“Solitude gives birth to the original in us, to beauty unfamiliar and perilous.”
-Thomas Mann.
“You need to build an ability to just be yourself and not be doing something. That’s what phones are taking away: The ability to just sit there. That’s just being a person.”
-Louis C.K.
Slide 3: The first session focused on the structure and causation of Addiction or attachments, and its connection to attention and focus. While in many ways it wasn’t focused on technology per say, it was meant to highlight what tech could become in our lives if left unchecked. We spoke of solutions in a broad sense, but the singular point I wanted everyone to come away with was that addiction- a baseline level of attachment and dependency- can only truly be combatted with meaningful attachments in the form of deeper relationships: parents with children, us with each other, and the community at large.
This session will focus on connection and communication itself. We can all agree that our social media platforms, our devices, - our advancing tech- allows us to communicate and connect now more than ever before. Our relationships are built on how well we can communicate: reveal ourselves to others, in order for them to know us and vis-versa.
The following are quotations from the Testimonies I had you read beforehand:
Slide 4: 1) “I would so often run into a situation where, even though I talked to someone, via the internet every day, we would have little to nothing, aside from exchanging pleasantries, to say to each other in real life. “
2) “Feelings can’t be exchanged the same way. I had been unfair to my friend. I was limiting her to the social media version of me. I wasn’t being a proper friend at the time when she needed one most.”
The writers understood some kind of schism was present in their communication, something that we are trying to force into the mold of conversation, but it doesn’t fit. Why?
Slide 5: This chapter is based on the work of Psychologist Dr. Sherry Turkle, and her research in connection and communication, as well as the philosophy of American philosopher Henry David Thoreau and his ideas of the relationship between dialogue and solitude. To understand communication, we must understand the tiers of communication first.
Thoreau once famously said: “I had three chairs in my house; one for solitude, two for friendship, three for society.” The chairs, he claimed, represented the types of dialogue we have at different levels, involving more people each time. The chairs represent a conversation, but also something deeper than that. Symbolically Chairs are meant to represent a Hospitality: the welcoming in of a stranger. To Thoreau, this is what we do when we have a genuine conversation with another person. He called it by the German gespräch: A dialogue. When we welcome a stranger into the home, there is a mutual exchange taking place in hospitality: first, there is an expectation that both parties do not have to disclose or agree on everything. The Visiting Stranger represents the potential of good or bad based on the hospitality of the host. This is represented in the Story of the Destruction of Sodom, found in Genesis: Strangers visited Abraham, and because of his hospitality he was told that in a year’s time Sarah would bear a child. Yet when these strangers reached Sodom, they were met with threats of death and rape. There was no hospitality, and so the city was destroyed for its sin.
The stranger expects that they will be met with honesty and trust, just as the host expects it in exchange for their hospitality. Thoreau argues that this is the same model we use in conversation. A conversation is based on truth and trust. It is where both parties are equal and listening. Disagreements are natural and expected but also respected because the end goal is to reach a middle ground of understanding, and not to “win’ the exchange. If you win, you didn’t have a conversation. You have a disagreement. A debate. An argument.
Here is a fact: Technology improves communication and connection. Not conversation. Conversation, in Linguistic Psychology, is possible only as, “The exchange of meaning and idea between two sentient and present beings that understand the other. Technology has given us outlets to express our thoughts; Platforms allow us to display our ideas, and the texting format allows us to stay in touch with old acquaintances and makes meeting new people easier. But it does not lend itself well to conversation because it does not guarantee that exchange of genuine understanding is taking place.
Slide 6: Thoreau’s chairs mark conversation and communication on a three-tier process. Three chairs:
· The first is the conversations we have with ourselves (solitude). Before we can understand anyone else, we must be comfortable with ourselves. Solitude, Turkle argues, is the birthplace of a child’s imagination, and imagination development is crucial to the development of empathy: the ability to put oneself in another’s shoes. We can then probably see how crucial it is for a child to be able to be alone: because you need empathy to communicate with others.
