Am I crazy, or is this article absolutely seething with contempt? I began reading this article hoping to learn about the systemic issues in academia, but these put-downs framed as genuine concern...
Exemplary
Am I crazy, or is this article absolutely seething with contempt?
They go through the motions and maybe learn something along the way, but it is all in service to the only conception of the good life they can imagine: a job with middle-class wages.
They can’t sit in a seat for 50 minutes. [...] I’m supposed to believe that they suddenly, urgently need the toilet, but the reality is that they are going to look at their phones.
They are absolutely addicted to their phones. [...] Sometimes I’m amazed they ever leave their goon caves at all.
I began reading this article hoping to learn about the systemic issues in academia, but these put-downs framed as genuine concern made me question the author's judgement. Sounds like a tough teacher.
One hopes it's a bit gone a bit too far - maybe they just really committed. But I also just don't agree with them on, say, their argument that moral stances are basically sympathetic magic,...
One hopes it's a bit gone a bit too far - maybe they just really committed. But I also just don't agree with them on, say, their argument that moral stances are basically sympathetic magic, especially in relation to the idea that it's somehow bad for someone to take Epstein's money, or why a vegetarian won't consume animal products because after all they're already dead, there's no harm.
Edit:
Also fuck the attitude about accommodations. Seriously. Yes, the students who need it will go get accommodations if you ban it. If you think it's ban worthy then do it instead of whinging about including students with disabilities.
Pretending to type notes in their laptops. I hate laptops in class, but if I try to ban them the students will just run to Accommodative Services and get them to tell me that the student must use a laptop or they will explode into tiny pieces.
Man I wish I’d had a laptop to take notes on during uni, I’m sure I would’ve done better. I’ve typed faster than I can write since some point in high school and there were several classes where...
Man I wish I’d had a laptop to take notes on during uni, I’m sure I would’ve done better. I’ve typed faster than I can write since some point in high school and there were several classes where with paper notes I struggled to keep up with the professor (and often didn’t). I’m not a particularly slow writer or anything, I’ve just typed way more than I’ve written and that comes through in speed.
This probably isn’t super common among the phone-oriented younger generation but it’s probably not that unusual either. There’s no good reason to deny them a laptop…
It is true (in RA training at least) that they're doing other things than just taking notes, but, so are the professional staff during their trainings. (For me it is a mix of ADHD, being a quick...
It is true (in RA training at least) that they're doing other things than just taking notes, but, so are the professional staff during their trainings. (For me it is a mix of ADHD, being a quick learner, and having to keep up on work at the same time). Often they're bored, and that reads as "rude" because presenters/professors don't like considering that they're boring. (I'm also sure there's just rude people but that was the case 20+ years ago too so I suspect it's always been the case)
But yeah notes for me in college (undiagnosed at the time) were mostly me remembering things because I'd written them down rather than particularly useful later. My handwriting has always been bad, and when I made a real effort I'd usually learned the things I wrote well enough not to need them.
The statement is so derisive about accommodations that I strongly suspect the writer complains about having to provide them at all. For many students the other option is a note taker who may have to be paid and may also need to use a laptop for clarity. I've been asked to provide my class presentations in advance for someone with a processing disorder. It's not actually that difficult to accommodate. And it is even better to redesign courses to be more engaging and accessible to everyone.
The author, to me, just feels like a bad teacher who is taking it out on the younger generation between making fun of them and lamenting accommodations/being ableist. I've had plenty of...
The author, to me, just feels like a bad teacher who is taking it out on the younger generation between making fun of them and lamenting accommodations/being ableist. I've had plenty of instructors like that, who, even with documented accommodations, denied me what I was supposed to be able to use, and that was 15+ years ago now.
I agree with you that this person should redesign their course if their students aren't paying attention. Alternatively, they should get out of education/academia.
Once again I note they "joke" that taking Epstein's money is good actually because it was reducing his wealth. Yeah, no, I don't need academics, especially "ivy educated, tenured philosophy...
Once again I note they "joke" that taking Epstein's money is good actually because it was reducing his wealth.
Yeah, no, I don't need academics, especially "ivy educated, tenured philosophy professors", to tell me that it's reasonable to take that money and unreasonable to expect people to know who he was. There were probably some people who didn't, so let's focus on the major names who absolutely did, or the institutions who should have known at a minimum
As someone with universally terrible handwriting skills, handwriting notes was always better for taking notes. You use more of your brain to write than to type, and that is especially true if you...
