Augmentation or Immersion
Looking around the blogs and “wikis” related to Second Life I found an interesting page talking about Immersion and Augmentation, as philosophical concepts of our metaverse. And that made me thought… Am I an Immersionist or an Augmentationist? I’ll try to be as objective as i could.
This “philosophical issue” has existed in Second Life forever, since the early days, maybe is even part of the metaverse itself.
The definition of Immersion in that page is:
“… The immersion view is that SL is its own thing and should not be contaminated by anything from the outside. Many people in SL will bring up the metaverse. This term and a notion self contained internet worlds were introduced in Neal Stephenson’s Snowcrash. [Stephenson, 2002] Since the early these sci-fi worlds has been repeatedly mentioned as the inspiration for SL. Residents that subscribe to this belief often feel that SL should evolve at its own pace as we continue to gain a deeper understanding of how our metaverse should and could look. …”
Immersion vs. Augmentation by Henrik Bennetsen.
Immersion also means that your SL and RL identities are different sides of you and shouldn’t be mixed, this way you can be free to live your Second Life (quite an immersionist name) in a way you may not feel able to do in your first life, so this concept includes a role playing component. Immersionist residents don’t use the 1st Life tab in his profile, or use it in a way they don’t give information about his real life.
This concept defends also the “sanctity” of the metaverse, so any external influence (RL corporations, for example) or any change that could affect the resident “immersion” level (as Voice Chat) will be conceived as a potential aggression. The “government” (Linden Lab) will be asked to protect this sanctity. If is the “government” who is producing or facilitating that “aggressions” then the protest against Linden Lab will be big and hard through different channels (forums, blogs, Flickr, …). Immersionist are not against a market in SL, but prefer to keep it inside SL, residents creating objects and/or services and selling them directly to other residents, again, no external influence.
Augmentation considers we have to stop thinking SL and RL as different spaces. SL is just an extension of the real life, so is a part of it. Second Life is, for augmentationist, just an Internet application (maybe a future Web 3.0?). Something, not somewhere. A tool to work, interact, meet, and even create, but create as you can create a web page or a web 2.0 application. In this case the SL and RL persona are the same, openly. This option is specially followed by the “professionals” of Second Life, production companies as Electric Sheep Company and some particulars, when you are moving big money you need to know who are you dealing with. Also is usual to consider the avatar as a brand, in the sense is the representation and the image of a business.
Of course there are conflicts between this two positions, one is “idealistic”, the other is “realistic”, impossible to make them compatible at the same time. Even the Augmentation theory is more recent, it has been growing in the last years, and some new features of the platform, like Voice Chat, were something applauded by the Augmentationists and refused by the Immersionists.
OK… now, where i am? What is my position about this? After being for a while thinking about it, looking at the Linden ocean through the window of my bedroom i think i have a conclusion, or something like that: I’m almost an Immersionist, but that’s the point… “almost”.
In Second Life, in my blog, in Flickr, even in my business, I’m Raul Crimson, an SL persona, that’s all. Anyway Raul Crimson is so me as my RL “avatar”, so he is just myself. Anyway, with the people who I trust or feel comfortable I don’t need to hide my RL persona. Also i can use voice openly, anyway i don’t do it always because English is not my first language and is easier sometimes for me to communicate typing and reading than speaking and listening.
I think also i prefer the Immersion because the romanticism implied in it (…you may saaay i’m a dreamer….. but i’m not the only one… 
), anyway i understand and even share sometimes the augmentationist ideas.
If there are place for both philosophies in me, then sure is place for both philosophies in our metaverse.
11 Responses to “Augmentation or Immersion”
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
Raul's Flickr Latest
|
This is where I have problem with the immersion vs augmentation debate. While a certain standpoint is labeled as ‘immersion’ – immersion is not actually what it is. Immersion’s actually something you need for proper augmentation.
I think, perhaps, escapism vs augmentation would probably be more correct. You need immersion for both sides of that.
So does that make us immermentationists? Or augmersionists?
That page made so much mess that it should be permanently deleted!
Those definitions are misleading and false. Stephenson’s metaverse doesn’t exclude meatspace. And an idea of the virtual world disconnected from meatspace is insane. Immersion doesn’t mean that SL and FL identities shouldn’t be mixed. It means that one is “deep into the media” so that outside distractions doesn’t bother. On the other hand augmentation means extension and many of those that call themselves “augmentationsts” are sonsidering SL as a telephone or other communication tool. Funny enough it is not their idea that avatar might be a brand. Quite opposite.
Even Henrik Bennetsen reviewed his position and made another, much more useful though not perfect, system.
I should say that page i refer, the one by Henrik Bennetsen, was the first i saw about this. Wanted to comment it because i thought the idea of a philosophical existence in our second life would be really interesting.
As i say at the end of the post i can “close” myself in one of the positions because i feel both have their right points, or at least, i agree with points in both philosophies.
@Tateru: You are right, there’s a need of “some immersion” for both, and escapism could be a good definition, specially for who is into deep role playing. Anyway i don’t mean escapism in a derogative way (and i don’t think you do it either).
@dandellion: I was reading your post and now i have more information, thanks for sharing it, specially the link to the page where Bennetsen review his position.
Oh sure that we need to think about (ways of) our virtual existence and our existence in the new media. At least, some of us like to play that game. I love Tateru’s conclusion that immersion is necessary for good augmentation. I do have a problem with escapism, though. It is too close to escape and we already have problem with bad attitude towards virtual worlds as means of escaping the reality.
Having read this, and the comments, I am not at all sure where I stand on the subject. My avatar certainly seems to have a life of her own and yet she is most definately ‘me’ and I don’t pretend to be anything I am not – I don’t even role play. On the other hand, I don’t bombard my SL friends with all the details of my real life. I like to get totally immersed inworld and interruptions from this side of the keyboard can be very jarring. Thats the main reason i don’t go in when the kids are around! But I always remain aware that everyone I meet is a real person sitting at a keyboard somewhere in the real world. So i guess I am sitting on the fence somewhere, neither one thing or another
@ dandellion: The game of concepts is really interesting, a dear friend, Arahan Claveau, made an installation in Second Life working on the concept of full uploading of the being called “Sick Cat”. Of course i don’t think he wants to upload himself totally, but the concept is really interesting. The british Channel 4 made an interesting documentary about it, you can take a look following this link.
@ Phoenix: Well, immersion, augmentation, escapism, are just concepts, tags. I presume we all have our own position including part of the one, two, or even three concepts (maybe some concept more ;-P ). My way is quite similar to yours (you know me enough), Raul Crimson is me, not a role, just some part of me.
Is there any real reason to choose side, SL allows you to have both. When it come to SL I’m quite open about my RL life. Then I have an alt that definitely isn’t open. In a way Balp exists in SL for me to have someone in SL i can be open about exists. There for as Balp I get many of my RL restrictions on me, my alt is in some way much less politically correct, more experimenting and spends more time inside SL. Still I made some good SL contact and some of them I like to meet in RL.
The only positions where I find the immersion, augmentation conflict in SL is the voice matter. And even thou I’m open about my RL identity voice chat isn’t anything for me. The main reason is that i care about the others in my surrounding, voice communication is for the one across the table.
Phoenix, I guess you’re not sitting on the fence but on both of the positions. Which is, imho, a good way to go. One doesn’t forbids you to be another as well.
Ains.. por que no haces dos versiones de la misma página.. en inglés toda es que no me entero.. bueno.. me da pereza.. muackssss
Aww, Gala, no me hagas escribir todo de nuevo en castellano que me matas