· The next chair Thoreau adds is the conversations we have with close friends and family (Relationships). The second chair added to the conversation is like introducing a Stanger into the home. Our mind is our home. We live in our heads. Having another person talk to us is opening our mind to the stranger who we hope will respect our home. But sometimes conversations go wrong; People insult us-breaking the contract of the hospitality. We know there are rules to a conversation then and we can’t break these rules, or we will stop getting visitors. We have to learn hospitality in conversation.
· Lastly, the third chair represents the greater conversations we have as a community (society). Once three people are there, we are no longer having deep inner conversations, and usually that also means you don’t sit and share as intimately as you would with just one other person. Three or more chairs is no longer about the quantity, but the quality of dialogue taking place.
These are the three chairs we all have and the three conversations that technology is interrupting. Let’s begin with the Self.
Slide 7: Chair One: Self.
Conversation and the breakdown of the ability to have gespräch began with the breakdown of our ability to spend time with ourselves.
“Mom, ich bih geboredt!” how often have moms heard this cry. it is the hours a child spends playing independently without the interruption of parents, siblings, or other friends, that is the birthplace of the imagination. It is there that children between the ages of 3-5 should develop imaginations so rich that they cross over into their perception of reality. The floor is actually lava. Their stuffed animals can talk, and their Lego guys are driving their Lego cars. The imagination is one of the most important things for a human being to develop and nurture. It is how we can philosophize, create, invent, and perhaps most importantly, Empathize. And good conversation requires empathy above all else.
Slide 8: Last time we talked about empathy, and that led me to do some digging- yes, children have always been mean- always poked and prodded each other. But something is changing. According to Dr. Gordan Neufeld, across all North American schools, there has been a 40% decline in empathy among children. It sounds like a fake stat. but empathy interestingly can be studied. Participants in these ages between 5-10 are asked questions, placed in mock- scenarios, or observed on schoolyards or parks, and the research shows that children are developing imagination and as a consequence empathy later and later in life.
The first signs of empathy should show up around the age of 2: this is expressed in mimicry actions, such as a child hugging a person they observe crying, because mom hugs them when they cry. Neufeld notes that these basic demonstrations of emotional comprehension are showing up later and later. It is not that children are purposefully crueler to other children than before, but that they have simply never thought about how it will make the other child feel. Children always have and always will hit, steal toys, and exclude each other. The difference is that they no longer understand what they are doing. Turkle explains: the action of pushing or kicking at random, is becoming just that -random. It’s too easy to blame an underdeveloped frontal lobe because the foundations for empathy should be there, but they aren’t.
Social Development begins with the recognition of one’s own emotions, thoughts, and feelings. A child has to practice thinking through and in these emotions to be able to understand that others around them experiences them to the same capacity. It begins with self-entertainment.
Slide 9: Technology has disturbed our ability to be self-entertained across all demographics: The average child (age 2-8) spends over an hour on a device or some form of an electronic a day. Children ages 8-12 spend over two, and teens (13-19) are nearing 5. These numbers include watching a Sibling. So for example, your children have one hour a week each – are they allowed to watch their other sibling after their hour? That is bringing up their average.
Further, there is a difference between being alone and being in solitude. Everyone with a smartphone is spending more time alone than we did in the past, but this time when the child or teen is silent and alone does not necessarily translate to the necessary solitude required for development.
Here is the difference. Our brain continuously absorbs and documents new stimulation all around us at all times. In cognitive psychology, this is called consciousness sequencing: let's see.
· I say: picture a pink dog with black spots in your head for 30 seconds
· Times up: when I said stop, what were you thinking about?
· When we did this experiment in class, we did it for a minute -over ¾ of the class were not in that second thinking about the pink dog with black spots -their mind had wondered because the information was not stimulating anything new: we cannot hold a single thought of consciousness for long
This carries out into the real world in something we looked at last time Sensory Adaption: the reduction of activity in sensory receptors when exposed to stimuli for a long time.
Further, our brain has 3 types of memory –
· the first is Sensory Memory: this is our mind -without our ability to control it -taking in the information from the 5 senses. That which has our attention moves into short term. Short term
· Short Term or Working Memory is the thought, feelings, ideas, and memories we are conscious of- it is the memory in which we live.
