I'm not so sure they aren't harming the brains of all ages.
At the very least, they cut down on social interaction in public settings. Go to any area where you might be likely talk to others, both friends and complete strangers. Look around a bit and see what you see (yes, put your phone down for just a minute or two).
I'm sure they must be, really! The only thing I wonder is to what degree the harm varies, since I would think it's much worse on a developing mind, and potentially the damage less severe and more easily reversed on an older one. At least optimistically, I'd hope.
What you say is impossible not to notice when not using a phone in public. Even in the middle aged, older demographic (up to a certain age that doesn't use them much), I notice many in public glued to their phones no differently from teenagers nowadays, and less likely to start a conversation rather than look at one.
Middle aged men and women who, if I get any look at what they're doing when they sit next to me (not that I like to be nosy, but I can't help but glance over wondering what is so important on their phone...), seem to be aimlessly scrolling around apps and switching between them in what is certainly no kind of pattern that I can understand as someone who can truthfully say I've never had a phone addiction, nor ever used much social media.
I notice it in attention span of all ages, and I've felt the way it can affect myself too (always the sign to cut back from the pull of the Internet when I do). For example, anecdotally, I notice the shorter form written content of sites like Substack and blogs seem to make it harder for people to read books when read too much in their place rather than as a supplement to them. There are many now who don't read books, only Internet articles and essays.
This psychologist's theory is interesting, and I would be very curious to see it further investigated, esp. on older generations. Developing brains are understandably highest priority, but the older addicts will influence younger ones and set examples for them, too.
Interesting article. You and Dr. Winston might find this interesting; I wrote about how excessive reading (including, and now I think especially, reading text on screens) at the expense of other activities might rewire the brain to make it more left hemisphere dominant / mechanistic at the expense of the right hemisphere, essentially making a person more "autistic". Loosely, the left hemisphere processes verbal language, the literal words, but the right hemisphere processes facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc. When people communicate via text messages and social media posts more than in person, the latter, as noted in this article, is not present. There's cascading negative effects of this.
Also from the addictive nature of oxytocin spikes and crashes and the way screen communication confuses our mirror neurons ... using the double-slit experiment in physics as a metaphor, humans are waves, but when we record ourselves, we create a "particle". Over screens, we communicate by particles, and our mirror neurons start mirroring particles of each other instead of waves ... does this make us more particle-like ourselves?
Another terrible thing about this is how all content is getting shorter and shorter so we get those dopamine hits 1 after another curated to your interest to keep watching and want more they can't even watch a 30 minute tv show without getting bored.
As the last guy without a phone I'm perpetually amazed at the totality of this colonization of the human body. As many people have noted the strangest thing about this is the complete lack of curiosity about what it's doing to us. Doesn't anyone else have this dispirited feeling when they look down a city street and see a landscape where everyone is engaged with their gizmo?
I am currently reading Jonathan Haidt's book, The Anxious Generation. Oh boy. What have we allowed for these kiddos. It's on us as adults to fix this right now. I'm going to have my first grandchild born in August - I will be acutely aware of this as this baby grows and spends time with us.
There needs to be measurable hard science to test the theories. To me none of this is the least bit surprising as I've always believed from empirical observations that cellphones are electronic crack. Apps are too. Look at TikTok. You can bet the cellphone mfgs, app makers & internet providers will do everything in their power to derail any hard science by coming up with theirs, much like tobacco & drug companies have done & do. Power, money & control.
Gee, I guess Posner would prefer to live in the 1930s so nothing modern, like empathy for trans people or using technology, would interfere with his rants. Grow up, dude. You post nonsense.
What are you talking about? Those in Silicon Valley itself understand the harm of smartphones and social media, and they're the ones creating it and marketing it to others. Lots of articles about this years ago, here's just one I found right away.
There is more and more research and data showing how screen-based activities and devices, as well as social media, permanently impair brain development and harm mental health. Acknowledging this doesn't mean going back to the 1930s, and facing the issue collectively as a society to prevent further harm to ourselves and others doesn't mean disempowering anyone of any sort, or a reversal to the 1930s—nothing like that. Rather, it empowers and frees us.
Technology and its use are not new. Mastery of fire is a technology, and the greatest inventor might be whoever first made an axe, from which time humanity has dominated every other species without peer. The wheel, the cultivation of plants, the domestication of animals: these are some of our greatest technologies, even today. No one is suggesting to do away with technology!
That you see this attempt to look at the benefits and harms of this technology as "fearmongering" seems to me it must say something about yourself and not others, as if what the research shows is derived from fear and not facts or their examination. Fear is also not irrational when the threat of harm from something is real, nor is there much need to monger it, as it arises naturally in the same way one needn't sell a swimmer in the Amazon River the fear of a green python approaching in view. The fear of the power of entertainment; the power of the senses to overthrow the mind; the power of emotion to obliterate reason: all these are ancient fears no less real than that of the python.
Edit: Not being familiar with this author, it seems to me you're criticising other work from them with these comments? But not this one for its own merit.
I am SO glad those damn things didn't exist when I was a teen...
I'm not so sure they aren't harming the brains of all ages.
