-
Is the Internet Destroying Real World Interactions?
July 11, 2008 - 12:50 pm PDT - by Steven Hodson 37 Comments
Just to make this clear – I love technology and everything it adds to our lives. There is nothing better than one minute putting a computer together and installing the operating system to the next being able to talk with friends around the world via things like Skype. There is a joy in being able to research any subject you want and then being able to write about your ideas gleaned from that information. Then there is being able to see some of the best photographs in the world with the click of a mouse.Yes, technology is a great thing and I wouldn’t want to be without it.
I know I am not alone in this but sometimes I get the feeling that as a human race we are slowly losing the ability or desire to appreciate the things in life that we are so eager to try and replace with technology. After all, one has to wonder if face to face discourse is willingly being replaced by video and electronic text when Fred Wilson writes the following:
But the idea of a physical place that we “must be” doesn’t have the same impact anymore. Right now, I can engage in a debate with friends in Australia, China, Japan, India, Israel, Italy, France, England, NYC, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Chicago at the same time. Or we can post our thoughts to each other (and the world) over the course of a day, a week, or a month, and share our passions with each other and learn from each other.
Our Cafe de Flore is Techmeme or Tech Newsjunk or Twitter or FriendFeed or Tumblr or Flickr or something else. And we are just getting started. It will be interesting to see if the new cafe society produces the kind of work that the traditional ones did.
If this is the case then I think it speaks sadly for our society as we apparently are distancing ourselves from each other. As much as technology in some ways is trying to make our lives better, we should also not be willing to so easily give up on the real human act of interaction.
Regardless of what Fred may believe, I truly don’t think that any amount of electronic discourse can come close to those conversations we share with friends within arms reach. I don’t believe that any video conferencing can come close to sitting at a bistro cafe on a sunny Sunday morning sharing brunch while talking about both the mundane and the important. Friendships made over digital connections can be important, but they don’t even come close to those forged through holding a friend during their times of trouble or when they sit with you sharing nothing more than the setting of the sun.
Even in our individual lives we seem to be trying so hard to replace everything with some sort of electronic equivalent with the idea that it is the better alternative. Sure computers, PDA’s and all the other forms of communication might give us more options, but does that necessarily make it the better alternative?This is something that Graham Chastney was talking about in a post earlier this week when he wrote the following
With a notebook and pen there is nothing else, I sit on a sofa away from a keyboard so there are no distractions. When I write, I’m not worrying whether it’s legible, spelled correctly or whether it is good grammar, I’m just writing. When I use a keyboard my brain won’t allow me to be free, it wants me to be correct. While I’m trying to be correct I can’t stream, it’s disruptive.
I know I have asked on places like FriendFeed and Twitter about what people use for keeping short sticky type notes, but in the end I come back to simple scraps of paper littering my desk. Is this practical or even a productive way to do things? No it isn’t and yes a little program on the computer might give me more options, but what it can’t give me is that tactile feeling of the simple process of literally writing down my thoughts. It also can’t give me the same pleasure I get from crumpling up the note once the task is done and throwing it in the garbage.In his post, Graham also notes this tactile need of physical items and the act of making notes as being important:
There’s more to it than that though.
A notebook and pen are tactile things. When I’m sitting in that place with those object my brain knows what is coming, I’ve built a routine and the routine helps. When I first started it took me ages to get into a stream, if I follow the routine the stream now comes quite easily.
When I have finished one notebook it goes on a bookshelf next to my other notebooks, there is something very satisfying about seeing the number of books increase. Seeing files feel a computer disk doesn’t feel the same.
As good as technology and computers become they will never be able to equal the things that truly inspire human beings and nor should they. We need to realize that as important as technology is in our lives it is even more important to realize that there is no replacement for real life human interaction, because if we do, I think we lose a very important part of our humanity.
[Image credit: Keyboard: Peter Huys, notebook: Jeremy Mikkola]
-
Related Posts
-
Subscribe to Mashable
Sponsors
Popular Tags
Mashable Rocks
Recent Jobs
The Sun Startup Review
Sponsored By:
Trackbacks
37 Comments
Wow Steven, you’re really having a think about things right now aren’t you?! Great post - I hope that we’re just a bit bedazzled by everything right now and things will calm down once a lot of the technology that seems like magic today becomes the norm. You’re right though, being human and interacting with other human beings is what it’s all about and 1s and 0s dilute that.
Thanks Jonathan. I hope things might calm down but I have a gut feeling that it won’t and we will continue to find new ways to distance ourselves from real life interactions.