· Long Term Memory is that information which we retain over time, store, and recall as we need it.
When we are engaged in the outside world- the world beyond our head -our sensory and Working Memory is on high alert -but just like the pink elephant memory- you could not hold the image. In the same way, the memory was no longer satisfying- stimulating, so too our environments, when they remain unchanging, do not reward the senses with information to relay to our Short-Term Memory in the process of Sensory Adaptation. Thus, the mind retreats and self- entertains, focusing on thoughts and abstract ideas. This is the birthplace of imagination. The purpose of a device is to provide an extreme amount of this visual stimulation for the explicate purpose of keeping the user entertained, engaged, and focused on the app or browser they are using. We all know this: it is a device created to engage our external stimulation.
Slide 10: At age 2, a child should be able to be alone for approximately 30 minutes uninterrupted, and there is a reason why psychologists do not count time on a device as “independent play”. At two, the most crucial parts of physical and mental development are starting to take shape: the ability to process more and more complex ideas must be met with periods of time when the visual and auditory stimulation is muted. This is so that a child from age 2-5 who is not stimulated by outward sensations (objects, sounds, feelings, etc.,) is forced to turn inwards and to utilize the information they already have. When they turn inwards, they develop their deep thought processes and imagination. If your child has just been introduced to a fictional character, a new feeling, or even a new toy, it is crucial that the particular thought or memory becomes a pathway, connected to other parts. Every time that thought is visited (thought about) the path is reinforced by a myelin coating. This is the basic psychology of memory and sensory learning in a nutshell. But as seen in the previous chapter, online games and entertainment impairs the building of these connections due to extensive overstimulation- that is sensory memory without time in solitude to encode- memorize or think about that information. If these pathways can only be reinforced in solitude, then a high-intensity game will not allow this to happen.
Slide 11: Let us go older. Around middle school, we see the development of complex emotions and ideas. It is crucial in these years that a child builds not only close friendships with family and other children, but that they understand their own strengths and weaknesses. A child using a device is not self-reflecting, engaging with complex thoughts, or deepening their connections. Rather, they are merely re-paving their brain's reflexive actions and sensory emotions. They are staying in the developmental stage (sensorimotor development) of a 3-year-old.
Let's move older then, to teenagers. The Hutterite teen of today (15+) is in constant and unending contact with peers, strangers, friends, and acquaintances. There is no break. There is always the potential of a phone buzzing. There is no break for solitude. The constant presence of a “bling.” Bling.” Bling” or even vibration disrupts any train of thought or moment of aloneness. It is silence, but it is filled with the same bombardment of stimulation, emotion, and sensory information as any other point in our lives.
In this way, journalist Johann Hari – who we looked at last week- sees social media and any form of online interaction as a form of drug. It works in the same way: drugs trigger good feelings by triggering certain hormonal production centers, so a small version of a certain feeling can be achieved. But because it is fake, it does not last as long, and so We wait for text backs as our next of dopamine. We forget to give ourselves a mental break.
If we do not take time for solitude, time where we have an uninterrupted private thought life, we lose self-awareness. There is a difference between feeling an emotion and feeling an emotion and being able to understand intuitively what caused it. This skill of identification is developed when we are alone. If we are not in tune emotionally, we cannot expect to be able to be vulnerable and therefore emotionally available for others.
The most private of conversations should be those that take place inside your own head. If we come to understand our shortcomings and weaknesses and come to terms with our own flaws and setbacks, we extend more leeway to others we talk to. We develop the empathy required to converse without being defensive and judgmental. The vulnerability of thinking alone opens the doors of empathy and honesty when we communicate with family, friends, and other relationships.
Slide 12 This leads to Thoreau’s Second Chair: Relationships and Deep Conversation.
. This second part of the essay on Communication covers the private conversations we have with the closest people in our lives.
· This section can be split further into two types of conversation being stunted by technology.