At the very least, they cut down on social interaction in public settings. Go to any area where you might be likely talk to others, both friends and complete strangers. Look around a bit and see what you see (yes, put your phone down for just a minute or two).
I'm sure they must be, really! The only thing I wonder is to what degree the harm varies, since I would think it's much worse on a developing mind, and potentially the damage less severe and more easily reversed on an older one. At least optimistically, I'd hope.
What you say is impossible not to notice when not using a phone in public. Even in the middle aged, older demographic (up to a certain age that doesn't use them much), I notice many in public glued to their phones no differently from teenagers nowadays, and less likely to start a conversation rather than look at one.
Middle aged men and women who, if I get any look at what they're doing when they sit next to me (not that I like to be nosy, but I can't help but glance over wondering what is so important on their phone...), seem to be aimlessly scrolling around apps and switching between them in what is certainly no kind of pattern that I can understand as someone who can truthfully say I've never had a phone addiction, nor ever used much social media.
I notice it in attention span of all ages, and I've felt the way it can affect myself too (always the sign to cut back from the pull of the Internet when I do). For example, anecdotally, I notice the shorter form written content of sites like Substack and blogs seem to make it harder for people to read books when read too much in their place rather than as a supplement to them. There are many now who don't read books, only Internet articles and essays.
This psychologist's theory is interesting, and I would be very curious to see it further investigated, esp. on older generations. Developing brains are understandably highest priority, but the older addicts will influence younger ones and set examples for them, too.
Interesting article. You and Dr. Winston might find this interesting; I wrote about how excessive reading (including, and now I think especially, reading text on screens) at the expense of other activities might rewire the brain to make it more left hemisphere dominant / mechanistic at the expense of the right hemisphere, essentially making a person more "autistic". Loosely, the left hemisphere processes verbal language, the literal words, but the right hemisphere processes facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc. When people communicate via text messages and social media posts more than in person, the latter, as noted in this article, is not present. There's cascading negative effects of this.
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/the-dangers-of-reading-too-much-part
Also from the addictive nature of oxytocin spikes and crashes and the way screen communication confuses our mirror neurons ... using the double-slit experiment in physics as a metaphor, humans are waves, but when we record ourselves, we create a "particle". Over screens, we communicate by particles, and our mirror neurons start mirroring particles of each other instead of waves ... does this make us more particle-like ourselves?
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/particles-and-waves
Another terrible thing about this is how all content is getting shorter and shorter so we get those dopamine hits 1 after another curated to your interest to keep watching and want more they can't even watch a 30 minute tv show without getting bored.
As the last guy without a phone I'm perpetually amazed at the totality of this colonization of the human body. As many people have noted the strangest thing about this is the complete lack of curiosity about what it's doing to us. Doesn't anyone else have this dispirited feeling when they look down a city street and see a landscape where everyone is engaged with their gizmo?
I am currently reading Jonathan Haidt's book, The Anxious Generation. Oh boy. What have we allowed for these kiddos. It's on us as adults to fix this right now. I'm going to have my first grandchild born in August - I will be acutely aware of this as this baby grows and spends time with us.
There needs to be measurable hard science to test the theories. To me none of this is the least bit surprising as I've always believed from empirical observations that cellphones are electronic crack. Apps are too. Look at TikTok. You can bet the cellphone mfgs, app makers & internet providers will do everything in their power to derail any hard science by coming up with theirs, much like tobacco & drug companies have done & do. Power, money & control.
Attachment theory is not what you want to be founding your theories on
I can’t edit my comment to add that you’re fearmongering again.
Gee, I guess Posner would prefer to live in the 1930s so nothing modern, like empathy for trans people or using technology, would interfere with his rants. Grow up, dude. You post nonsense.
What are you talking about? Those in Silicon Valley itself understand the harm of smartphones and social media, and they're the ones creating it and marketing it to others. Lots of articles about this years ago, here's just one I found right away.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/phones-children-silicon-valley.html
There is more and more research and data showing how screen-based activities and devices, as well as social media, permanently impair brain development and harm mental health. Acknowledging this doesn't mean going back to the 1930s, and facing the issue collectively as a society to prevent further harm to ourselves and others doesn't mean disempowering anyone of any sort, or a reversal to the 1930s—nothing like that. Rather, it empowers and frees us.
Technology and its use are not new. Mastery of fire is a technology, and the greatest inventor might be whoever first made an axe, from which time humanity has dominated every other species without peer. The wheel, the cultivation of plants, the domestication of animals: these are some of our greatest technologies, even today. No one is suggesting to do away with technology!
That you see this attempt to look at the benefits and harms of this technology as "fearmongering" seems to me it must say something about yourself and not others, as if what the research shows is derived from fear and not facts or their examination. Fear is also not irrational when the threat of harm from something is real, nor is there much need to monger it, as it arises naturally in the same way one needn't sell a swimmer in the Amazon River the fear of a green python approaching in view. The fear of the power of entertainment; the power of the senses to overthrow the mind; the power of emotion to obliterate reason: all these are ancient fears no less real than that of the python.
Edit: Not being familiar with this author, it seems to me you're criticising other work from them with these comments? But not this one for its own merit.