As someone with universally terrible handwriting skills, handwriting notes was always better for taking notes.
You use more of your brain to write than to type, and that is especially true if you have bad handwriting. It’s harder to read handwriting than it is to read a font, which engages more of your brain - once again, especially if you have bad handwriting.
Personally speaking, I usually had a computer with me starting sometime in high school, and the notes I wrote down were always more useful than the ones I typed. Often times if I wrote notes I would not even need to study them because I already had them firmly planted in my mind. You are left not only with the memory of the content, but the memory of putting in the effort of writing the stuff down. It’s a mnemonic force multiplier.
I’m sure handwriting is more easily committed to memory, but my issue is that the pace that some professors moved at was so high relative to my writing speed that my notes covered as little as a...
I’m sure handwriting is more easily committed to memory, but my issue is that the pace that some professors moved at was so high relative to my writing speed that my notes covered as little as a half or third of the lecture, and what did get written didn’t soak in because I was in a panic trying to catch up the whole time.
For me at least it would’ve been more effective to type notes in class and then review and maybe re-compose in writing on my own time.
That was also my experience for the first few weeks of uni. Then you end up developing strategies. You're not supposed to write everything the professor says verbatim, just keywords. And good...
That was also my experience for the first few weeks of uni.
Then you end up developing strategies.
You're not supposed to write everything the professor says verbatim, just keywords. And good professor (most of them) repeat the same thing twice in 2 different way to ensure proper retention by more student, obviously just write a synthesis. The act of thinking up the synthesis under pressure is mentally taxing, but it's what makes you learn! (You may already know this, or think you do, but every time I checked over the shoulder of someone who "take better notes by typing" IRL, they were not synthetizing enough)
You cann't avoid needing to grind taking notes a bit to get good at it.
Hand written is absolutely more effective if your goal is learning.
This is true, though I get some benefit from typing notes as well because I often quickly reread as I go, but some students will need an benefit from accommodations for tech anyway (even if they...
This is true, though I get some benefit from typing notes as well because I often quickly reread as I go, but some students will need an benefit from accommodations for tech anyway (even if they don't get those accommodations)
I used to type out my notes because I could easily transcribe what someone was saying very quickly while typing and then go back and hand-write my notes on my iPad, adding in illustrations or...
I used to type out my notes because I could easily transcribe what someone was saying very quickly while typing and then go back and hand-write my notes on my iPad, adding in illustrations or other necessary information that wasn't included in the lecture. Just because it's good to do something one way doesn't mean it needs to be done that way at the time of the class.
They've done studies and shown that you tend to remember handwritten notes better than typewritten notes. iirc, I think it engages more hooks into memory
They've done studies and shown that you tend to remember handwritten notes better than typewritten notes. iirc, I think it engages more hooks into memory
Ah, I didn't realize they were that different but I had clicked through to the original(?) on the author's own substack at some point when looking into their other works. They're two versions of...
Ah, I didn't realize they were that different but I had clicked through to the original(?) on the author's own substack at some point when looking into their other works. They're two versions of the same essay.
My bad for not realizing, though my opinion of the author remains the same
The author seems to consistently conflate idea of ability with willingness. I very much doubt that. They could read a "serious adult novel", which are apparently anything written by Barbara...
The author seems to consistently conflate idea of ability with willingness.
No, our average graduate literally could not read a serious adult novel cover-to-cover and understand what they read.
I very much doubt that. They could read a "serious adult novel", which are apparently anything written by Barbara Kingsolver, Colson Whitehead, and Richard Powers. They just don't want to. There's a difference there. Being functionally illiterate means they can't read those novels. The fact that they don't, doesn't mean they can't.
If I pointed a gun to the head of most college graduates and told them to read The Nickel Boys, then give me a summary or I'll kill them, I have no doubt in my mind that the vast majority of them would be able to do a somewhat decent job.
The author of the article seems to think that his class has similar stakes, but for most students, it really doesn't. They can pass without reading a book they don't want to read, so they don't read it.
The entire premise of the article is based on this false assertion. I could just as easily make the argument that the author functionally can't ride a pink tricycle 200 feet, simply because he's never done it before and has no desire to.
