I've also had intense, beautiful relationships via chat that were completely flat IRL. A soul-crushing experience to my younger self.

I think the other commenter nailed it: in text-only chat, you end up projecting your own ideals upon the other person.

Human communication is full of nonverbal cues which do not translate at all over text. In absence of those nonverbal cues which our brains are (usually) wired to pick up on, we end up mining the text for semiotic constructs which conform to our ideals of the other person, rather than the reality of the other person.

This is done subconsciously, and doesn't become obvious until you meet the person in real life and they are completely different from what you imagined.

> Human communication is full of nonverbal cues which do not translate at all over text. In absence of those nonverbal cues which our brains are (usually) wired to pick up on, we end up mining the text for semiotic constructs which conform to our ideals of the other person, rather than the reality of the other person.

Fantastic explanation.

> Human communication is full of nonverbal cues which do not translate at all over text. In absence of those nonverbal cues which our brains are (usually) wired to pick up on, we end up mining the text for semiotic constructs which conform to our ideals of the other person, rather than the reality of the other person.

I don't agree because this is a two-way street. Some people just communicate more directly in chat than in real life, especially because the nonverbal and physical side is not throwing off distractions all the time.

There are many "nonverbal" cues you can pick up on in a person if you know them very well in a chat environment. The time they suddenly need to reply if you ask them something emotional. The wording they use that is slightly off. Things like that.

Also, I don't really imagine the other person if all I have is a nickname. They remain just that, an entity. I don't imagine their physical appearance at all.

You are confusing one instance with a general behavior.

Chatting is fine.

Getting most of your meaningful social interactions out of chatting is, however, a good way to feel depressed.

Very few people are actually wired to never be touched, to never smell humans, to not be part of group dynamic.

Even introverts, which pay a great price for IRL social interactions, also pay a price for not having them enough.

Hey I'm not saying it's the only thing I have in my life. It's not like that at all. In fact I do a lot of physical stuff with other people (a lot more than most I would say :) )

But some people I only know online for logistical reasons.

I think what you’re saying is you had a really deep relationship with your imagination, what seemed to be with another person?

IRL relationships still involve a lot of imagination. We can't directly experience other people, we have to rely on our fallible and low bandwidth senses.

Real life is orders of magnitude more bandwidth than anything online. Online allows a lot more/easier maladaptive disconnection.

But yes, many (most?) in person relationships are also ‘imagination’ driven. Some very pathologically so (NPD, BPD, DID, etc.).

No I don't think so because the other person had this too. It's a more direct connection between minds, with no distraction of physical attributes. I can physically like the appearance of another person or dislike it, and it really affects my behaviour. Because this I'm not really being open and honest because it will introduce other factors that have nothing to do with what we are talking about. For example if the person is a beautiful lady I will be very inclined to impress her and this will affect everything I say and make me really shy. In a chat environment this is not a factor. That part doesn't exist, I'm just communicating with their mind.

Also, I don't really imagine the other person if all I have is a nickname. They remain just that, an entity. I don't imagine their physical appearance at all. They don't have a face or even a gender until I know it or is obvious from the nick. All I have is the things they say, the beliefs they have. It is more pure than their physical appearance which in many cases they don't control. Is that so weird?

I know not everyone has this ability but I do and I notice it a lot. Also, in many cases it does work out in real life. Just sometimes it doesn't.

It's pretty weird because of how maladaptive it is, practically?

On the other end could just be a really good chat bot. It may feel good at the time, but what future does it hold, and/or what useful feedback are you getting from it that isn't just a mirror of yourself or someone similarly disconnected physically?

Dissociative Identity Disorder is a problem for a reason. At the end of the day, real life/our physical selves do matter.

People are catfishing you whether they intend to or not. Everybody has max confidence online.

> There's people I've had a deep relationship with online and when I met them in person there was nothing.

I can't help but feel there's a serious issue somewhere in the reality described in this sentence.

I agree with other comments that it can be easy to conflate the actual person on the other side of text with the imagined person. But, there are also other possibilities to consider too. I am speaking generally here, not assuming we know the background of that once sentence.

Overall, a person's identity is not so clear cut as we like to think. Whether in text or in person, people are often performing and wearing some kind of mask rather than exposing their "true" selves. (And, one might ponder whether a true self really exists separate from these layered behaviors.) For one reason or another, some folks may have more modes than others or switch more easily by different nuances of context.

A romantic idealist might think of a text-first relationship as somehow meeting the true person. They might even believe that they've found a soul-mate and invest in ideas like "beauty is the person inside". That they are more advanced and would not judge a book by its cover. But to meet in real life, they eventually will discover how they respond to the outsides too. The face, the voice, the body, the pheromones, the posture and mannerisms. Finding incompatibilities at this level can create a strong cognitive dissonance.

But also, people sometimes compartmentalize aspects of their personality and behavior. They might be dedicated to their real-life relationship but almost put on an alternate ego as an escape. They behave like a different person in this other (possibly secret) mode. Someone meeting this alt-person could be in for a rough ride if they do not understand that it will always be a background "fun" mode for the other party, not something they would prioritize or allow to supplant their primary lifestyle.

And finally, some might find control or security in an alternative context. Whether virtual chat or just some other space compartmentalized from real life, they may find it easier to escape boundaries of their primary social personality. They might bypass shyness or anxiety or repression expected by their social circle. But in a crossover setting, they might involuntarily shut down, to the bewilderment of someone who knew them in their escapist space.

> And finally, some might find control or security in an alternative context. Whether virtual chat or just some other space compartmentalized from real life, they may find it easier to escape boundaries of their primary social personality. They might bypass shyness or anxiety or repression expected by their social circle. But in a crossover setting, they might involuntarily shut down, to the bewilderment of someone who knew them in their escapist space.

Very well put. I'm pretty sure this was the case where I had online contacts that didn't work out IRL. I had a really strong connection but they were not able to continue this in real life due to physical distractions. Or in one case, I wasn't.

How would you differentiate the value you perceived vs the value you provided?

I love chat but before AI and before understanding the value of people reaching out to me apart from the chat medium just to say they were thinking of me I cannot consider the value of chat to be anything beyond a poor substitute to real conversations and interactions.

Some people process speech slower. Chat allows some time to think before replying. A real life conversation is not that forgiving. In a group setting, it is especially detrimental, because before you are ready to say a word, already 3 other persons inserted their witty comments.