In writing my second major essay there were multiple challenges along the way. I would say that the process started off smoothly, I had an idea of what I was going to write about and had even identified what quotes I wanted to use. I immediately threw the concept and where the quotes were from onto a google doc so I could easily pick up where I left off. Things however began going downhill as I had to miss a class due to medical reasons. In addition to missing class, my wrist was still giving me extreme pain. When I was able to resume writing I met with our class peer editor and got help with my thesis and some key concepts. Things were looking up for my essay, until I had to miss another class due to medical reasons.This set me back yet again, by the time I could get back to writing it, when looking at it I couldn’t really understand what I was trying to say. After reading it multiple times to try and jog my memory, I still couldn’t figure it out so I decided to rework my thesis. Although this ended up taking more time it was easier for me to write because it waa fresh in my mind.
Author: escheff (Page 1 of 2)
After looking at the comments left on my essay from my peer review group, the main focus of my next steps are:
-getting all of my thoughts typed out
-organizing the paragraphs
-choosing specific parts of quotes
-overall flow of the essay
For or against technological evolution? The rapid pace at which advances in technology are happening is not necessarily something that we need to fear. Nicholas Carr who is a journalist, Harvard and Dartmouth graduate and Pulitzer Prize finalist also believes in making things more efficient and simple. Similarly, Sam Anderson, New York Times Magazine writer and multi-book author also talks about how technology isn’t the largest threat. Two things can be true, technology can be advancing quickly and people have to balance where they are giving their attention. Carr while referencing the concept of taylorism explains that “Once his system was applied to all acts of manual labor, Taylor assured his followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency” (Carr 5). Through this part of his writing Carr is connecting the dots between taylorism and the algorithm that is google. Formed off of the idea that there is a single and most efficient way to get the information people are looking for out to them, google which many of us use everyday was crafted.
To be efficient means you need to pay attention to the task at hand. The ability to pay attention and technology are often seen as polar opposites. While that may be true for some people, for others they are two things that can work side by side. While Anderson is in conversation with Winifred Gallagher, they discuss how “It made her realize, she says, that attention was not just a latent ability, it was something you could marshal and use as a tool.” (Anderson 6). If we could all harness the ability to split up our attention to focus on tasks in the way that is most efficient, would the struggle of balancing attention and technology still prevail? For me the answer would be yes, no and maybe. Although the answer is not definitive there is a purpose for that, it varies person to person. One may be able to more swiftly change their habits to reflect using attention as a tool, while others may find great difficulty in doing so. Every person will adapt to change at different levels of understanding and at different speeds. The key commonality between them is that they are all still growing and evolving. This is just like how technology is becoming more advanced and is constantly changing. The only difference is that as humans on an individual level we can change the trajectory. We can’t stop the world and technology from advancing and at the same time, we can learn to treat our attention in a more efficient way.
As a result of thoughtfully dividing our attention it also allows us to address another problem surrounding technology. It is very rare that you come across someone that has never been told to get off of some type of their technology devices. Being absorbed in devices rather than the present moment is something that occurs extremely often. Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and sociologist Sherry Turkle talks about this issue often. Turkle thinks that “Among family and friends, among colleagues and lovers, we turn to our phones instead of each other” (Turkle 343). One can acknowledge that this is in fact true in most cases, and it is also something that we as humans can work on. If we take the idea of dividing our attention it can give us the time we want to be on our devices and it can allow us to spend more quality time with those in our lives while engaging in the present moment. For me, I would be lying if I said there was never a struggle for me with attention and technology both separate and at the same time. I am on my devices a lot, however the reasons I am on them aren’t always because they are distracting me. In most cases it is actually helping me focus and/or stay in the present. A decent portion of my technology usage is spent listening to music, contrary to some beliefs music helps me pay attention and it brings me a sense of peace making me able to do my tasks more efficiently. Another way that my technology contributes to me being more efficient is by having certain apps on my phone that can help me when I need a brain break or to calm down. I also frequently use my devices to stay on top of my medical condition. My technology also helps me stay in touch with those that I care about who are now farther away from me now that I am up in Maine. Although most of my technology use is for good, there is still the remaining portion which can be categorized as a distraction. When thinking of how I can apply the ideas of using technology as a resource and dividing my attention, I have a lot to improve.