Yes, exactly! I wrote a long response to this but ended up deleting it because nobody needed that negativity. What kind of asshole calls someone illiterate because they don’t like a compulsory...
Yes, exactly! I wrote a long response to this but ended up deleting it because nobody needed that negativity. What kind of asshole calls someone illiterate because they don’t like a compulsory class? It’s honestly astonishing how out of touch they are with their students.
Not exactly a new sentiment, I know, but I've been screening applicants recently for an entry-level position, and the percentage of current college students and college-age people who refuse to...
Students are not absolutely illiterate in the sense of being unable to sound out any words whatsoever. Reading bores them, though. They are impatient to get through whatever burden of reading they have to, and move their eyes over the words just to get it done. They’re like me clicking through a mandatory online HR training. Students get exam questions wrong simply because they didn’t even take the time to read the question properly. Reading anything more than a menu is a chore and to be avoided.
Not exactly a new sentiment, I know, but I've been screening applicants recently for an entry-level position, and the percentage of current college students and college-age people who refuse to read through 350 words and follow simple instructions is DEPRESSING. I'd say maybe only 15% actually read it.
Slightly orthogonal to the posts’ academic focus: I’ve noticed around me over the past few years a precipitous uptick in phone usage. I’ve always been annoyed by phone usage when hanging out with...
Slightly orthogonal to the posts’ academic focus: I’ve noticed around me over the past few years a precipitous uptick in phone usage. I’ve always been annoyed by phone usage when hanging out with people, but now I notice when I’m around people in basically any situation, most cannot avoid pulling out their phones. When I go for walks in my neighborhood I notice nearly everyone walking is scrolling on their phone, and even more alarmingly I see a stupid number of people doing this while driving. Texting while driving has always been a problem since mobile phones were invented, but I feel like since short form videos surged in popularity and nuked our collective attention span it’s gotten worse.
I try to limit phone usage for myself because I’m so frightened by all this but despite all my awareness and fear around it even I struggle. I’m convinced smartphones with purposefully addictive apps are a quiet, massive plague with wide downstream implications. It seems it’s bad for everyone too, not just younger people, but they are more vulnerable. I know there are so many upsides that raving against them may sound out of touch and naive, but I desperately wish I knew some way we could change this horrible societal status quo.
I’ve always thought getting into teaching towards the end of my career would be a rewarding way to cap it off. My career is long from over (hopefully), but I really struggle to see that as a desirable path with the way I hear teachers talk these days.
At the same time, the explosion of long-form content has been interesting. Many people regularly listen to 2-3 hour podcasts now, which was very rare beforehand. I guess there's a K-shaped...
At the same time, the explosion of long-form content has been interesting. Many people regularly listen to 2-3 hour podcasts now, which was very rare beforehand. I guess there's a K-shaped trajectory in people's attention spans. If you don't have a taste for short-form content, there's not much worthwhile medium-form content to consume.
You listen to podcasts while doing other things. I don’t know how many people would listen to a 3 hour podcast if they could do nothing but stare at paint dry while they did so. If you listen to a...
You listen to podcasts while doing other things. I don’t know how many people would listen to a 3 hour podcast if they could do nothing but stare at paint dry while they did so.
If you listen to a podcast while goonmaxing or whatever the kids are doing these days, does that count as having a long attention span?
A regular joke on Tiktok is when someone who tells an interesting story with good presentation/speaking skills posts a long video the comments being full of "see I don't have an attention span...
A regular joke on Tiktok is when someone who tells an interesting story with good presentation/speaking skills posts a long video the comments being full of "see I don't have an attention span problem, I was locked in" and "I want 37 more parts." And this makes me think that for a lot of folks it's just about interest, and many presenters and professors have not updated their style for 10+ years. If you can scroll to something else at any time, then why stay if the thing you see isn't interesting. Is that actually damaging the attention span or is it really that, much like long form podcasts, when it's interesting they can engage.
I'm not sure of the answer but I found playing Heardle with my class between their group presentations really helped them lock in to the next one.
I didn't get into Podcasts until I was near the end of my time in college. Started listening to them on my walks to work/campus and immediately got hooked to the point that they have taken up the...
I didn't get into Podcasts until I was near the end of my time in college. Started listening to them on my walks to work/campus and immediately got hooked to the point that they have taken up the majority of my audio time. They also got me to look forward to doing housework. It's great to learn new things or be entertained while tidying up the place or doing acts of service for my wife (which is one of her main love languages).
