message board

your email

books

music

communities

join the conversation

write for us

add your site

    

 

  GINKWORLD: VOICES: stories  

 

 

[site search]   [ report a dead link] [ message board] [add your voice]

building a community

by john o'keefe

 

  

what is "community?"  what does it mean to "form community?"  will a first century model meet the needs of a twenty-first century mind?  can one truly develop community in cyberspace?  If we can, develop community in cyberspace, does it change the meaning of community or move it to a new level?  Interesting questions as we face our walk into the 21st century hand in hand with tech.  more importantly, i believe, is the question; as christians, is a community developed in cyberspace seen as a "christian community?"

  

let me start by saying this, developing community is hard.  it is one of the hardest things we as humans can do.  it takes work on behalf of all, and a constant drive to accomplish community - community is not "just" it is work.  according to webster community is "an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as a species) in a common location."  without getting into the "species" debate, I think the definition is pretty good.  I like the concept of community being a "particular population" in a "common area"  who "interact" with each others.  but will it allow for a "cyber-community?"  can a cyber-community meet the definition of community, or will the definition need to be changed?  I believe cyber-community meets the definition of community, let me expand....

  

seeing community as "an interaction of a particular population in a common location" can be seen in three distinct parts (I know, how dare a postmodern theologian list anything in three - too darn traditional - but to paraphrase freud, "sometimes three is simply three.").  lets look at the first one, "a particular population."

  

 

a particular population

what is meant by "a particular population?"  I can see the term ranging from the extremely small (two people with common interests) to the extremely large (thousands of people with a particular interest).  size has nothing to do with determine a particular population.  you can be a particular population of two.  so, we know size does not define a particular population.

 

the perimeters of a "particular population" are not defined by those outside of the population; meaning people in the group are accountable to people in the group, outsides have no say.  if change needs to occur, it must come from within the particular population.  Jesus did not criticize those outside of his own group (the jewish people).  his main ministry dealt with those who were within his particular population.  as the ministry grew, and after his death and resurrection, the particular population base grew and changed - because those from outside came in and accepted the basic of the particular population.  they, in turn, expanded the particular population to others.

 

the internet allows people to develop within a particular population.  people, who are seen as living "outside" of a main stream group, can develop a connection with a particular population on the internet.  people who would not feel connected locally, because of a lack of a particular population, can find voice and  place in cyberspace.

 

Christ taught building a community was central to developing as a people of faith.  examining the reality of our faith allows us to know that throughout history people have developed community with those who they felt lived in their particular population.  this can be seen within the monk communities and the creation of denominations and associations of the past.  for these groups location was defined by geography, but for the cyber-community geography is not key.

  

 

in a common location

the second fact of the definition that cyberspace fits is the "in a common location."  most people see location in terms of limited geographical boundaries; boundaries defined by nation, states, cities and town - even neighborhoods and city blocks.  cyberspace exploded the concept of boundaries and boarders.  cyberspace expanded the concept of location to being bigger then anyone could think of - space defined in terms of "infinite."  most who see community in terms of location have a hard time seeing cyberspace as a location.  to them, location must have a physical context - land and boundaries.  they need to limit the condition of community to be of a physical place - and not a place where physical space is not connective. now, I am not saying developing community based on a geographic location is wrong - it is not, but neither is developing cyber-community were the definition of geography is of no interest.

 

cyberspace expands the concept of community to being something powerful.  a particular community on china can actually have community with the same particular population in tulsa - "common location" is seen as a computer screen.  within the concept, and the minds, of those living in this particular population, cyberspace has become a "common location."  a way I like to think about it, and explain it, is in the item of a vacuum.  most people see a vacuum as a "great void" empty of everything.  while others see it as filled with "nothing" - one sees it empty of everything, and another sees it as full of nothing.  people who see it as empty, can not grasp the concept of seeing it as full - in fact, they will tell you you are wrong and try to change your definition to meet the conditions of their definition.  people who desire location to be physical, have a hard time seeing cyberspace without walls - and they desire strongly to give cyberspace walls.  they desire this because they believe their is no human touch, no human interaction.

  

 

interaction

the last area of the definition, is actually the first, it is that of "interaction."  I wanted to save this one for last, because it is (for me) the most important part of the definition.  here again we are caught in the debate of physical and cyberspace.

 

interaction does not require a physical connection between two people for it to be valid, as some demand.  if that were the case, phone calling and letter writing would both be considered "wrong" and outside the definition of community.  the goal of any community should be to get to people together, if it never happens on a physical level - it is still a valid community.  for interaction to be valid it does not need to be physical, it just needs to be meaningful.

 

a particular population expresses interaction as an inner relationship between two or more people where meaningful exchanges can take place.  I believe the internet allows for a particular population to relate on a personal level; in fact I believe the internet demands it.  when we have a physical interaction it depends on so many pretences that it may be hard to truly be ourselves - we pretend to be what we are not to please.  we build a fake front where we block ourselves from ourselves and others from ourselves.  I have found that dealings over the internet has developed my empathic skills.  by reading what is written, and how it is written, I have a strong connection to people and how they feel.

 

while I do understand the concerns people have with people developing only internet communities - I do not see this happening; I understand, I just do not agree.  I belong to several different email groups, and cyber communities.  I enjoy each one, and I enjoy the relationships I am developing with people in my particular population.  even though I have a great relationships on the net, I still enjoy getting together with my friends and having a great time.  I believe as a Christian people we should strive to take the community to the next level - meeting; but it is not a requirement for the cyber-community to be valid.

 

community is a connection of a particular population striving to meet the needs of each other - even if that community is developing on the internet - community is what makes us people.  cyber-communities are growing, meaning they are meeting the needs of a particular population.  what we as christians need to do is not complain about cyber-communities, we need to develop them and model after them.  we can learn why cyber-communities are growing, and what need they are filling in people - if we can find that, we will be a community open to all particular populations.

 

 

  

  

shameless ads 

[click here to place an ad with ginkworld]