What has happened to meaningful conversation? In the New York Times Review, September 26, 2015,
“Stop Googling. Let’s Talk,” Sherry Turkle identifies technology as the culprit
– namely the cell phone:
• So
conversation proceeds [amidst cell-phone interruptions], but… The effect is
what you would expect: Conversation is kept relatively light, on topics where
people feel they can drop in and out.
Turkle argues that this makes for superficial conversations:
• Studies of
conversation both in the laboratory and in natural settings show that when two
people are talking, the mere presence of a phone on a table between them or in
the periphery of their vision changes both what they talk about and the degree
of connection they feel. People keep the conversation on topics where they
won’t mind being interrupted. They don’t feel as invested in each other. Even a
silent phone disconnects us.
What do we sacrifice for the convenience of a cell phone?
Turkle observes that through direct conversation:
• We learn to
make eye contact, to become aware of another person’s posture and tone, to
comfort one another and respectfully challenge one another — that [is where]
empathy and intimacy flourish.
However, as she points out, there seems to be other factors
involved:
• In 2010, a
team at the University of Michigan led by the psychologist Sara Konrath put
together the findings of 72 studies that were conducted over a 30-year period.
They found a 40 percent decline in empathy among college students, with most of
the decline taking place after 2000.
The decline in empathy and intimate conversations seems to
even pre-date the advent of the cell-phone. Turkle identifies our discomfort
with solitude and any attempt to try to become grounded in ourselves and self-awareness
as the source of the problem:
• In one
experiment, many student subjects opted to give themselves mild electric shocks
rather than sit alone with their thoughts.
While some thrive on the contemplative life, others dread
it. This resistance to encountering self is tragic. Turkle reflects that:
• In solitude
we find ourselves; we prepare ourselves to come to conversation with something
to say that is authentic…If we don’t know how to be alone, we’ll only know how
to be lonely…When we are secure in ourselves, we are able to really hear what
other people have to say.
Why is it that security – the comfort in knowing and
accepting where we stand – enables us to hear and to attend to others? I think
that there are a numbers of ways that we can understand this.
When we accept ourselves, we can accept others. Their
problems, weaknesses, and even their strengths do not threaten us. We are free
to appreciate them for who they are. When our most pressing needs are resolved,
we are also free to attend to the needs and anxieties of others.
Besides, when we are secure in our own opinions and even in
our failings, we need not fear being exposed, ridiculed, or backed into the
wall.
Also, when we know where we stand and why we stand there,
and this requires a lot of personal reflection, we can comfortably respond.
It’s like hitting a home run. Our feet must be planted firmly and securely.
When our feet aren’t planted securely, we are off-balance and confused.
Let’s use an example. Your friend tells you about a
wonderful extra-marital affair he is enjoying. You ask him about its impact on
his wife and kids. He answers that everything is just fine.
Where do you go from there? You feel that adultery is wrong
and destructive, but you also believe that your friend has to do what feels is
right for him. (You are a moral relativist and don’t believe in objective moral
truths.) Consequently, you are very confused and do not know how to respond.
You try to resolve your confusion, but your paradigms are in irresolvable
conflict. Result – great discomfort and a huge headache! Further contemplation?
It just leads to frustration. It’s like starting to button your shirt with the
wrong button. Every other button will be out of place.
We have to go back to the beginning, but that is too
difficult. Questioning moral relativism is like questioning the very foundation
of our life.
Turkle suggests that we simply reclaim conversation:
• This is our
moment to acknowledge the unintended consequences of the technologies to which
we are vulnerable, but also to respect the resilience that has always been
ours.
However, it is one thing to acknowledge this extensive
problem, but it’s another thing to effectively confront it, especially in light
of our antipathy to solitude and self-examination.
No comments:
Post a Comment