I do enjoy long form video essays, but those are usually watched/listened to while I'm folding clothes since I'm in one spot and can fold without paying that much attention to the clothes themselves.
Beyond the phone, I've noticed a troubling increase in the need for multi-stimulation. Scrolling phones while watching a show or movie, watching a stream while playing a game, that sort of thing....
Beyond the phone, I've noticed a troubling increase in the need for multi-stimulation. Scrolling phones while watching a show or movie, watching a stream while playing a game, that sort of thing. I've seen people struggle to focus on just one thing, even if it's something they truly enjoy. There was a funny web clicker/idle game a little while ago that satirized by having the goal to be maximizing the stimulation you're getting by amassing layered sounds, windowed video streams, animated desktop widgets, playing music tracks, and such (I think it was posted here, though I can't recall the name).
I've fortunately haven't had much of an issue with this when there's a clear activity, but I've been thinking about how to handle the "grey area" time like riding a bus, waiting in a queue, or walking somewhere. Sure, there's not much else to do, but there's usually plenty of "mundane" things that can be interesting to observe and think about if given full attention. I've been trying to be "in the moment" more in those situations. It's still a struggle, but it's already paid off with things like noticing new (to me) shops while riding the bus
When you're stuck and there's really nothing worth your attention, like sitting on the toilet, sure, whip that phone out without an ounce of regret while you do your business.
I miss my teen years (dial-up internet days) when I used to actually just chill and do nothing but listen to music closely. I can't remember the last time I did that, now it's always music while...
I miss my teen years (dial-up internet days) when I used to actually just chill and do nothing but listen to music closely. I can't remember the last time I did that, now it's always music while scrolling or driving and I'm obviously not paying as much attention to the music and I don't seem to appreciate the music in the same way. Also I had to listen to just a few albums over and over then, now the entire world of music is at my fingertips. Listening to whole albums multiple times has become much more rare.
People probably judge me for reading on my phone while walking the dog (like I'm doing now), but since for the almost 8 years we've had him I've walked him 2-3 times a day around the same...
People probably judge me for reading on my phone while walking the dog (like I'm doing now), but since for the almost 8 years we've had him I've walked him 2-3 times a day around the same neighbourhood, even doing 5 different loops means I've done any given walk about a thousand times. Same with getting the bus to work, though I tend to read a paperback then if I get a seat.
I'm all for finding interest in the "mundane", but even that is thin on the ground after the thousandth iteration. Checking in every once in a while when things may have appreciably changed is plenty, I think.
Thats really interesting, I go on walks with the purpose of not looking at a screen, diverting my full attention to things like a colony of ants eating a dead bug or something. Maybe the...
Thats really interesting, I go on walks with the purpose of not looking at a screen, diverting my full attention to things like a colony of ants eating a dead bug or something.
Maybe the difference is I don’t HAVE to go on these walks, I don’t have a dog that needs to be walked, and so for me if I had my book out while walking, well I shoulda just stayed home.
Phones are a great distraction away from doing things we don’t want to be doing, I think, and maybe the problem is that our entire day is full of things we don’t want to be doing
I was the kid that used to walk around holding my paperback and turning the page with one hand, mostly not running into things. So in some ways ebooks on my phone are just a return to that...
I was the kid that used to walk around holding my paperback and turning the page with one hand, mostly not running into things. So in some ways ebooks on my phone are just a return to that childhood for me.
I can enjoy outdoors time but sometimes I'm walking to walk not to experience the outdoors. That is just where I happen to be.
On the flipside, with regard to driving, pedestrians stepping off the curb into an intersection and meandering through a crosswalk with their eyes glued to a phone is one of my major pet peeves...
On the flipside, with regard to driving, pedestrians stepping off the curb into an intersection and meandering through a crosswalk with their eyes glued to a phone is one of my major pet peeves when I'm trying to make a turn. Put the damn phone down and have a little situational awareness; the phone can wait until you're out of the street and back on the sidewalk!
The pedestrian might be more aware than you realize... I very often pretend to check my phone when crossing the street, here is my reasoning: The driver wants to avoid running over the pedestrian...
The pedestrian might be more aware than you realize...
