Jul 17, 2016

Artificial Communication?

In a chinuch article, the author responds to a question about cell phones for a high school student.  He makes reference to the dangers of technology but his main point is children need to be fully present to develop connections with others.  He says, "Cellphones are artificial connections.  A real connection is a face to face conversation between two people and includes their facial and body language and their full attention."

I wonder what he would say about letter writing, writing letters to grandparents, as I did when I was a child and teenager and even older.  What about penpals.  What about letters to and from camp.  Would he say that letter writing is an artificial connection?

I don't recall any condemnation of letter writing over the past decades, only praise.  Was something lacking because there were no facial or body language? Yes.  But did that make communication via letter artificial, i.e. fake?

What makes communication other than face to face talking artificial? It lacks what face to face conversations have, but that doesn't make it artificial.  It can even be argued that sometimes things can be expressed in writing that cannot be said face to face, which would make writing superior sometimes.

I don't find it helpful when people condemn today's means of communication without acknowledging its positive aspects and when their arguments aren't consistent.

No comments:

Post a Comment