I recently watched yet again an appeal to switch off our smartphones and other distracting devices to allow
ourselves to be more connected to the people around us. The idea was: Let
go of virtual communities and embrace real social contacts. Somewhat ironically, it
was posted via Facebook. In general, I am all for this sort of thinking. If I
had to write a categorical rule for behavior, I would probably want social media
(albeit their positive effects) to be excluded from intersubjective
relationships rather than included. In fact, I might be one of the last
westerners of my generation who does not even have a smartphone. But there are
two counter-arguments that should be considered. I think something can be said in
favor of electronic distraction as a protection from unwanted social contacts.
And, more generally speaking, I fear that condemning the devices we use in
anti-social behavior is rather talking about the symptoms and not the reasons
that cause us to act in this way.
If you really think about the
problems of disconnection, excessive individualization, self-centeredness, isolation
etc. it is obvious that they have a much longer history than that of social
media and the increasing use of arguably socially separating electronic appliances
(cf. e. g. Dahlern, 2013 100-111; in the online version: 83-93).
“Structural modernization was accompanied by cultural modernization
which is characterized by secularization and individualization of religious
and moral values, the rationalization of society, fast information diffusion,
and the origination of a consumer culture” (Ester/Halman/Moor, 1993 3).
Industrialization and modernization could be seen as factors that have
supported social disintegration and have led, for example, to the dissolution
of family ties. For anthropologists it seems to be a commonplace to assert that
contemporary children in the West typically learn language in dyadic structures
(i.e. in one-on-one situations, usually with the mother), at least in middle-
and upper-class homes, and that they also spend a lot of time alone (cf. e. g.
Small, 2001 94). Other research shows that our culture of scarcity and,
intertwined with it, shame, comparison and disengagement are major sources for anti-social
behavior, fear and suffering in our societies (cf. Brown, 2012 24-30).
It is simply illegitimate to single out one current form of behavior
such as the use of social media and electronic devices to explain pervasive
social and cultural changes of this size. Moreover, it seems very doubtful that
the simple advice to stop this behavior is even helpful, because it does not
address the real issues.
Besides, I personally feel that it is possible, and not too difficult,
to listen to (moderately loud) music over your headphones and/or to text
someone via your mobile phone and still pay attention to your surroundings at
the same time. I actually find it a lot harder to concentrate on anything else
when I’m reading a book, which I sometimes do in public. I am much more cut off
from social contact when I am engaged in a gripping novel than when I am writing
a text message or listening to a song. In addition to this, I sometimes feel
that it is relaxing not to have to listen to everything people around you are
saying and to give yourself a break from chitchat with strangers. So the second
argument could be summed up in a question: Should I be available for every
communicative contact just for its own sake? I would argue that the answer has
to be no, as this is an overbearing demand.
Sources
Brown, Brené. Daring Greatly. New
York: Gotham, 2012.
Dahlern, Nina von. The EthicalFoundations of Postmodernity – Communicative Reality and Relative Individuals.
Bremen: EHV, 2013.
Ester, Peter, Loek Halman and Ruud de Moor. “Value Shift in Western Societies.”
The Individualizing Society: Value Change in Europe and North America. Eds.
ibid. Tilburg: Tilburg UP, 1993.
Small, Meredith F. Kids – How Biology
and Culture Shape the Way We Raise Young Children. New York: Anchor 2001.
