Is Being Connected But Alone a Crisis of Significance?

 In Sherry Turkle's Ted Talk "Connected, But Alone" she discusses the power of technology over us as people. She explains how those little devices (our cell phones) are so psychologically powerful that we remove ourselves from the physical moments in life. We are together in many moments but often alone. But why? Why would we want to do this? Turkle says that she feels the thing that matters most to people is being in control. Control of where to put their attention, control over when they see, who they see, control over themselves.

Across different generations, people just cannot get enough of one another, so long as they control the distance. This is actually called the Goldilocks effect. This can be a huge issue for adolescents who are learning to control their world. Teenagers and young adults are no longer learning how to have conversations. Conversations that take place in real time that are rich and messy and demanding like actual human relationships. Conversations do not allow us to predetermine everything we are going to say. 

Turkle mentions that people are so used to getting short changed on time that they are willing to just dispense conversation all together. It is a painful truth, no one is listening, and because of it humanity is turning even further to machines. We expect more from technology and less from the physical people around us. Turkle says the only way to start fixing this issue to to create sacred spaces at home, and to start really listening to each other, even the boring bits.

In Michael Wesch's article, "Anti-teaching: Confronting the Crisis of Significance" he highlights the fact that so many people and educators claim that certain students just are not cut out for school. However, he states this means that those people are claiming these students are not cut out for learning. Which is not true, as humans learning is what we do. Wesch noticed that so many students in his class were disconnected. And while yes, some were using technology because they were in a large lecture hall being lectured to. Wesch did research and involved the students and really learned that “Good questions are those that force students to challenge their taken-for-granted assumptions and see their own underlying biases.” (5)

Wesch finds access to answers to these good questions, that ultimately lead to more questions, through access to the digital world. His students are able to connect and learn about cultures from all over. They make simulations of periods of time in world history; recreating the world system. Wesch sees technology as a helpful tool, not as something hindering his students from connection. Quite opposite in fact, he sees it as a way to connect to their world and the world of the past in new ways, allowing them to learn while living.

These two stances on technology beg us to ask the question. Are Sherry Turkle and Mike Wesch allies or opponents in this discussion about new technology. While their views are opposing, I don't know that these two highly intellectual beings would like to be called opposing. They both bring technology to light in different ways, and in both discussions, technology is being used in different ways. Turkle is talking about technology replacing relationships and discussion. Wesch is talking about using technology as a tool to further discussion. I think that both would agree that in the end, it is ultimately what you do with technology that makes it dangerous in the end. Thus making them a sort of ally in the end.