500 word draft
In some ways, technology has become completely silent. It is so integrated into our lives that nobody really notices it anymore. A new phone might be interesting for a few days, but that will pass. But other than that, technology has become much more individualized; people used to sit around televisions with their families to watch the news or their favorite shows, they used to listen to the radio with their friends, and they used to have to go to their rooms for privacy when on a call. Now, if you want privacy, you just text, or watch something on your phone, or plug in your earphones. A whole family could be sitting in one room, all listening to their devices, but the room would be dead silent. Someone might laugh at something they saw, but nobody would comment on it, because they are all too focused on their own screens. So, in some ways, technology is a silent killer of conversation. This is the sort of view Sherry Turkle writes about in her work, The Empathy Diaries. In this book, she talks about how technology has had an effect on conversation, relationships, and empathy in children. She takes a rather pessimistic view on the effects of technology, and while some may agree with parts of it, others don’t agree with all of it. I believe she makes many great points, but tends to focus on the negative.
Most of Sherry Turkle’s work talks about children. She argues that children are losing empathy because of electronic devices. She visits a school to see this first-hand and interviews the teachers that work there. She believes that one of the reasons this is happening is because of the parent’s inattention, which is also due to technology. At one point she writes, “…we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathetic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at family dinner. We catch ourselves not looking into the eyes of our children or taking the time to talk with them just to have a few more hits of our email” (349). Here, Turkle likens technology use to addiction, puts the blame on the parents for not paying attention to their children, and describes the consequences of that addiction. I have seen evidence of this before, so I do agree with her on this point. A year or two ago, I was eating lunch with my father at a ski resort, and he motioned to the family next to us, where the parents were eating while the child had a phone in front of her face, watching a TV show. He was disappointed that they couldn’t talk to the girl for the thirty minutes it took to eat, especially since ski resorts are busy and full of activities. This may have been the result of avoiding her due to their own devices, and getting used to how easy it is to just let her watch something rather than interacting with her. This could grow into an issue where the girl herself won’t want to interact with her parents, or anyone for that matter. Obviously, this is just a snapshot of that family’s day and life, but the point my father made still stands. As parents, addictions to your own devices can lead to your children having the same problem.
800 word draft
In some ways, technology has become completely silent. It is so integrated into our lives that nobody really notices it anymore. A new phone might be interesting for a few days, but that will pass. But other than that, technology has become much more individualized; people used to sit around televisions or radios with their families and friends to watch the news or their favorite shows, and they used to have to go to their rooms for privacy when on a call. Now, if you want privacy, you just text or plug in your earphones. A whole family could be sitting in one room, all listening to their devices, but the room would be dead silent because they are all too focused on their own screens. So, in some ways, technology is a silent killer of conversation. This is the sort of view Sherry Turkle, an MIT professor and sociologist, writes about in her work, The Empathy Diaries. In this book, she talks about how technology has had an effect on conversation, relationships, and empathy in children. She describes many areas of society that have changed because of the addition of technology. She takes a rather pessimistic view on the effects of technology, and while I agree with parts of it, I don’t agree with all of it. I believe she makes many great points, but tends to focus on the negative.
Most of Sherry Turkle’s work talks about children. She argues that children are losing empathy because of electronic devices. She visits a school to see this first-hand and interviews the teachers that work there. She believes that one of the reasons this is happening is because of the parent’s inattention, which is also due to technology. At one point she writes, “…we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathetic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at family dinner. We catch ourselves not looking into the eyes of our children or taking the time to talk with them just to have a few more hits of our email” (349). Here, Turkle likens technology use to addiction, puts the blame on the parents for not paying attention to their children, and describes the consequences of that addiction. I have seen evidence of this before, so I do agree with her on this point. A year or two ago, I was eating lunch with my father at a ski resort, and he motioned to the family next to us, where the parents were eating while the child had a phone in front of her face, watching a TV show. He was disappointed that they couldn’t talk to the girl for the thirty minutes it took to eat, especially since ski resorts are busy and full of activities. This may have been the result of avoiding her due to their own devices, and getting used to how easy it is to just let her watch something rather than interacting with her. This could grow into an issue where the girl herself won’t want to interact with her parents, or anyone for that matter. Obviously, this is just a snapshot of that family’s day and life, but the point my father made still stands. As parents, addictions to your own devices can lead to your children having the same problem.