For or against technological evolution? The rapid pace at which advances in technology are happening is not necessarily something that we need to fear. Nicholas Carr who is a journalist, Harvard and Dartmouth graduate and Pulitzer Prize finalist also believes in making things more efficient and simple. Similarly, Sam Anderson, New York Times Magazine writer and multi-book author also talks about how technology isn’t the largest threat. Two things can be true, technology can be advancing quickly and people have to balance where they are giving their attention. Carr while referencing the concept of taylorism explains that “Once his system was applied to all acts of manual labor, Taylor assured his followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency” (Carr 5). Through this part of his writing Carr is connecting the dots between taylorism and the algorithm that is google. Formed off of the idea that there is a single and most efficient way to get the information people are looking for out to them, google which many of us use everyday was crafted.
To be efficient means you need to pay attention to the task at hand. The ability to pay attention and technology are often seen as polar opposites. While that may be true for some people, for others they are two things that can work side by side. While Anderson is in conversation with Winifred Gallagher, they discuss how “It made her realize, she says, that attention was not just a latent ability, it was something you could marshal and use as a tool.” (Anderson 6). If we could all harness the ability to split up our attention to focus on tasks in the way that is most efficient, would the struggle of balancing attention and technology still prevail? For me the answer would be yes, no and maybe. Although the answer is not definitive there is a purpose for that, it varies person to person. One may be able to more swiftly change their habits to reflect using attention as a tool, while others may find great difficulty in doing so. Every person will adapt to change at different levels of understanding and at different speeds. The key commonality between them is that they are all still growing and evolving. This is just like how technology is becoming more advanced and is constantly changing. The only difference is that as humans on an individual level we can change the trajectory. We can’t stop the world and technology from advancing and at the same time, we can learn to treat our attention in a more efficient way.
Emily Scheff
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110
27 September 2024
Technology Turmoil
They say that having face to face conversations fosters some of the strongest relationships, and that technology can get in the way of them. I say, technology isn’t the only factor contributing to this issue. One of those people being Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and sociologist Sherry Turkle. I say, technology isn’t the only factor contributing to this issue. What it truly comes down to is how people are using their technology and for what purposes. Some of my closest relationships are with people who do not live in the United States, let alone the same continent. Due to the power of modern day technology, I am able to maintain extremely close relationships with people as far as on the other side of the world. The presence of technology in my life is not explicitly positive or negative, it is far more complicated. This makes my stance on the topic not as clear-cut as Sherry Turkle’s, who has written about the intersection of technology and conversation in her work “The Empathy Diaries”.
People say to focus on the positives, not the negatives, and Turkle addresses that in regards to technology.
“We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new —our new comforts, our new distractions,our new forms of commerce. And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist —that we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at a family dinner.” (Turkle 349).
However, not everything is so black and white; technology evolving is not just positive or negative. Society tends to only focus on the extremes, burning hot and freezing cold while completely overlooking everything that is in the middle. It is the actual use of technology that makes up the gray area. The fact that two things can be true at once is what creates the in-between area in terms of technology usage.
Turkle suggests that people tend to be more vulnerable and have true conversations when speaking face to face. Turkle says “Yet these are the conversations where empathy and intimacy flourish and social action gains strength.” (344). Although this might be the case for some people, not everyone is in a place to be vulnerable and to have those deep and intimate conversations. Some people struggle with maintaining eye contact while speaking to others and technology can be used as a way to bridge the gap from observing to actually engaging and contributing to those conversations. This also allows for those who are still working on overcoming other hard parts of conversations to build up the courage to participate in a face to face setting, whatever that looks like. When taking away or lessening the stressful parts of communicating, like eye contact, it can actually have the opposite effect of what Turkle describes. It can allow them to participate more in conversations and it creates the opportunity for people to grow and get more comfortable in social settings. Despite my understanding of Turkle’s point with this quote, I cannot help but feel as though it is oversimplifying what empathy, intimacy and mean.
Contrary to Turkle’s beliefs, technology can be a reliable tool for relationships, especially ones that are long distance. It is also helpful given the fast-paced and forever evolving world we live in. According to Turkle, technology creates a divide between us and the people that we care about. “Among family and friends, among colleagues and lovers, we turn to our phones instead of each other” (343). For some people, they have no choice but to turn to their devices to have conversations with their family and friends, as there is physical distance between them. The 2020 Covid-19 pandemic is a good example. During times when we were uncertain how dangerous it was and were scared of getting sick, we heavily relied on technology in order to stay in touch with our friends and family. Even without the pandemic, there are many different reasons why people have to be distant from each other. Deployment, new jobs, change of scenery, college, economics are just a few of the reasons why people may have to be away from their loved ones. While we still turn to our phones as Turkle had said, sometimes the reasoning behind it is because that is the only communication method that is efficient and available. Given that, I do not think many people are ever in the right to judge the ways in which people choose to communicate.