1. The first Is how the texting format itself stunts the texted conversation.
2. The second is how a device hinders in-person conversations from fully developing and being concluded.
Slide 13: Let’s begin with looking at what texting has done to the format, ethics, and social queues of genuine conversation: What does a conversation consist of? The more psychologists have researched conversation and human interactions, the more they come to understand that spoken word makes up only a small part of a conversation. Our minds subconsciously weigh in on tone, speech, word choice, body language, expression, or lack thereof, level of detail, subtle or broad movements, hand gestures. On top of that are personal history, level of the relationships, past exchanges, and social standing with the person you are talking to. It is as though we are created to be in relationship with others in every possible way. Good conversation requires vulnerability and that will only be done if both participants feel it is an environment where they are safe to share- where attention is on them.
Lenard Sax notes that the texting form communication, “Handicaps the reader’s ability to deduce anything other than what they want to hear.” This is crucial. In a face-to-face conversation, we have no control over half of what is being exchanged. The words and tone that the other user is giving us are entirely their own. If you texted “Hi” to someone, and the response back is also “Hello”, we have no context of their mood, attention, or even annoyance level. “Our deduction of the conversation is then entirely selfishly based on what we want or expect to hear.” The tone we gave to our message is the one we chose.
We have normalized the online silent texting forum, to the point where to speak face to face is intimidating. It is fast- with no time to formulate ideas properly we think. Sometimes its awkward, with long stretches of silence are seen as a boring conversation. We grant the online friend hours, and sometimes over a day to answer, but face to face, silence spent thinking is awkward.
Because of the limitations of the texting format, an exchange of text messages, no matter how long or fast they appear, does not meet the definition of a conversation. No matter how long and deep the texted communication becomes, it remains an exchange of ideas. It is a way to stay connected and interact with friends but it is not a conversation any more than if you were to yell sentences across the colony. A conversation requires full attention and full concentration on all levels of communication that proceed far beyond the formulation of words. That is why Johan Hari suggests that the place of online communication, “Should be as a placeholder: the expectation should be that we are staying in touch and merely that- showing we care in the time we anxiously wait for the next face-to-face exchange.” It should not be viewed as the first resort. Ever.
Slide 14: Think of the Contribution at the start of this essay: “Real life relationships have so many different factors like eye contact, facial expressions, hand gestures, tone of voice, etc. that are simply not there if you’re talking with someone through a computer. You would also never get as personal with someone you’re meeting face to face right away as quickly as we tend to do online. Typing words with our fingers is a lot less intimidating than saying them, and people kind of tend to lose their humanity when they’re hundreds of miles away.”
Be that as it may, social media and the texting format are brilliant for positivity. That is because the text format communication is so simplistic. A cheerful update to a parent in another colony is good. It is uplifting and is a genuine way to remind them that you are thinking of them. But for the more complex conversations, it is less than ideal. For the difficult conversations, we need to move away from this format that handicaps our ability to gather the information we need to understand those we care about.
Slide 15 (this section is contributed by an anonymous author): The online and texting form communication follows different social rules which do not apply to an IRL conversation.
Rule #1: By accepting follow requests, you are essentially giving people permission to message and reply to your stories. “Random strangers were filling up my inbox, and I dutifully replied and even formed bonds with some of them because they were now my ‘friends. Their offered likes and comments required some responsibility on my part, so I had to form friendships with these strangers. Friendship is not a social contract. But the terminology of social media and messaging apps change the mean of the word “friends” to include a broad circle of all peers, acquaintances, and strangers we want to talk to.’ It is the reality of our new form of communication.
Rule #2: Left on read? Too bad. In real life, the option of saying nothing is so deeply rude and the message is clear. Text culture has removed this simple rule and changed it to where the recipient must simply resign and try again later. Imagine conversing with a girl then suddenly, she looks away, as though she sees no need to respond. That is not conversation. More than that, it never happens in real life. There is at least some clue that the other converser is not interested long before someone walks away. How much has our conversation environment altered that over text, the idea that a message and conversation ends most often with just dead air? We are forced by this strange dynamic to accept this lack of empathy as simply normal. So many “friendships today are ending, not with a squabble, a disagreement, or a mutual parting of ways, but with dead air…for days. This is not normal. And lends to my theory that texting is not a conversation.
