Thread by @garwboy

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete I'd never paste anyone for asking questions, so don't worry about that.

The issue here is that a great many things are being conflated into one excessive, unhelpful idea, i.e. 'modern tech is bad and is damaging us'. The truth, far as we know, is way more complex

/1

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete First and foremost; yes, phones and social media etc. are 'distracting' in so many ways. They provide us with dozens of things to pay attention to, all of which are constantly updated (novelty makes things more alluring/stimulating), and they're on our person at all times

/2

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete So, it's fair to say that your phone/device will occupy a lot of your attention. Because it will. That's what it's for, and we're instinctively wired to react to the things it offers us.

But that's very different to saying they disrupt/damage our brains/focus etc.

/3

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete The most logical conclusion is that, if we have something with us at all times that offers us countless distractions, we'll often be distracted by it.

But our brain/attention capacity hasn't been changed. It's just that a bit of it is directed at the phone/social media etc

/4

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete So to claim that our whole species is losing brain capacity because modern devices are distracting is one hell of a leap. It's unfounded, unscientific, and massively unhelpful.

/5

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete And yes, people do get a reward response whenever we get a like or interaction. We're hugely social creatures, and regularly respond strongly to social validation and connection.

The dopamine thing is common, but again, it's way more complex

psyche.co/ideas/the-fasc…

/6

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete This isn't to say that devices and social media *don't* come with risks, because they do. A lot of problematic behavioural changes have been linked with their use in recent years

/7

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete Thing is though, the nature of problematic use of phones/SM/etc. rarely meets the criteria for official addiction, so isn't classed as such. There is talk among the psych world of coming up with a whole new label for problem behaviours stemming from use of tech stuff

/8

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete But the main point of it all is that, despite everything, there's no evidence that tech use alters our brains in any appreciable way. If we stop using our phone, we usually resume 'normal' functioning and behaviours etc.

/9

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete So, to release a mainstream book, and get it publicised far and wide, which 'confirms' people's instinctive (but largely misplaced) suspicions about the harm tech is doing to us, based on little to no evidence but a lot of emotional manipulation, that's seriously unhelpful

/10

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete It also overlooks the countless benefits that tech has had for millions, like the infirm or neuro-atypical, and others in vulnerable situations who can't just go where they please and speak to who they like, or take holidays as and when they fancy

/11

@polaleeks @PaulaGhete That's largely why I so strongly object to JH's efforts

- They're scientifically unfounded/illiterate
- They're deeply cynical & manipulative imho, exploiting people's instinctive suspicions
- The existence of people who aren't able bodied/neurotypical isn't even considered

end