Despite the fact that my opinions thus far have not totally aligned with Turkle’s, it does not mean that there aren’t a few things that we could agree on. True conversation does not need to be face to face, however, sometimes it can make a conversation even more special. Talking with loved ones and people who you care about while being with them in person is one of the greatest gifts. It is also something that gets taken for granted way too much. Having even the most basic of conversations is such a mundane part of most people’s lives, that they do not stop and appreciate them. There is a common phrase: “you don’t realize what you have until it’s gone”. That saying applies to conversations both face to face and through technology, as well. Conversations give you the opportunity to say the things you do not want to be left unsaid, show how much you value the person and create memories that will last a lifetime. Time goes by in the blink of an eye, and no future conversations are guaranteed. Cherish every one as if they are the last you will have, because looking up to the sky and talking is not the same as a real conversation and hearing them speak back to you. Taking the time to appreciate all of the conversations that you have left can end up being a blessing in disguise.
To sum up, it is the ways in which one uses technology which plays a role in whether face to face conversation is going to die out or not. It is a personal preference, it is not an all or nothing situation. What it comes down to is that conversation in the presence of technology is what you make of it. Each person is given the opportunity to make technology a tool that enhances their life, or it drives a wedge between them and the many aspects of their lives. To me, whether to agree or not agree with Turkle’s beliefs each comes with their own positives and negatives. While technology has personally allowed me to maintain some of the most important relationships in my life, it does not discount the fact that I have had many memorable face to face conversations. Thus, my stance on the connection between technology and conversation remains complicated.
Works Cited
Turkle, Sherry. “The Empathy Diaries: A Memoir” Penguin Press, 2021, pages 343-354
Emily Scheff
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110
27 September 2024
Technology Turmoil
They say that having face to face conversations fosters some of the strongest relationships, and that technology can get in the way of them. I say, technology isn’t the only factor contributing to this issue., Wwhat it truly comes down to is how people are using their technology. Some of my closest relationships are with people who do not live in the United States, let alone the same continent. Due to the power of modern day technology, I am able to maintain extremely close relationships with people as far as on the other side of the world. This makes my stance on the topic not as clear-cut as Sherry Turkle’s, who has written about the intersection of technology and conversation in her work “The Empathy Diaries”.
People say to focus on the positives, not the negatives, and Turkle addresses that in regards to technology.
“We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new —our new comforts, our new distractions,our new forms of commerce. And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist —that we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at a family dinner.” (Turkle 349).
However, not everything is so black and white;, technology evolving isn’t just positive or negative. It is the actual use of technology that makes up the gray area. The fact that two things can be true at once is what creates the in-between area in terms of technology usage.
Turkle suggests that people tend to be more vulnerable and have true conversations when speaking face to face. “Yet these are the conversations where empathy and intimacy flourish and social action gains strength.” (Turkle 344). Although this might be the case for some people, not everyone is in a place to be vulnerable and to have those deep and intimate conversations. Some people struggle with maintaining eye contact during conversations and technology can be used as a way to bridge the gap between engaging and contributing to those conversations and those who are still working on getting the courage to incorporate themselves into a face to face setting. When taking away or lessening the stressful parts of conversations, like eye contact, it can have the opposite effect of what Turkle describes., Iit can allow them to participate more in conversations and. This also creates the opportunity for people to grow and get more comfortable social settings.
Contrary to Turkle’s beliefs, technology can be a reliable tool for relationships, especially ones that are long distance. According to Turkle, technology creates a divide between us and the people that we care about. “Among family and friends, among colleagues and lovers, we turn to our phones instead of each other.” (Turkle 343). For some people, they have no choice but to turn to their devices to have conversations with their family and friends, as there is physical distance between them. While we still turn to our phones as Turkle said, sometimes the reasoning behind it is because that is the only communication method that is efficient and available. The 2020 Covid-19 pandemic is a good example. W, when we were uncertain how dangerous it was and were scared of getting sick, we used technology to stay in touch with our friends and family.