In another passage, Turkle briefly describes the good things that have come out of technology, then flips it on its head to talk about how we shouldn’t focus on the positive. She doesn’t want to shed a good light on technology “Because these are the stories we tell eachother to explain why our technologies are proof of progress. 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” (349). She is essentially saying we have grown too comfortable with our technology, and therefore want to defend our use of it, consequently ignoring all the bad things it produces. I understand why she thinks this, because there have been a lot of negative effects (of which she goes into detail), but I disagree in the thinking that technology is all bad. Especially since I am far away from my family and friends, I love being able to use technology to stay in contact with them. Texting feels a little impersonal, but calling and facetime really make it feel like a true conversation. Obviously, I use my phone for other things like social media and entertainment, but I don’t think that needs to be demonized either. I, as well as many people, still have hobbies outside of technology use. I like to go for walks, I like to make art, I like to read books. I do believe that technology has given us the ability to become closer together, even if it does have some adverse effects.
1000 word draft
In some ways, technology has become completely silent. It is so integrated into our lives that nobody really notices it anymore. A new phone might be interesting for a few days, but that will pass. But other than that, technology has become much more individualized; people used to sit around televisions or radios with their families and friends to watch the news or their favorite shows, and they used to have to go to their rooms for privacy when on a call. Now, if you want privacy, you just text or plug in your earphones. A whole family could be sitting in one room, all listening to their devices, but the room would be dead silent because they are all too focused on their own screens. So, in some ways, technology is a silent killer of conversation. This is the sort of view Sherry Turkle, an MIT professor and sociologist, writes about in her work, The Empathy Diaries. In this book, she talks about how technology has had an effect on conversation, relationships, and empathy in children. She describes many areas of society that have changed because of the addition of technology. She takes a rather pessimistic view on the effects of technology, and while I agree with parts of it, I don’t agree with all of it. I believe she makes many great points, but tends to focus on the negative.
Most of Sherry Turkle’s work talks about children. She argues that children are losing empathy because of electronic devices. She visits a school to see this first-hand and interviews the teachers that work there. She believes that one of the reasons this is happening is because of the parent’s inattention, which is also due to technology. At one point she writes, “…we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathetic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at family dinner. We catch ourselves not looking into the eyes of our children or taking the time to talk with them just to have a few more hits of our email” (349). Here, Turkle likens technology use to addiction, puts the blame on the parents for not paying attention to their children, and describes the consequences of that addiction. I have seen evidence of this before, so I do agree with her on this point. A year or two ago, I was eating lunch with my father at a ski resort, and he motioned to the family next to us, where the parents were eating while the child had a phone in front of her face, watching a TV show. He was disappointed that they couldn’t talk to the girl for the thirty minutes it took to eat, especially since ski resorts are busy and full of activities. This may have been the result of avoiding her due to their own devices, and getting used to how easy it is to just let her watch something rather than interacting with her. This could grow into an issue where the girl herself won’t want to interact with her parents, or anyone for that matter. Obviously, this is just a snapshot of that family’s day and life, but the point my father made still stands. As parents, addictions to your own devices can lead to your children having the same problem.