I think the point of “Online destructing real world interaction” to some extent is true. But the idea of pushing away keyboard and writes using pen is stone age, mainly because my handwriting sucks harder than the worst font in Wordpad. lol
your writing can’t be any worse than mine
This is probably the umpteenth time I’ve seen an article that tries to tackle this issue. I’d say that with that many people asking the same question, the answer is pretty obviously yea.
*points for using the word umpteenth.
Yes, when people im you from five feet away, that just shows you how sad the situation is.
While I appreciate your thoughts and post, I wonder if it is worrying over the wrong thing. A dichotomy- that there is human interaction vs tech interaction, seems to me to be a false dichotomy. Seems to me there are multiple levels of human interaction- some more intimate than others and for me some of the more highly tech are more intimate than their predecessors. For example, at one time, I could write my father; then I could call him; If he wasn’t there, the phone would ring and ring, but no connection. Answering machines improved that. Then cel phones made it more likely to get ahold of him where ever he is. But, given a choice, I would rather video chat with him, than talk on the phone. Now, will I choose a video chat over an in-person meeting? Probably never. The technology doesn’t replace- but rather adds options/ adds meaningful connections.
I’m also not sure that an in-person interaction is by nature more meaningful. Example. I am thousands of miles away from home, about to make a big presentation. I’m a bit nervous moments before walking into the conference room.. Then, I get a text message from a loved one, reminding me that it will go great. Wow. Perfect connection to help me go into that presentation with more confidence. Given the place and timing, no in-person interaction could have happened.
Perhaps, what is more important than comparing the type of interaction (in-person to tech) what we need to focus on is the quality of our relationships. Do we have a broad mix of very intimate friendships and relationships all the way to loose aquaintenances, or are most all of our relationships fairly shallow surface level?
We are by nature social creatures. And we are tactile creatures who appreciate touch and all the other things that make in-person interactions of value to us. Perhaps we do have a harder time today, given all of the choices- choosing to seek out high quality interactions. It is so easy to do what comes fast. So, all of us have choices (and a need to recognize and make those choices) so that our lives are filled with a balance of relationships and intimacy.
I realize that electronic communication has its place and is extremely valuable. That still doesn’t make it an intimate vehicle for that eye to eye contact where you can feel what is being said. It is this emotional part of connecting with a person on a much more basic human level that is important and something technology cannot - and should not - replace.
I totally feel this. I tried to blog about it, but it didn’t come out as intelligent or eloquent; and my lack of tech credibility caused it to draw more naysaying than support.
But yes - I think that when technology enables us to communicate more clearly face to face, we’ll really have something. But what does that even look like?
or do we even want this to happen?
What perfect timing! I was beginning to think that I was the only person alive who actually understood the impact of human interaction in a technology-driven world. I recently wrote a blog about the evils of text messaging and how it has ruined human communication (to the core) because of its abuse! Case in point… Recently, I had to end a friendship of 10 years by way of text message because this person could not answer my phone call. Technology made it easy for her to copout on a conversation that she knew would require an apology on her end. Guess “I’m sorry” was too much for her to say! And, just last night, my relationship of two years came to an end after the boyfriend decided that it made sense to text me a “you deserve better than me, but see you around” message. Am I crazy? Or, doesn’t a relationship of two years deserve a face-to-face conversation. At least a phone call? Some people! Thank you so much, Steve. This post was much needed. –Becky (http://www.linkedin.com/in/rebeccaarmendariz)
electronic comunication allows us all to be emotional cowards. I think it in some ways also allows us to bypass any responsibility for our actions.
I’ve given this one a lot of thought lately. There are pros and cons to everything- upside to online interactions is the ‘instant’ and ‘easiness’ factors, eg, finding long-lost high school friends. Downside is probably losing some social skills when all you do is text and IM. I think people will continue to interact no matter how advanced technology gets, and one day we will be telling our grandchildren about the good ol’ days when people emailed and Facebooked all day.
Steven,
Thanks for a thoughtful and soulful post.
I spend lots of time online communicating through the prism of technology. It’s convenient but somewhat impersonal. Face to face contact brings a richness and depth to personal interaction. And meditation gives me a ‘connection’ to a Higher awareness. I play in three places. It’s all about balance.
I agree about there needing to be a balance between all forms of communication but it is human nature I think to always take the easiest way out and electronic communication allows us to do this much easier.
Interesting point, but then, isn’t the problem human nature instead of technology?