Despite the fact that my opinions thus far have not totally aligned with Turkle’s, it doesn’t mean there aren’t a few things we could agree on. True conversation doesn’t need to be face to face, however, sometimes it makes a conversation even more special. Talking with loved ones and people you care about while being with them in person is a gift. It is also something that gets taken for granted. Having even the most basic of conversations is such a mundane part of most people’s lives, that they do not stop and cherish them. There is a common phrase: that “you don’t realize what you haved until it’s goneit is gone”. That saying applies to conversations both face to face and through technology, as well. Conversations give you the opportunity to say the things you do not want left unsaid, show how much you value the person and create memories that will last a lifetime. Time goes by in the blink of an eye, and no future conversations are guaranteed. Cherish every one as if they are the last you will have, because looking up to the sky and talking is not the same as a real conversation and hearing them speak back to you. Taking advantage of the conversations you have left can end up being a blessing in disguise.
All this to say, it is the ways in which one uses technology which plays a role in whether face to face conversation is going to die out or not. It is a personal preference, not an all or nothing situation. Each person is given the opportunity to make technology a tool that enhances their life, it is just a matter of what they choose to do. To me, there is no definitive answer, no matter which side you pick, you are still missing out on certain aspects that make the other method unique. My stance on the connection between technology and conversation remains complicated.
2.)
3.)
They say that having face to face conversations foster some of the strongest relationships and technology can get in the way of them. I say, technology isn’t the only factor contributing to this issue, what it comes down to is how people are using their technology. Some of my closest relationships are with people who do not live in the United States, let alone the same continent. Due to the power of modern day technology, I am able to maintain extremely close relationships with people as far as on the other side of the world.
People say to focus on the positive not the negative and Turkle addresses that in regards to technology. “We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new —our new comforts, our new distractions,our new forms of commerce. And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist —that we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at a family dinner.” (Turkle 349). However, not everything is so black and white, technology evolving isn’t just positive or negative. It is the actual use of technology that makes up the gray area. The fact that two things can be true at once is what creates the in-between area in terms of technology usage.
Turkle suggests that people tend to be more vulnerable and have true conversations when speaking face to face. “Yet these are the conversations where empathy and intimacy flourish and social action gains strength.” (Turkle 344). Although this might be the case for some people, not everyone is in a place to be vulnerable and to have those deep and intimate conversations. Technology can be used as a way to bridge the gap between engaging and contributing to those conversations and those who are still working on getting the courage to incorporate themselves into a face to face setting. Some people struggle with maintaining eye contact during conversations, so having the ability to socialize online can be a lot easier and less stressful for them.
Contrary to Turkle’s beliefs, technology can be a reliable tool for relationships, especially long distance ones. According to Turkle, technology creates a divide between us and the people we care about. “Among family and friends, among colleagues and lovers, we turn to our phones instead of each other.” (Turkle 343). For some people they have no choice but to turn to their devices to have conversations with their family and friends. While we still turn to our phones as Turkle said, sometimes the reasoning behind it is because that is the only communication method that is efficient and available.
Despite the fact that my opinions thus far have not aligned with Turkle’s, doesn’t mean there aren’t a few things we could agree on. True conversation doesn’t need to be face to face, however sometimes it makes a conversation even more special. Talking with loved ones and people you care about while being with them in person is a gift. It is also something that gets taken for granted. Having even the most basic of conversations is such a mundane part of most people’s lives, that they do not stop and cherish them. There is a common phrase that you don’t realize what you had until it is gone. That saying applies to conversations both face to face and through technology, as well. Conversations give you the opportunity to say the things you do not want left unsaid, show how much you value the person and create memories that will last a lifetime. Time goes by in the blink of an eye, no future conversations are guaranteed. Cherish every one as if they are the last you will have, because looking up to the sky and talking is not the same as a real conversation and hearing them speak back to you. Taking advantage of the conversations you have left can end up being a blessing in disguise.
All this to say, it is the ways in which one uses technology which plays a role in whether face to face conversation is going to die out or not. It is a personal preference not an all or nothing situation. Each person is given the opportunity to make technology a tool that enhances their life, it is just a matter of what they choose to do. To me there is no definitive answer, no matter which side you pick, you are still missing out on certain aspects that make the other method unique. My stance on the connection between technology and conversation remains complicated.