In another passage, Turkle briefly describes the good things that have come out of technology, then flips it on its head to talk about how we shouldn’t focus on the positive. She doesn’t want to shed a good light on technology “Because these are the stories we tell eachother to explain why our technologies are proof of progress. 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” (349). She is essentially saying we have grown too comfortable with our technology, and therefore want to defend our use of it, consequently ignoring all the bad things it produces. I understand why she thinks this, because there have been a lot of negative effects (of which she goes into detail), but I disagree in the thinking that technology is all bad. Especially since I am far away from my family and friends, I love being able to use technology to stay in contact with them. Texting feels a little impersonal, but calling and facetime really make it feel like a true conversation. Obviously, I use my phone for other things like social media and entertainment, but I don’t think that needs to be demonized either. I, as well as many people, still have hobbies outside of technology use. I like to go for walks, I like to make art, I like to read books. I do believe that technology has given us the ability to become closer together, even if it does have some adverse effects.
Turkle also talks about technology and its effects on our ability to be alone. She references Henry Davis Thoreau’s three chairs: one for solitude, two for friendship, and three for society. She calls this the virtuous circle, and argues that technology disrupts the first chair, therefore disrupting the entire cycle; “We are so accustomed to being always connected that being alone seems like a problem technology should solve. And this is where the virtuous cycle breaks down: afraid of being alone, we struggle to pay attention to ourselves. And what suffers is our ability to pay attention to each other. If we can’t find our own center, we lose the confidence in what we have to offer others.” Turkle is saying that technology disrupts our ability to have productive and good solitude, which causes people to not pay attention to themselves and consequently others. I partly agree with her thoughts on this. I do relate to reaching for my phone in times of insecurity, and find it a sort of escape from that situation. But, while I do rely on my phone occasionally, there are absolutely other times when it’s just me and my thoughts alone together. I feel like, in this passage, Turkle makes it seem like people are now completely incapable of being by themselves, which I disagree with. There are still regularly used parts of society that allow, and sometimes encourage, you to be by yourself but also feel a comforting sort of solitude-some examples being libraries, any kind of nature, and maybe even some stores. Consequently, I don’t believe my or many others’ ability to understand ourselves and others has completely left us, but I do agree with Turkle in saying it may have hindered this ability to some degree.
1400 word essay
Celia Caron
Professor Jesse Miller
English 110
27 September 2024
The Silent Killer
In some ways, technology has become completely silent. It is so integrated into our lives that nobody really notices it anymore. Technology has become much more individualized; people used to sit around televisions or radios with their families and friends to watch the news or their favorite shows, and they used to have to go to their rooms for privacy when on a call. Now, if you want privacy, you just text or plug in your earphones. A whole family could be sitting in one room, all listening to their devices, but the room would be dead silent because they are all too focused on their own screens. So, in some ways, technology is a silent killer of conversation. Sherry Turkle, an MIT professor and sociologist, writes about the impact of this silent killer on development in her work, The Empathy Diaries. In this book, she talks about how technology has had an effect on conversation, relationships, and empathy in children. She describes many areas of society that have changed because of the addition of technology. She takes a rather pessimistic view on the effects of technology, and while I agree with the fact that parents are partly to blame for the developmental issues children are experiencing due to technology, I don’t agree with her ideas that technology is all bad and causing us to lose our ability to relate to others. I believe she makes many great points, but tends to focus on the negative.
Sherry Turkle argues that children are losing empathy because of electronic devices. She visits a school to see this first-hand and interviews the teachers that work there. She believes that one of the reasons this is happening is because of the parent’s inattention, which is also due to technology. At one point she writes, “…we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathetic than they should be for their age, and that it seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at family dinner.” (349). Here, Turkle likens technology use to addiction, puts the blame of the loss of empathy in children on the parents for not paying attention to them, and describes the consequences of that addiction. I have seen evidence of this before, so I do agree with her on this point. A year or two ago, I was eating lunch with my father at a ski resort, and he motioned to the family next to us, where the parents were eating while the child had a phone in front of her face, watching a TV show. He was disappointed that they couldn’t talk to the girl for the thirty minutes it took to eat, especially since ski resorts are busy and full of activities. This may have been the result of avoiding her due to their own devices, and getting used to how easy it is to just let her watch something rather than interacting with her. This could grow into an issue where the girl herself won’t want to interact with her parents, or anyone for that matter. Obviously, this is just a snapshot of that family’s day and life, but the point my father made still stands. As parents, addictions to your own devices can lead to your children having the same problem.