Rule #3: Difficulties are texted, not phoned. We have established that conversation requires vulnerability and empathy. Nowhere is this as clear as when we want to comfort a loved one far away. We cannot be there with them, but you want to reach out and show them you care. Yet, we opt instead for Consolation texts. We have lost. When the conversation of sympathy or any difficult subject is moved to the text message, you lose out on not only the solace a friendship provides but also the deeper understanding of yourself and your friend. Conversations of any importance must be had in real-time, and if at all possible, face to face. Difficult topics mean more complex emotions and thoughts. Exchanges we have online force us to channel these complex ideas through the simplistic format of a written exchange. The adequacies of real-time are not naturally translated directly onto the online world of social media and messaging apps.
(End of Anonymous Contribution)
Connotations and subtleties are lost to the “whisper game” that texting is. The thought that is texted to a friend is channeled into something more simplistic and edited before it is sent. The recipient further edits and simplifies it upon reading it, because all tone, expression, body language, and voice are lost. The conversation arrives at the destination of another mind, starved and a shadow of the original idea. If there is anything to take away from this essay, it is that we cannot replace communication and conversation with technology. We are social beings. We need intimate and profound friendships and relationships to be healthy and complete. And to maintain them, we must not stop talking. Long and hard. Texting is a way to connect. Not converse. There is a difference.
The truth is, we as humans like and actually need to socialize with other humans: to share ideas, thoughts, news, etc., and to be a part of groups that share a common interest of ideas, hobbies, and experiences. There is nothing wrong with that. That is why social media was created: to stay connected. We make the mistake when we confuse, “sips of connection we actual gulps of conversation.” Texting and online communication is a brilliant opportunity to share and connect with a broader audience that shares common interests with you. We’ve only been able to do that until’ as of late and that’s a pretty remarkable phenomenon.
( Anonymous Contribution Cont.)
“Oh hey, I know her- she’s the one that posts those quirky captions on Instagram, I’m a huge fan!”
This was my fuel in the past and still is. There have been incidents where people have approached me in person, whom I had never met and they spoke to me as if they had known me for years- saying that they know me from online, namely from my posts/Instagram platform. This one time at the [location name] fireworks still sticks out the most, because it was the first time it happened. I was approached by a lovely young man in blue jeans, and on first glance he appeared to be fohlufn.
“Heeeyy, you’re [name and colony] right?!”
I was too dumbfounded to give any kind of response, or I just don’t remember it, and he must have immediately caught on to my confusion because he then laughed and added “I know you from Instagram.” We exchanged laughs, handshakes and things were easygoing after that. I remember who it was, though I don’t remember talking to him for long. I just remember his friendly aura and how dumb I must have looked shortly after the encounter. Someone who I didn’t know had approached me in a very public setting, knowing exactly who I was, and I had little to no idea who he was until he introduced himself.
This has happened to me more than a couple of times. People’s names, faces and where they were from often just melted into a gigantic puddle of butter in my brain, because there were just SO many to keep track of. A high “friend” count will do that...” (End of Anonymous Contribution)
Slide 16 Text over talk: Perhaps the most important thing that texting takes away from conversation is that we are tricked to believe that these sips of connection throughout the day equal a single, large conversation. It does not. Especially not for negative or complex emotions.
Online exchanges are always short. If you have your phone on yourself right now, take it out and look for the longest text you have ever received? Maybe you are scrolling a couple times. Now go to where the exchange began and read the entire exchange, from where the conversation was started to its conclusion. This exchange may be something that took place over several hours, or even days, depending on the complexity of the conversation. The time between text messages give the illusion of an extended conversation. “The exchange documented and taking place over several hours or days make us feel like we are in connection for several hours or days. We are not.” The spoken word is said as the thought is formed, we interrupt, we go down rabbit holes, interrupt, tell anecdotes and drop conversations and veer to new ones altogether. And most importantly, talking makes this easy. Turkle describes it as such: The extra time, the ability to edit, the social rules at our disposal, and the lack of vulnerability it requires us to show, all play a part In the appeal of texting over conversation in real time. Texting is a format of communication that does not lend itself well to long-form conversation. We must discern the circumstances where we opt for the text over the conversation just because it is easier.
