the time to live real life and attend to life’s needs.

One my favourite situations are at parties/gatherings, when you find a couple of people on their phones sitting down, frantically texting away, and lost in their own world. Like why are you there in the first place?, its obvious everyone at the gathering is boring, and that your phone gives you greater satisfaction. Even if you are a shy person, how you going to improve your social skills by being on your phone all the time, and typing LOL when you didn't even crack a smile. I will admit that the phone is now a great accessory to seem busy, or not socially awkward. When you find yourself in such situations, it is easy to turn to your phone. Yes......think back, you have done that before, and even if you don’t talk to that person in your contact list often, you suddenly say Hi. 

Maybe I am just so much of a people’s person that I find this new trend disturbing, but I know somewhere somehow, everyone needs people skills and the ability to communicate with another human being properly. I also am worried about the literacy of these phone users, as all words are abbreviated, and in all honesty could be a new language. Some research shows that social networking has encouraged students to write more, which is great, but we need to take it one step further and teach them to write and speak properly.

I could go on forever with this but, I think you get the point I am trying to prove. For some of us we have less human interaction while having more of a digital interaction, which in turn may make us more antisocial.  On extreme cases you may find that one person may be a Casanova on the phone, with all the right lines, but when it comes to human interaction, it’s a complete turnaround.

So my 2 cents worth of advice to you for next time. Take time to appreciate human interaction to see a genuine smile, to embrace that awkward moment with another human, who won’t make you upset, when it says battery low.

Not being acknowledged because of SKIN Colour?

One small step for mankind one giant leap for Human kind- Neil Armstrong

These were the famous words said by Neil Armstrong when he first walked on the moon. Or was he the first person to walk on the moon? There are many conspiracy theories surrounding the claim of Americans sending the first people to the moon, even though Mythbusters proved that they were. That is another debate on its own. Do you not wonder why society remembers Neil Armstrong more than Yuri Gagarin ( first person in Space), does media select who to acknowledge more, does government cover up true stories to not alter history?. These are some of the questions that drove me to write about certain individuals being not acknowledged by the government or the World for things they accomplished. In this case apparently being the first people to do it or participate in it

The 3 people I would like to highlight in this regard is our own South African surgeon “ Hamilton Naki” , Nigerian super computer inventor “Philip Emeagwali” and guitar inventor “ Robert F Flemming” . These people happen to be African with Flemming being African American. This leads to my next question that if they are not being acknowledged, is it because of skin colour.

The case of Hamilton Naki has caused a lot of stir in the South  African medical industry in the past, about Naki actually being the first person to participate in the first open heart surgery. Extreme supporters claimed he performed the surgery himself. Now I am not saying he did or did not, but it is one of those issues that do raise red flags to know who is lying and who is telling the truth. People, who worked with Chris Bernard and were close to him, rise to claim that Naki was nowhere close to the surgery room at the time, and would not be allowed to perform such under the apartheid laws.

Others claim that the Apartheid government at the time would cover this up, and would never acknowledge Naki for the duties. So the question that beckons is who is lying. Upon doing some research, Naki did not have a medical degree at all, but was a very skilled with his hands which made him an assistant to a surgeon at the time after many years. There are some articles that claim Bernard himself said Naki was a better surgeon than him. So again who is right, who is telling the truth.  I find myself asking, would Naki have been able to even perform the surgery without a degree. I also wrestle in my mind would Naki just wake up one day and lie about the surgery, was he paid by the media or government to lie to the world or to otherwise to face the consequences.  When Naki died several newspapers including The Economist published an obituary of Naki, stating he performed the surgery and they later retracted the article based on several reasons. Is there a conspiracy there or not?.  Bernard is quoted as saying he Naki was great in the theatre on liver transplants, while others claim Naki only operated on animals and was not allowed in Groote Schuur, with so many stories, this opens up a lot of debate.

This is not just in South Africa. When you google the Fathers of the internet, a lot of people come up, but you will not see the name Philip Emeagwali among the names in the list. Philip Emeagwali was a Nigerean scientist who claimed being the Father of the internet. In some articles he is acclaimed as the unkown father of the internet. Upon doing research, there are more facts supporting that he was NOT one of the fathers of the internet, even Nigerian scientist’s claiming he was a fraud. This topic does emotionally play with black people, as some critics say that black people want to hold onto the fact that there is a black hero, and cannot accept the truth. Apparently Emeagwali lied about everything from the Nobel price of computing to his education. This story has more flaws than Naki’s one. My only question is then why would Philip Emeagwali lie about all of this, why would he go through all that trouble, if he knew he’d be caught one day.  I am fully aware people do lie to get to fame. Being a university student who has been encouraged to think for myself and think out the box, on this case, there are more facts supporting that He was NOT the father of the internet, but to play devil’s advocate, this could be one big cover up, so that history is not changed, and that a black person is not acknowledged as being the father of the internet.  Several reputable sources do claim him as the father of the internet while others deny, so again who is lying?

Robert F Flemming is the man, (according to many sources) that is credited with inventing the guitar. So it becomes worrying when you read on to these articles, where some are claiming that he did not, that he only had the patent to the guitar, hence why he is credited with it. Does is really bother people that much, that Flemming was not smart enough to invent the guitar. Is it based on his skin colour? Many questions do start to surface when such accusations do happen, or am I wrong, just another man claiming to invent something that he did not.

To end, I am not claiming that these particular people did actually invent something or be one of the first people to do something. It does though get one wondering when it’s happened more than once, that if these particular people are not being acknowledged because of skin colour?