While I do agree with the fact that parents must shoulder some of the blame for their children losing the ability to interact with others, I don’t fully agree that the good of technology should be wholly ignored. In another passage, Turkle briefly describes the good things that have come out of technology, then flips it on its head to talk about how we shouldn’t focus on the positive. She doesn’t want to shed a good light on technology, “Because these are the stories we tell eachother to explain why our technologies are proof of progress. 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” (349). She is essentially saying we have grown too comfortable with our technology, and therefore want to defend our use of it, consequently ignoring all the bad things it produces. I understand why she thinks this, because there have been a lot of negative effects (of which she goes into detail), but I disagree with the thinking that technology is all bad. Especially since I am far away from my family and friends, I love being able to use technology to stay in contact with them. Texting feels a little impersonal, but calling and facetime really make it feel like a true conversation. Obviously, I use my phone for other things like social media and entertainment, but I don’t think that needs to be demonized either. I, as well as many people, still have hobbies outside of technology use. I like to go for walks, I like to make art, I like to read books. I do believe that technology has given us the ability to become closer together, even if it does have some adverse effects.
In addition to demonizing all aspects of technology, I also disagree with the point that technology is completely taking away people’s ability to understand themselves and others. When talking about technology and its effects on our ability to be alone, Turkle references Henry Davis Thoreau’s three chairs: one for solitude, two for friendship, and three for society. She calls this the virtuous circle, and argues that technology disrupts the first chair, therefore disrupting the entire cycle; “We are so accustomed to being always connected that being alone seems like a problem technology should solve. And this is where the virtuous cycle breaks down: afraid of being alone, we struggle to pay attention to ourselves. And what suffers is our ability to pay attention to each other. If we can’t find our own center, we lose the confidence in what we have to offer others.” Turkle is saying that technology disrupts our ability to have productive and good solitude, which causes people to not pay attention to themselves and consequently others. I partly agree with her thoughts on this. I do relate to reaching for my phone in times of insecurity, and find it a sort of escape from that situation. But, while I do rely on my phone occasionally, there are absolutely other times when it’s just me and my thoughts alone together. I feel like, in this passage, Turkle makes it seem like people are now completely incapable of being by themselves, which I disagree with. There are still regularly used parts of society that allow, and sometimes encourage, you to be by yourself but also feel a comforting sort of solitude-some examples being libraries, any kind of nature, and maybe even some retail stores. Consequently, I don’t believe my or many others’ ability to understand ourselves and others has completely left us, but I do agree with Turkle in saying it may have hindered this ability to some degree.
The silencing effect that technology has upon society is what many parents, teachers, and sociologists worry about. They believe that technology is ruining society’s ability to feel empathy, and destroying the ability to have real conversations. Sherry Turkle shares these views in her book, The Empathy Diaries, and focuses on the negative effects of technology. She believes that parents are setting the standard for their children, which has detrimental results when the parents themselves are addicted to their devices. She also believes you should not focus on the positive effects of technology, because it just distracts you from reality. Lastly, she argues that technology takes away our ability to think about ourselves, and therefore others as well. Generally, she takes a very negative view on technology. Though there is truth to what Turkle says, I disagree with ignoring the good that technology can bring. Yes, sometimes it may be an escape from reality, but it can also allow you to hold people closer than you could before. FaceTime is a great resource for family and friends who live far apart. I do believe that technology is proof of advancement and makes many aspects of living easier. I get where Turkle is coming from, but is it not a common saying that everything is good in moderation? I believe that we can learn to balance technology use with other aspects of daily living to create a healthy relationship with technology moving forward.
Works Cited
Turkle, Sherry. The Empathy Diaries. Penguin Press, 2021.