***
(Anonymous Contribution)
Many might find that the online world is scary, unnecessary, and even dangerous- not for the minds of naive teenagers. It's hard to argue that because in some ways I believe it too. It’s true that we live in a generation where the minds of our youths are being shaped by smartphones and by the communication rise of social media, and conversation is dying. What’s not to be worried about? What makes all this scarier is that we now also use our smartphones to manage the more complex things in our lives, such as relationships and emotional issues. And sometimes it appears like the cons seem to outweigh the pros with technology, especially given its effects on communication. Almost- but not quite.
New form-communication through texting, instant messaging, etc. does have benefits. It's a way to express oneself, stay in touch with other humans, and to connect. (preferably via phone and facetime of course) It is a way to remind ourselves that we are not the only ones who are wandering the earth aimlessly, trying to figure out where we are going and what we are doing. It’s an entire sea of bewildered, curious, bizarre anxiety-ridden personalities, just like me. I love it. And it’s through the not-so-fun experiences that I’ve had online that have actually taught me how to have a healthier relationship with real friends in the first place and with real-life me.
For younger people, I want to emphasize the importance/dangers of chatting online, especially with strangers. It is crucial to remember that all is not what it seems. Verbal and facial cues are important parts of communication, and these have been replaced by “emojis.” It’s because of this that we often interpret messages based on our own current mood and attitude. We cannot read their expressions or hear their voice.
In other words, do not let heart emojis get in the way of showing real human affection- because it simply doesn’t fill that need. I know this is especially hard when your crush slides into your DM’s and comments on that selfie you storied just twelve minutes ago. Remember, people also only let you know what they want you to know about them. Which makes us easy to manipulate and be taken advantage of, especially over text. This is why building relationships off-line first is so crucial.
So, if possible. Call or facetime that friend. And truly, there are close friends where the texted conversation can take place, because you know them and their expressions and values. But when push comes to shove and the conversation becomes something deep or difficult, for goodness sakes, call! In fewer words, don’t talk to strangers. Do not allow too many strangers to follow you. Access to your profile means access to your life means access to your message inbox means access to play with your psychological and emotional wellbeing. “We as humans are extremely social creatures who thrive when surrounded by others. This desire for social inclusion and interpersonal exchange is what made us adapt to social media so avidly and rapidly.”
(End of Anonymous Contribution)
***
I really like this particular segment because it puts into perspective that the messaging system isn't going anywhere. It will continue to be used by teenagers who will continue to have social media platforms, so what's important is to emphasize that along with this we cannot neglect this real life. That's where it's at. We need to learn to communicate offline before we learn to connect online.
Slide 17: So, we have examined what the misused texting format can do to when we assume connection the same as conversation. Now, What does having a phone on-hand in “real time” social situations do to conversations? Sherry Turkle introduced me to a conversation theory called “the seven-minute rule,” Basically, the rule states that a conversation on average remains shallow, awkward, and small-talkish for around 7 minutes from its beginning. Around this mark, someone will venture a question, or a more informative or deeper topic will be introduced. Turkle called it “the bait.”
That is, unless a phone is one’s hand. Turkle notes that, “The conversation scene among friends and young people hanging out today shows a dynamic where the conversation never moves deeper. With one or two participants dipping out of the conversation to browse or text, only to return and go ‘wait, what?’ the conversation remains shallow.” The presence of a distraction both disengages us from dedicating to a conversation while simultaneously prevents the other person from bringing up something “deeper” because our lack of full attention does not invite them to “take the bait” and be more vulnerable.
