Summary: Technology can enable us reach out to people in
ways that were never possible before, but at the same time, it is also
extremely capable of bringing out the absolute worst of humanity as
well.
In a previous column, I discussed the impact of smartphone technology on human society and why extended usage of these devices may be stealing our most valued moments of life away from us.
I've given this a bit more thought. The issue isn't so much
smartphones per se, but our increasing reliance on mobile technology
combined with an irresistible cocktail of social networking. A cocktail
in which there are incentives for constant participation or sharing of
information, as well as incessant information "snacking."
Basically, the problem comes down to what Yale University computer science professor David Gelernter has termed the "lifestream", and what I have referred to in a previous article as "The fast track to nitwit."
In summary, the smartphone/social networking cocktail combined with
this penchant for information snacking is a perfect storm for
artificially created autism spectrum disorders, and it makes antisocial
behavior in the form of a non-stop feedback loop the new accepted norm.
But smartphones and technology as a whole are generally accepted to be morally neutral, right?
Technology may be morally neutral, but society as a whole establishes
the norms. Once we decide collectively as a society what is socially
acceptable to do, there's no turning back.
For example, in the 1920s, radio became a popular form of
entertainment that started to displace various social activities. In the
1950s, television re-enforced this, and by the 1960s, the "Boob Tube" became part of our collective lexicon.
So while we can certainly point towards societal detachment with the
introduction of radio and television, those were only consumptive
technologies rather than interactive ones.
The move towards Personal Computing starting in the early 1980s added
an element of societal detachment. By comparison, radio and TV could be
enjoyed in groups, whereas the PC and online interaction was by nature a
single-user activity.
The widespread use of the PC, the rise of online services, and the
use of the internet outside of academia were probably the tipping points
of this trend towards a societal disconnect through technology. The
mobile phone along with texting was another one.
Once these technologies were combined into the smartphone, the
perfect device for bringing out the worst of our inner antisocial
qualities was born.
With smartphones and mobile devices, we've extended that introversion
and ersatz social activity to anywhere that there's a wireless data
connection.
One could argue that any technology when applied in moderation is
beneficial. Becoming connected to other people is always a good thing,
but there are qualitative aspects of making connections.
I'm having a hard time believing that Facebook, Instagram, Vine, or
Twitter are high-value experiences compared to, say, email or a
voice-over-IP (VoIP) or video conferencing session between colleagues or
distant family members.
Of course, we cannot place the blame of societal disconnect entirely on the current generation of mobile devices.
Smartphones and tablets just so happen to be the latest and greatest
tool for freebasing social networking and information snacking —
eventually, there will be other avenues for doing this, such as through
wearable computing devices.
Game consoles and PC gaming, interestingly enough, are more of a
high-value experience, particularly if they involve multiplayer games.
It's certainly a more complex form of social interaction than the
standard quick-share or quick-consume model of social networking.
However, too much gaming and staying inside is not great for us as a society, either.
Those who have lived through the evolution of mobile computing can
still remember an age when we didn't have these devices and still have
the capability to "turn off," but even so, it's still difficult to do
for those people, including myself.
What is most concerning is the generation of people who are growing
up with smartphones and cannot remember life without them, or never knew
a time when this form of behavior was socially unacceptable.
Wearables will allow people to be antisocial in a nearly undetectable
manner. In my opinion, that makes it worse, because nobody on the other
side of the eyepiece will truly know whether they are being paid
attention to or not.
This is pretty much the ultimate evolution, short of a cybernetic implant or the mythical technological singularity of an artificially created autism spectrum disorder.
Of course, I'm not advocating neo-Luddism of any kind here. I think
that we can put mechanisms into our technology that tells us that we
need to take a "time out."
Just like the fitness sensors that we have built into our phones and
Bluetooth devices that count our calories and miles walked, it would
also be possible to track how much we are using our technology and
create thresholds which inform us that we need to take a rest.
We also need to tell people when they are acting in a socially
unacceptable manner, and try not to be part of the problem ourselves.
Additionally, as my colleague James Kendrick pointed out, human beings just plain need to get out and be with other people more.
As I have said in earlier writings, we are becoming a society of anxious, sleep-deprived, irritable stress-heads. Add the "lifestreams" to this mix, and we're all at risk of becoming attention challenged and socially inept as well.
My earlier advice still stands: Simply turn the devices off and
engage in basic social activities more often. Cook with people and have
discussions without your devices at the dinner table.
Engage in group exercise like team sports, or even engage in solitary
exercise to clear your mind and to meditate. And while long-form
reading of books and newspapers is not a social activity per se, it
stimulates the brain differently than social networking services do.
Technology can enable us to reach out to people in ways that were
never possible before, but at the same time, it is also extremely
capable of bringing out the absolute worst of humanity.
Anything that enhances the human condition is a positive thing, but
anything that displaces basic forms of human interaction will
potentially destroy us, if we are to believe EM Forster, who predicted the rise of the internet in 1909 with his short story "The Machine Stops."
I don't believe we need conclusive scientific evidence that over-use
of these devices and a tendency to replace traditional means of social
interaction with social networking tools disconnects us from society and
may also retard or harm our overall developmental skills, particularly
if we are exposed to them at an early age.
Those of us who already have difficulties in social situations or
have autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and associated co-morbid
conditions, such as ADHD and ADD, should be making an extra effort to
get out and be with people, and not become recluses with our tech toys.
The signs are certainly out there. You only need to walk into a
restaurant to see supposedly mature adults at tables mindlessly texting
or "liking" and sharing, rather than engaging in focused conversation
with each other.
You only need to go to a public park and watch people stare at their
tablets or phones rather than take in a beautiful summer's day watching
the marvels of nature or to people watch. Or ignoring priceless works of
art displayed at a museum, instead fixated on their business calendars
and corporate emails when they are on vacation.
You only need to observe your own children at family gatherings who
would rather be texting peers of their own age — frequently in the same
room with each other — than having to communicate verbally with anyone.
Is this the society we want to create for ourselves? For our
children? Or are we doomed to transform our great civilization into a
sea of stupid? Talk back and let me know.
Source: ZDNet
0 comments:
Post a Comment