Sunday, November 14, 2010
© Charles D. Hayes
A few months ago, while presenting a September University workshop, I made a point of suggesting that each generation longs for something it grew up without—something that is likely to be disrespected or readily dismissed by the generation to follow. This prompted a question from a participant about today’s younger generation currently in high school and college. What are they growing up without? What will they long for and subsequently rediscover in a few years? It didn’t take long to come up with an answer—something I suspect will someday in the not too distant future seem like a profound breakthrough. The revelation hit me like a lightning bolt: what’s missing today is solitude.
If history is a reliable measure, today’s frenzy of texting and tweeting, with cell phones and a never-ending selection of new gadgetry with which to connect oneself with the rest of the world, is going to produce a backlash. But whether the repercussion will have lasting reverberations is an open question. The rush to cities decades ago resulted in a back-to- the-land movement that seems to have subsided, even though telecommunications opens up more opportunities for living in the country than ever before. So perhaps, in the long run, multitasking will be humanity’s destiny. I’m quite confident it won’t be mine though.
Many people spend a big part of their vacations answering business e-mail. Millions upon millions of people increasingly live in a constant state of perpetual distraction, where one interesting subject of focus morphs into another before the previous matter of attention is fully satisfied or absorbed. In effect, individuals are being overwritten both by their tools and by the crowd.
Ralph Waldo Emerson said that “solitude is impractical and yet society is fatal” and “It is easy to live after the world’s opinions; it is easy in solitude to live after your own; but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.”
Of course, it’s doubtful that Emerson could have envisioned a society like ours, where the horde follows us to the bathroom and to bed, and awakens us in the night to connect. But I can imagine what Emerson would have said about tweeting, and I suspect it would be an eloquent expression of outrage. He had little tolerance for chit-chat. There is, however, growing resistance by more and more people to being constantly connected, and I would wager that it’s only a matter of time before this resistance begins to get wider public attention.
Scientists sometimes express annoyance when analogies are drawn to subatomic particles as a way to illustrate a point by people who don’t know enough about quantum physics to know what they are talking about. Knowing that risk, I’m going to join those ranks with regard to what’s known as the observer effect, which says that the act of observing subatomic particles affects their behavior. Even though I don’t have a clue how this works, I am quite confident that this analogy applies doubly to human behavior. There is no doubt that our actions are affected by the eyes of others, and can influence us in the same way.
So, if a person spends most of his or her time responding to email, texting, and participating in our vast cornucopia of social media, then what becomes of the self? What happens to our individuality and authenticity if everything we do is a reaction at the behest of another individual or group? The very thought of living one’s life as a perpetual reaction to external stimuli is disturbing, and yet at some level this is philosophically inescapable. The antidote, I suspect, exists only as a matter of degree and comes from thoughtful contemplation. Such contemplation requires some measure of privacy and quite possibly a generous serving of solitude as well, at least enough to dissipate distraction.
Philosophers through the ages have expressed the notion that there is strength and creativity to be gained from brief periods of isolation. Albert Einstein observed that we shun solitude in our youth but cherish it as we get older, and I couldn’t agree more, except that I clearly recall being fond at times of being alone during my childhood. I used to spend many hours by myself in the woods. Now, with five acres of tall timber on my property, I feel as if I live in the woods. I admit to liking e-mail and some social media, but I do not text and I will not tweet on the principle that chit-chat is an absurd waste of time. Life is much too complicated to reduce the essence of our experience to 140 characters.
We are all affected by our interrelationships in society, and much of what we do each day is not what we started out to do. Instead, it is the result of a reaction to something someone else has done. What we think about is affected, in large part, by the media we use. Moreover, if one is not very careful, becoming subordinate to one’s tools of inquiry is a real possibility. Spending most of your waking time on Twitter is analogous to being a proton perpetually spooked by no-matter.
In The Shallows, a book about how the Internet is affecting our brains, Nicholas Carr observes that Google is in the business of distraction. We think we are using it, but it may be more accurate to suggest that Google is using us. Carr discusses the fact that young people today are shying away from novels because the sentences are too long and difficult. How unfortunate that as society gets more and more complex and our problems grow exponentially, our citizens become less and less thoughtful.