Second, the information age has created information friendships. A simplified form of communication over text has resulted in us forging relationships based not on the sharing of ideas, feelings, and emotions, but on the exchange of information: your day, your pet, whatever is new. “The bait” must be taken in conversation to deepen any relationship and friendship and within a short time, the superficial day-to-day talk should no longer be the basis of what is discussed. Turkle notes that the new-form friendships observed in schools are where the children befriend only to broadcast- inform the other person of themselves, with no listening and response in return. She continues, “this directly correlates to the fact that this is a generation coming up who have not fully developed their empathetic abilities, nor have learned to articulate their emotions, let alone listen -show hospitality to those of their friends.”
Conversation is less about information and more about creating an environment of exploration. Turkle calls it a Whole Person Conversation. For the formation and development of true conversation: dialogue and gespräch- there is no room for technology; the phone must be out of sight and mind. You cannot stop to answer a text, because the full attention is required to fully listen, think, formulate what the speaker has said.
Which leads to the last point: Even a silent phone disconnects us. You are sitting in a room with a friend, relative, whoever. You want to spark up a conversation. However, studies show that even see a phone nearby, or within reach makes us less likely to engage in a deep conversation because we know we could potentially be interrupted at any time, so we keep conversations light. The Seven minutes drag out into an hour. When phones are out in physical conversations, the conversation must remain light, since you are concentrating less on it. Moreover,, you will not engage in a deep, vulnerable dialogue with a distracted individual.
Turkle talks about “present conversation” when she described this new phenomenon: We hold our phones like a crutch; we look down and pretend to text in an awkward situation. When a conversation bores us for even a moment, we do not take the opportunity to involve ourselves, Conversations are interrupted by refreshing one’s phones. Gatherings of friends spend their time texting those not there. We come together to hang out, but there is no real, present conversation that goes below the surface, no growth. “We are,” says Turkle, “Sitting alone together.”
If the mere presence of a device is disrupting our concentration, then conversation cannot flow as it should. Technology has its place as an aid in connection; But it has no place within a conversation itself. If we wish to use with intent, we will need to change our habits. Gordan Neufeld, Leonard Sax, and other authors on this topic talk about creating “sacred spaces” in the home as well. Leave technology out of the bedroom and kitchen. In these places - the area where we should be practicing solitude and, in the place where family conversation and dialogue should take place- the presence of technology- disrupts and damages these opportunities, and it is these moments that add up and form our relationships.
The phone was created with the purpose to connect us and simplify communication and connection. It has indeed made us more connected, given us more relationships, friends, and allowed us to have interactions with strangers online that were meaningful and insightful. But when we do not acknowledge its limitations and turn to technology as a main source for conversation and relationships, we hinder the development of empathy and imagination, our ability to converse in solitude and with the people closest to us.
Slide 18: Community and Gespräch:
Let’s now turn to the third chair. The third conversation that is being reshaped and, in some ways, damaged by online connection. Riedemann and other Huttarian writers discuss what makes Huttarianism a true reflection of God’s vision for his people. One of the core values of Huttarianism is the principle of community and self-sacrifice -to serve one another. Over 500 year ago, the refugees leaving Nikolsburg made the choice to pool the recourses of a few desperate and poor families. These original pacifistic people agreed to live and serve God, each other, and others together as a physical manifestation of the church. We see this legacy played out in the Chronicles and other documentation until the present day.
In the book Called to Community, the various chapters discuss the virtues required to maintain this expression of faith though Huttarianism. Some of these will be familiar to this essay: empathy for others (to give help), vulnerability on one’s own part (to receive help), and lastly, Gespräch and conversation (to be able to ask for, discuss, and discover where help is needed). To have community one needs gespräch: A true, openminded and empathetic dialogue. An open dialogue is necessary to maintain strong community.
By an open dialogue I mean the continual stream of small interaction we have face to face with almost all the members of our colonies. Be it at the shop, the kitchen, or at community work, a continuous conversation in which the entire colony is engaged and participating creates the bonds and fellowship that allow us to continue to work and live together in relative peace. Technology is taking this larger dialogue away.