People have always run the gamut of experience. Some people reach for high levels of engagement in life, while others do not and settle for what is easiest. Each of us individually have to ask ourselves- at the end of the day, did we get everything we wanted out of out last 24 hours? and if not, what do we want to do differently in the next 24 hours?
Even before technology (as we are discussing it) some people could and did choose to remain unconnected- and shy away from intimate interactions. This is not a new thing. Perhaps easier today, but not new.
I don’t ever want to see technology replace in-person interaction completely. I want to see it find its place, and use it where it makes the most sense and fits well.
Steve, the biggest problem I have with your argument is the dualistic nature of it. This is better than that. Rather than both have pros and cons- both have a valued place, and what might the best use of each be. Does that make sense?
Of course, we’re all making the dewey-eyed assumption that face-to-face communication is a good thing, or at least better than the other kinds.
That’s not a very safe thing to say given the horrific history of the human race until now, and the fact (which of course might change) that the net and attendant forms of communication have been on the whole pretty damn good for all of us.
Sure, face-toface is great. But for some women, particularly dieters or women in search of an exercise motivator, the ‘real thing’ can be simply feeling like you’re part of a plan. I think that’s why the You Can Do It Programs on fitnessmagazine.com and other stuff like that in the women’s mag world are so popular. You can motivate without a whole lot of effort or money down. The most recent plan in FITNESS, one with Daisy Fuentes on the cover, is part of a great series. THis onelets you eat a dessert a day.
Ironically enough, I was writing about this similar topic on my website when I came across this article and I agree with the message completely.
I think a lot of “nerds” (and I say it loosely to avoid sounding condescending) spend too much of their lives in a fictional reality of IMs and Twitter and blogging and forums and the like.
They have e-friends and e-girlfriends and e-lives that don’t necessarily correlate with actual living. Since many of these people possess a lack of social skills, they use the internet to recreate the lives they wish they could have in their own reality.
When writing for my own site, I try to get as far away from my PC as humanly possible, just to avoid the writer’s block that used to occur from checking e-mail and other nuisances that come with being on the internet. I understand Chastney’s take on it completely.
What if it comes back to sense and memory?
Think: The smell of an old lover’s cologne brings back a memory long locked away. If you have no smells, no breezes on your skin, no light glinting off of your companion’s arm to associate with the conversation you had with him, how much different is the memory of the conversation stored in your brain? Can it incite the same kind of response in your mind, the same string of connections that are the hallmark of great art?
But goddam if I don’t love me some lolcats!
there’s a simple balance to find. once we start getting sombre about one thing or another it can stifle creativity. i’m in touch with my close friends almost 24/7 now, compared to 5 years ago when we’d occasionally text and meet at weekends. and it’s great. and i can still ‘un-plug’ if i feel like it!
p.s i’m seeing an hilariously ironic ad for cisco on the right, anyone else?
Yea, I am really missing the quality time I can be spending with car salesman while trying get a reasonable price on a new car.
Nice post - thanks for the reference.
I think we still have a long way to go with technology before it does some of the things we do without it. It’s going to be a very long time before you can do everything on a teleconference/videoconference that you can do on in a face to face meeting. Have you ever tried brainstorming with more than two people over a video link - pointless. Give the same set of people a room and bits of paper and magic happens.
Great post. I agree with you. The physical presence and interaction between people is critical and will increase in its importance as technology continues to improve. Even with video conferencing, there is no replacement to receiving nonverbal communication and the bond that physical presence brings between people.
But the internet has provided me with such narrow interests and hobbies that nobody IRL knows what I’m talking about!
While technology might provide awkward in small distances and local situations (think of all the times you see people unreasonably glued to twitter), it has personally allowed me to have a worldwide network for friends and colleagues.
In almost every country in the world, I have people that I can hang with, socialize with, do deals with– nearly all of whom are those I’ve connected with online or other technological means.
When my wife and I went to Tokyo for my birthday, our schedule was pretty maxxed since there were so many people to hang out with face-to-face.
So the future is bright, as long as we learn to find balance now.
Actually, you should be more worried about the destruction of the learning process, rather than social skills. I mean, if you don’t know something, all you do is Google it up and make use of the ready information without really understanding it. Time was when people actually had to buy a book, read things (like learning programming) and understand them. Now, you just google it up, find a script or a widget and you’re good to go.