I very often pretend to check my phone when crossing the street, here is my reasoning:
The driver wants to avoid running over the pedestrian almost as much as the pedestrian : pedestrian doesn't want to die, but the drivers don't want the inconvenience of running a pedestrian over (time explaining themselves, and most would even get sad from it (not enough to choose to drive carefully, but still)).
So both interests are mostly aligned.
But both would also rather the other stops and wait until after they've passed. We no longer want exactly the same thing.
And there is asymmetry in that the driver can easely check that the pedestrian has seen him, whereas the pedestrian has much greater difficulty checking the driver has seen him (the reflection in the windshield stops you from seeing if the driver is looking at you, and judging if a vehicle is slightly slowing down is rather hard). So the driver can very easely barely slow down, keep there their foot near the pedal to emergency break if the pedestrian does show intent to cross anyway, but keep cruising if the pedestrian doesn't dare take the right of way (I've come to the conclusion that pedestrian should have priority everywhere, always).
So when I'm a pedestrian and I want to cross, I do keep an eye on the cars from the corner of my eyes (to abort in case of an inattentive driver which is way too common), but I try to make it as unobvious as possible such as by pretending to check my phone. Drivers have no choice then but to give the right of way.
I believe driver can do the good thing, as long as they don't really have a choice...
Interesting, I might have to try this. My go to method is to stare down the driver and start walking in front of them. In my experience, very few drivers will fail to stop with a pedestrian who is...
Interesting, I might have to try this. My go to method is to stare down the driver and start walking in front of them. In my experience, very few drivers will fail to stop with a pedestrian who is staring at them, despite the inattention. I have only had to bail a handful of times.
And I think people like you are probably few and far between. My guess is that people like you are probably as common as people using torrents for Linux isos. Yeah, they exist, but if you pick a random sample there is basically zero chance.
Yeah this is what I do too haha my face is like I dare you to keep going My intuition is that everyone has that sixth sense they’re being watched, so even if I cant see them see me, they know I’m...
Yeah this is what I do too haha my face is like I dare you to keep going
My intuition is that everyone has that sixth sense they’re being watched, so even if I cant see them see me, they know I’m staring at them cause everyone knows when they’re being stared at.
Well this doesn't work well if the driver is checking the other - left side for the incoming vehicles. Some intersections have such a layout that the driver needs to check both sides - right for...
Well this doesn't work well if the driver is checking the other - left side for the incoming vehicles. Some intersections have such a layout that the driver needs to check both sides - right for pedestrians and left for vehicles.
well yes, this is why this segways us beautifully back to the main topic.
well yes, this is why
I do keep an eye on the cars from the corner of my eyes (to abort in case of an inattentive driver which is way too common), but I try to make it as unobvious as possible.
this segways us beautifully back to the main topic.
This makes me wonder if when people see me walking my dog and being on my phone that they think I'm scrolling on social media when I'm usually reading a book. I know I try to avoid being on my...
This makes me wonder if when people see me walking my dog and being on my phone that they think I'm scrolling on social media when I'm usually reading a book.
I know I try to avoid being on my phone when I'm with people unless I'm specifically looking for something relevant to what we're doing, and notice when I'm in the room and everyone else is doing something on their phone. I am trying to be better at being off my phone around my kids at the end of the day, as there will be those exhausted days when I want to read an article or finish a chapter of my ebook, but my kids don't know what I'm doing and just see me on my phone. To help with this I've started keeping one of the books I'm currently reading in my kids' bookshelf. When they're happily playing together, and I want to do something for myself I can keep my phone in my pocket and read that book instead.
I'm also often reading while walking, or listening to an audiobook while multitasking. Even my social media scrolling might be focused on educational or informative media. We're all a bit more...
I'm also often reading while walking, or listening to an audiobook while multitasking. Even my social media scrolling might be focused on educational or informative media. We're all a bit more nuanced than "phone bad"
My cats care far less about our quality time being phone free as long as they can headbutt me regularly.
Where I lived in Hungary, there was a municipal trend of painting large, bright yellow signs on the ground right before you entered crosswalks crossing the street, signs that said "Stop using your...
Where I lived in Hungary, there was a municipal trend of painting large, bright yellow signs on the ground right before you entered crosswalks crossing the street, signs that said "Stop using your phone! Do not cross the street while using your phone!"
I thought that it was simultaneously very creative of the local govt, and also a sad commentary that the signs were apparently necessary (I hate to think what prompted them to start making those signs...).
