10 ms·
>And we'll adjust, as we always do I don't understand this line of thinking. Sure, it may not be the literal end of the world, but that doesn't mean that it wo
by ImprobableTruth 6y ago
>And we'll adjust, as we always do
I don't understand this line of thinking. Sure, it may not be the literal end of the world, but that doesn't mean that it won't cause a lot of damage before people 'adapt'. People have always adapted to wars, but that doesn't mean that the world wars weren't absolutely catastrophic.
And while I don't think that smartphones will 'destroy you', I think there's a good chance that it can both be very corrosive in all sorts of manners. I think smartphones are a lot more potent at sedating people and making them detached than novels ever could hope to be, which can have a very harmful impact on society at large.
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoHow do you feel about television? At least there's some ability to interact with a smartphone, there's absolutely none of that with TV, and yet society survived.
- ImprobableTruth 6y ago> How do you feel about television? I think it's kinda too early too judge (only ~60 years of widespread adoption and in this time the TV landscape has changed massively), but I think there's a pretty good chance that 'tabloid style' TV has caused a good deal more damage than the yellow press has. > At least there's some ability to interact with a smartphone Sure, but that also makes it a lot more addictive. You generally won't see people who are glued to their TV 24/7, but with smartphones that's not uncommon. > yet society survived Again, I'm not saying that society will just implode on itself, just that these things can do a lot of damage.
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoI dunno man, the average American (used to) watch eight hours of TV a day. When you look at the changing media landscape, it's that mobiles/PCs are being substituted for TV watching. Thank you for the answer though, I appreciate consistency when examining the impact of media.