Carr writes, “A personal letter written in, say, the nineteenth century bears little resemblance to a personal e-mail or text message written today. Our indulgence in the pleasures of informality and immediacy has led to a narrowing of expressiveness and a loss of eloquence.” I suspect it’s much more than that; it’s a loss of the substance of critical thought at a time when the need is so important that it’s hard to overstate the case.
So, anticipating a backlash that my generation may not live to see in full measure, we can only hope our children and grandchildren will someday reawaken to the realization that without setting aside sufficient time for contemplation, without a dedication to thoughtfulness, humanity’s future is suspect. While it may not seem so readily apparent now, someday soon I trust it will be clear to anyone striving to live fully that thoughtfulness is what holds society together and that some solitude is necessary in order to nourish autonomy. Otherwise there is nothing to tweet about.
September University Blog is now available on Kindle
My latest books:
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Sept-U: Setting the Movement in Motion
© Charles D. Hayes
© Charles D. Hayes
One thing I think most people today would agree about is that the Internet is having far-reaching effects on society, and at this point in time, it’s difficult to predict the outcomes. Radio and television required passivity. The Internet invites participation; it promotes curiosity, conversation, and conviction. Social connectivity makes ideological amplification easy, allowing like-minded people to get together and venture further in the ideological direction they’re already leaning than they would have ventured on their own.
Regardless of the sentiment, it can be amplified in cyberspace. Any one of the above features of social media offers the possibility of revolutionary change. The Internet, therefore, can bring us together or rip us apart. Today’s communication upheaval can play to our worst instincts or our best; how we respond is up to each of us as citizens.
During the past half-century the media sources we utilize have continued to dramatically affect the way we live. Television, for example, has entertained and educated us for more than sixty years, but in some respects it has had an anesthetizing effect. It’s managed to distort our intelligence into a sort of semiconscious stupor in which we can watch reruns over and over without recalling having seen them before. In other words, millions of people use television to relieve stress and tune out, so to speak, just as others under the stress of modernity use drugs to turn their anxiety into euphoria.
Contrast today’s communication capabilities with the 1950s, when there were only three television networks. The differences are so profound that many young people today have difficulty imaging what life would be like without constant connectivity. Millions of people used to go to work each day having watched the same programs the night before as most of the people they worked with. This shared sense of entertainment offered the feeling that we were really in the same boat, minus the racial and gender biases prevalent at the time. Social media may seem to have a similar effect today, except that the groups are far more self-selecting and the subjects of interest more trivial in nature. After all, how thoughtful and reflective can one be when the expectation is to respond quickly in 140 characters or less?
If you had a message you wanted to communicate to the general public in the 1950s, you were pretty much out of luck. Radio, television, newspapers, magazines, and letters were about the only options. Not so today. But when you start to imagine what the results might be from turning those billions of hours of television stupor into something more productive with today’s connectivity, the possibilities are mind-bending. In Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age, Clay Shirky, who teaches in the Interactive Telecommunications Program at
, shows how using our heretofore dead-to-the-world time differently has the potential to change the world. He describes interactive media as the connective tissue that holds society together. New York University
Shirky writes, “In a historical eyeblink, we have gone from a world with two different models of media—public broadcasts by professionals and private conversations between pairs of people—to a world where public and private media blend together, where professional and amateur production blur, and where voluntary public participation has moved from nonexistent to fundamental.” Shirky also makes it clear that we have always found the time to do what interests us and what we really care about—the same realization that prompted me to write September University.
As I make clear in that book, the fall and winter of life is the optimum time to reflect on our experience, to use that experience and our learning to achieve a fulfilling end to life, and to do so with enough enthusiasm that we leave something worthwhile behind. Regardless of whether you are politically left, right, or center, what is important is to set contempt and animosity aside and be willing to engage in a civil dialog with people of opposing views while maintaining a resolve to opt for the better argument.
Imagine what the Internet and all of the attendant social media could and would support, if most people used its power to find real solutions to real problems. What if more and more people were to truly care about discovering the better argument, regardless of whose side might appear to be winning? What if, instead of spending so much time posting incendiary remarks about their ideological opposition, people sent out positive messages seeking common ground? What if most people began to act as if the way we act toward one another really matters, and as if they believed we will get the future we deserve? What if a significant number of people past middle age began to focus on generativity and their legacy for the generations to follow?
I invite you to join the discussion and to visit the
Facebook page and engage. Please invite others to do so as well, and tell us how you plan to make the best of the rest of your life. September University