· First. We forget that we have adopted modern technology which embodies modern ethics: It’s very form, is developed based on the modern philosophy of individualism to properly use. Think of Apple’s model of the “private user.” Social Media is run on the notion that you can cultivate an image and broadcast it at large. Music is listened to alone, watching sports fills evenings where an actual physical and communal activity could have taken place. People are on their phones during communal mealtime. Overall, technology is a lonely tool. It is only you and the screen. Our devices are edging their way into our daily lives, and especially the parts of our daily lives where they have no business being.
· Next, Turkle notes that this time and alternative culture created online create the idea of an independent and all-important self. Community cannot continue if members work for themselves instead of the community at large. To be under the sway of individualism places you, the self, at a higher priority than those around you. You have neatly placed yourself on top of a hierarchy that in a community cannot exist. This leaves no room for humility and vulnerability necessary for conversation: Gellassenheit is the opposite of individualism. It places us under our neighbor, rather than over.
· Thirdly, to have dialogue, we must see our shortcomings as Christians and as individuals within the community, understanding that the one we are conversing with can teach us something. Anything. “We are open to change and are aware that our lives need correcting.” The colony group chat is useful for dealing with the tiny grievances of “Whose bike was left at the shop?”, and “Tell your kids to clean up eggs they drop in the fridge,” etc. It is one example of moving basic dialogue and information online- connectivity. In this sense it is a tool that has benefited us. However, texting and communicating primarily online begins to replace the small daily exchanges we have with members. whereas messages like “I’m concerned about...” or “I just want to let you know that...” – these are the type of messages that should be carried to another member directly.
“For a community to be united,” the writers of Called to Community go on, “The brothers and sisters need to meet as people; it requires a clear, radical and arduous commitment to each other.” And knowing those around you requires strong dialogue. “Dialogue demands of each participant that we try to live into the other’s world, try to see things as another sees them.” It is a self- emptying to make room for the other. Dialogue is not about persuasion. It is not a competition. But social media is. Online connectivity is. Devices are created on the bases of a self-glorification ideology. How sure are we that the worldviews we interact with online do not influence and change our traditional ones?
Slide 19: Suggestions For a Way Forward: Henry David Thoreau argue that conversation and communication happens on three tiers.
· First there is the inner dialogue. We must be able to talk to ourselves and God truthfully. We must be masters of the solitary conversation and the private dialogue first. What are our desires? Fears? Goals?
· Next there is the communication between family, friends, and relationships. Deep and meaningful dialogue with these people requires attention and build up relationships, trust, and vulnerability.
· The third conversation we have is with our community. It is filled with daily interactions among all community members. To have the third chair pulled into the conversation, we need to have mastered the first and second chairs. It all comes full circle.
Now let’s throw technology into the mix.
· Children given devices instead of being taught to self-entertain and practice solitude are not developing the skills necessary to properly empathize with others or even themselves. Teens like me grab our phones the second we are bored or feel uncomfortable: turning to a different, more stimulating environment, rather than turning inward to have an inner dialogue.
· Next, this disconnects from ourselves can have consequences on the depth of our conversation with the people closest to us. We text instead of call, and when we are face to face, we text other friends, or mentally flit in and out of the conversation with our devices.
· Lastly, the community at whole is in danger because we are being told that the individualism extoled by “die Wilt” is ok, which disconnects us from the people on our own communities even as we get to know people across the world on our phones.
“But we are resilient,” is the line Turkle uses throughout her book. The answer is not to remove technology. Technology has advantages in that we are more connected, and these basic levels of communication are better than nothing. Where would we all be during the quarantine if not for our devices that allow us to stay in touch with family and friends? Can we not utilize this one advantage while we rebuild relationships that we let decay? Can we not pick and choose with more purpose what we text and what we phone? Can’t we set specific places and times to interact with others online. To be more present in the now and the conversations taking place? Smartphones and laptops are the realities of today’s world. Texting is a reality of today’s communication. But they do not and should not define our conversations. The goal is to use them with greater intention and for their intended purposes. We need to re-differentiate between a deep dialogue and just merely being connected. We cannot afford to lose the art of conversation. As Thoreau put it, “How else will we bear our souls” to one another?
Comentarios