I couldn’t describe my own feelings on the matter better than you did about technology being a great thing you wouldn’t want to be without. We simply don’t want to be dependent on it. Human to human interaction is important and can’t consist of a million so called friends on Myspace who we really don’t know anything about except what they want us to. We shouldn’t be so emotionally involved with our technology yet we see it happening all the time these days. I’m guilty of taking it much too personally when the power goes out and I can’t play games or web surf on one of my computers which have replaced TV and a significant other nearly 100 percent for years starting before Wolfentein 3d even came out so don’t think I’m pointing the finger at everyone else out there who adores their computers. We just have to be careful not to get too dependent on technology, that’s all I’m saying.
I enjoyed reading your perspective and at times I blend the tech and in-person worlds.
For example, I am currently vacationing on Long Island where the locals gather to chat or even gossip at diners. Diners are the central stations of surburban conversation.
Conversely, as I was sitting before the opening curtain of a Broadway show the audiences’ teenagers were busily texting their last messages.
Each symbolize an extreme and it takes effort to keep it balanced.
I’m intrigued by how many of these new communication technologies are text based. Sure there is skype et al but the general progression seems to be away from voice and in to the written word.
Why not start talking again with our neighbors?
This is a long forgotten practice in cities (even before the rise of the Internet).
We can use it as a “remediation for a communication disability” :o)
However, is this time spent together relevant? Will we be able to find interesting conversation points other than the lack of parking space or the newly acquired bbq?
We could also start organising small mashable bbqs. This will provide informal meetings for the members.
But then again, why would you like to meet me? (don’t worry I’m quite ok)
Are you planning to start a real conversation on this topic hoping we’ll find more related interests?
The technology streches our reach, helping us develop new relevant connections based on similarities and interests. And this is great because someone in Peru might be more relevant to me than my neighbors two houses away.
The sad part is that most connections are extremely superficial and are based on limited profiles or cool pictures, we waste our time developing new “empty” relations. Some might feel comfortable with the feeling they are heard, even if virtually, but then again, it’s just a sham.
And with the new ?Phones, it will worsen…
Some cities have a “no driving day”, why not start with a “no mobile phone and internet day”?
Preferably during sunny weekends…
And the ways in which computers change human behavior don’t stop at the extent to which they change (or destroy) human interaction; they seem to affect human behavior on a more fundamental level.
Nietzsche, of all people, predicted that technology would fundamentally change the way people interacted with their own words. For most of his life, he had written his manuscripts by hand, but as he went blind, he was forced to adopt the typewriter as his primary writing mechanism, and predicted that human communication would become less nuanced as technology developed to allow for faster word-to-page translation.
Combine that with instantaneous delivery mechanisms (which he alluded to but were never realized in his lifetime), and it becomes easy to see that he was, at least in the literal sense, correct — a million Twitter-ers on a million computers will never materialize as the next Beyond Good and Evil.
But at the same time, I think fast-paced communication has afforded opportunities to introduce a new level of context into cultural communication, and that ultimately, in comparison to the ways the elder generations communicate, ours is, or as the potential to be, more expressive than what could have been provided strictly by language.
I guess I’m saying I try not to worry about how computers tamper with human interaction, because its going to happen, is happening, and I think culture will ultimately realize that human interaction is essential, and find ways to bolster it, or that maybe its not as important to progress as we once thought. I’m not convinced that social/cultural alienation is more common now, in the age of technology, than it was before.
There is no reason to be worried about this. No system is perfect. Good and bad go together it depends what to choose and what not to. Like if you see community sites like Orkut give an excellent opportunity to get in touch with long lost buddies. i think internet has given us a cheapest way to get information and communicate with the world. there are more positive aspects than negative aspects in using these technologies. i think this is a great change and more to come……………..
hi Krishna i think u r Indian i have my won website dedicated for India http://www.petitions.in god place for people like u do visit
i agree with ling .technology is what world is all about you are worried with the things which we used to give importance years ago but now we are nothing with technology .who want interaction like chit chat . you are more concern with with humanity but here i just say i don’t give dam to humanity
taking me as example i don’t communicate much even with my husband i don’t i just Google them up i just feel Google is my best friend
who don’t want to get updated i thing being updated makes lot of sense in todays world.
so frnd nice article but its just matter of thing
either its goes worst or it goes nice ?
i m totally disagree with your article .internet is giving new direction to the world .i myself regular update through internet as i dnt find any other source which is that much power full to keep you updated about world i m an Indian and i m writing about Indian wedding here i think internet given me platform to share my views with rest of the world we are now not shrink in group of 5 people rather we are now able to talk to people of every country .i have launched http://www.weddingmantras.com in order to put my marriage ceremonies in to words and trying to gather information on things which was problem for me on my marriage .