Someone looking at their phone while I'm talking to them has to be one of my biggest pet peeves of all time. It's absolutely infuriating to me, and I've just stopped conversations halfway through...
Someone looking at their phone while I'm talking to them has to be one of my biggest pet peeves of all time. It's absolutely infuriating to me, and I've just stopped conversations halfway through and walked off when people have done it to me before.
It's one of the rudest things you can possibly do, and I hate how it's becoming somewhat socially acceptable.
I've noticed a lot of student apathy in these essays, and I'm curious where it comes from. The addiction to short-form content isn't something I experience, and my friends and coworkers are either...
I've noticed a lot of student apathy in these essays, and I'm curious where it comes from. The addiction to short-form content isn't something I experience, and my friends and coworkers are either conscious about it or are older and don't have the habit. I know it's not good but I didn't realise it was this damaging?
My initial thought was a pessimism about their future; entry-level jobs being threatened by AI (whether justified or not), and houses, cars, and childcare are becoming out of reach as wealth concentrates up. The effects of global warming are getting more visible too. I certainly remember worrying about those last two when I was at university in the early 2010s, but I don't think this is the whole story.
There are more legal highs/stimulants since I was at uni, and phone gambling is also new. Again I'm not very knowledgeable about the impact of these on young people other than the potential addictiveness.
I don't blame them for their actions, on some level it must make sense, I'm just not seeing their perspective yet.
From what I've heard, you hit almost all of the popular GenZ maladies on the head with this list. While a Gen Y like me looking back at "The Kids" always comes with a hint of misunderstanding...
From what I've heard, you hit almost all of the popular GenZ maladies on the head with this list.
While a Gen Y like me looking back at "The Kids" always comes with a hint of misunderstanding about the generation, one point not mentioned really tracks: they're not dating and they don't want to.
That's a bit inflated - I'm sure that they want to, but news accounts point to social media as the reason why aren't.
They're busy talking about dating, reading stories about romance and looking good, but there are some alarming stats about just how many of them are asking people out, going on dates, having sex and going through those formative motions of elation, heartache, loss and learning.
So... In my experience many of Gen Z does a lot of those things but insists they're not in a relationship because it isn't that serious. (To the point that I can't ask about their relationship...
So... In my experience many of Gen Z does a lot of those things but insists they're not in a relationship because it isn't that serious. (To the point that I can't ask about their relationship with the other person because they'll insist that they're not in one and I have to explain that relationship in this context means any type of interpersonal connection.) They're "just talking." And yet they'll absolutely be jealous if the person they're "talking" to is even messaging another (relevant gendered) person.
I do wonder if there's a skew to the surveys there about dating in particular.
I don't think this is exclusive to younger generations unfortunately. I'm in my late 30s, and I'm married now, but was dating as recently as four years ago, and had to go through this whole...
I don't think this is exclusive to younger generations unfortunately. I'm in my late 30s, and I'm married now, but was dating as recently as four years ago, and had to go through this whole charade a few times.
I've been in situations where we were going on dates, sexually exclusive, and talking to each other all the time, but we weren't "in a relationship", apparently. The thing makes no sense. Besides the fact that we were, objectively, in a relationship (I'm "in a relationship" with my doctor, my parents, my coworkers, and anyone else I interact with on a regular basis, by definition), even in the colloquial usage, I was in a romantic, exclusive relationship.
I think a lot of people prop romantic "relationships" as being a much bigger deal than they are. If we're not married, I can just decide one day it doesn't work for me and never talk to you again, and have no further legal obligations to you. It's not a big deal if you ask someone out, date for three weeks, figure out you don't like them then dump them.
People fear them because they think a relationship is like a mini marriage, but it isn't at all.
The whole "talking=fucking" thing is also equally irritating and confusing, but that's probably the entire point of it. My question was always... what if you are actually just talking to someone now and then and haven't had sex?
The whole exercise of courtship feels like it's just driven by fear and overanalysis, rather than fun now.
I'm sure it's not exclusive to the Gen Z folks, but they were just the group being talked about. In my experience. At least millennials will generally say that we are dating at least. But really...
I'm sure it's not exclusive to the Gen Z folks, but they were just the group being talked about. In my experience. At least millennials will generally say that we are dating at least. But really everyone needs to define their terms so we can operationalize our definitions.
That's a good point, a lot of new technology and methods of escapism encourage isolation rather than group enjoyment. It's a mix of stunting social and mental development while providing a...
That's a good point, a lot of new technology and methods of escapism encourage isolation rather than group enjoyment. It's a mix of stunting social and mental development while providing a compelling, though shallow, alternative.
Another aspect is the fracturing or lack of people-centered regulation, leading to a loss of agency in daily life. I think everyone is feeling this, I certainly am, but it's probably more damaging if you've never known an alternative. So the temptation to lean into hedonism gets bigger.
All of this might also explain some of the increasing populist/nationalist right among young people; as your world becomes simultaneously smaller and harder to understand, you become more amenable to finger-pointing solutions like blaming other races/cultures.
Happy to hear other perspectives if I've got anything wrong :)
I think urban development patterns contribute to this a lot as well, more than is often talked about. If your friends live a 45 minute drive away from you, you're not likely to meet up with them...
I think urban development patterns contribute to this a lot as well, more than is often talked about.
If your friends live a 45 minute drive away from you, you're not likely to meet up with them on weeknights. If your friends are your neighbors, it's not a huge investment to go to their place for 20 minutes after work, or spend a couple hours getting a beer or playing board games rather than going home to play video games with total strangers.
We pay a huge social opportunity cost in time by living in disconnected suburbs and exurbs, or cities with horrible transit options and development patterns.
Great perspective and not at all wrong. "Wrong" is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to each of us trying to suss out how and why we've arrived here, where "here" is and what it all means....
Great perspective and not at all wrong. "Wrong" is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to each of us trying to suss out how and why we've arrived here, where "here" is and what it all means.
Frankly, I spend most of my day just trying to detangle my view of the world and what's happening from my stage in life.
Am I more perceptive given my age or is it external factors?
What mix of both is causing it?
Does ruminating over everything just amount to trivia and navel gazing?
It's all a big glorious fucking mess as far as I'm concerned lol. There is no wrong.
Bless those who spend their spare time trying to figure it out.
Your initial thought mirrors mine. I think phones are an issue, but what the article mentioned and then didn't follow up on was: Yes. Hard to care about Kierkegaard if you don't feel like you have...
Your initial thought mirrors mine. I think phones are an issue, but what the article mentioned and then didn't follow up on was:
They go through the motions and maybe learn something along the way, but it is all in service to the only conception of the good life they can imagine: a job with middle-class wages.
Yes. Hard to care about Kierkegaard if you don't feel like you have a future. At least in the US the prospects for a young person are bleak. Heck, I'm a working professional and the future can look bleak. I think social media can exacerbate worry about the future, but there are real problems of AI taking jobs (or being used as an excuse to fire), housing being extremely expensive, lack of affordable health care, lack of social safety net (and what we have being torn down). Not to mention global issues like geo-politics and climate change. I believe that for young people, the good ol' Americanism about working hard and making it seems like a joke.
So yeah, I think phones are an issue, but I think this article landed on the easy answer with a bit of a, "Phones bad, young people need to grow up" vibe. The issues facing young people are much bigger, and I don't think higher education is giving them satisfying answers. That said, I understand the frustration. education is hugely important for addressing these big issues and having a motivated critical thinking populace is key as well.
hm, if young people are addicted to their phones, why not take that as seriously as a substance use disorder? i wonder if it would be feasible for a class whose goal was deep textual analysis to...
hm, if young people are addicted to their phones, why not take that as seriously as a substance use disorder? i wonder if it would be feasible for a class whose goal was deep textual analysis to begin the semester with a program to wean the attendees off of phones. perhaps such a class might be required as a prerequisite to taking further classes that benefit from sustained attention. it seems cruel to expect young people to be able to manage this on their own when our shared world is pushing this addictive technology on them from childhood.
I've appreciated the shared experiences here, so I'll add my own. I've definitely witnessed challenges with deep or long-form reading. I vividly remember a scare a while back having a group of...
I've appreciated the shared experiences here, so I'll add my own.
I've definitely witnessed challenges with deep or long-form reading. I vividly remember a scare a while back having a group of highschoolers read a short passage and none of them being able to articulate what it was they just read. It made me realize I lack the language to label this phenomenon, as I was drawn towards describing them as "illiterate" the same as the post here, but I don't think that communicates the issue clearly.
One note that this article doesn't seem to acknowledge is that the weakening of long-term focus and persistence through learning challenges is not limited to poor performers. I think there's a natural association made that "poor attention" correlates with "less intelligence" within a group, thus if a whole generation is showing weaker attention than previous ones, they must be broadly less intelligent. Just based on my experience, I don't believe this to be the case at all. I've seen plenty of extraordinarily bright, hardworking students who share these challenges.
i think these observations fit well with the characterization of tech addition as a disease rather than a personal or moral failing on the part of individuals.
i think these observations fit well with the characterization of tech addition as a disease rather than a personal or moral failing on the part of individuals.
Am I crazy, or is this article absolutely seething with contempt?
I began reading this article hoping to learn about the systemic issues in academia, but these put-downs framed as genuine concern made me question the author's judgement. Sounds like a tough teacher.
One hopes it's a bit gone a bit too far - maybe they just really committed. But I also just don't agree with them on, say, their argument that moral stances are basically sympathetic magic, especially in relation to the idea that it's somehow bad for someone to take Epstein's money, or why a vegetarian won't consume animal products because after all they're already dead, there's no harm.
Edit:
Also fuck the attitude about accommodations. Seriously. Yes, the students who need it will go get accommodations if you ban it. If you think it's ban worthy then do it instead of whinging about including students with disabilities.
Man I wish I’d had a laptop to take notes on during uni, I’m sure I would’ve done better. I’ve typed faster than I can write since some point in high school and there were several classes where with paper notes I struggled to keep up with the professor (and often didn’t). I’m not a particularly slow writer or anything, I’ve just typed way more than I’ve written and that comes through in speed.
This probably isn’t super common among the phone-oriented younger generation but it’s probably not that unusual either. There’s no good reason to deny them a laptop…
It is true (in RA training at least) that they're doing other things than just taking notes, but, so are the professional staff during their trainings. (For me it is a mix of ADHD, being a quick learner, and having to keep up on work at the same time). Often they're bored, and that reads as "rude" because presenters/professors don't like considering that they're boring. (I'm also sure there's just rude people but that was the case 20+ years ago too so I suspect it's always been the case)
But yeah notes for me in college (undiagnosed at the time) were mostly me remembering things because I'd written them down rather than particularly useful later. My handwriting has always been bad, and when I made a real effort I'd usually learned the things I wrote well enough not to need them.
The statement is so derisive about accommodations that I strongly suspect the writer complains about having to provide them at all. For many students the other option is a note taker who may have to be paid and may also need to use a laptop for clarity. I've been asked to provide my class presentations in advance for someone with a processing disorder. It's not actually that difficult to accommodate. And it is even better to redesign courses to be more engaging and accessible to everyone.
The author, to me, just feels like a bad teacher who is taking it out on the younger generation between making fun of them and lamenting accommodations/being ableist. I've had plenty of instructors like that, who, even with documented accommodations, denied me what I was supposed to be able to use, and that was 15+ years ago now.
I agree with you that this person should redesign their course if their students aren't paying attention. Alternatively, they should get out of education/academia.
Once again I note they "joke" that taking Epstein's money is good actually because it was reducing his wealth.
Yeah, no, I don't need academics, especially "ivy educated, tenured philosophy professors", to tell me that it's reasonable to take that money and unreasonable to expect people to know who he was. There were probably some people who didn't, so let's focus on the major names who absolutely did, or the institutions who should have known at a minimum
As someone with universally terrible handwriting skills, handwriting notes was always better for taking notes.
You use more of your brain to write than to type, and that is especially true if you have bad handwriting. It’s harder to read handwriting than it is to read a font, which engages more of your brain - once again, especially if you have bad handwriting.
Personally speaking, I usually had a computer with me starting sometime in high school, and the notes I wrote down were always more useful than the ones I typed. Often times if I wrote notes I would not even need to study them because I already had them firmly planted in my mind. You are left not only with the memory of the content, but the memory of putting in the effort of writing the stuff down. It’s a mnemonic force multiplier.
I’m sure handwriting is more easily committed to memory, but my issue is that the pace that some professors moved at was so high relative to my writing speed that my notes covered as little as a half or third of the lecture, and what did get written didn’t soak in because I was in a panic trying to catch up the whole time.
For me at least it would’ve been more effective to type notes in class and then review and maybe re-compose in writing on my own time.
That was also my experience for the first few weeks of uni.
Then you end up developing strategies.
You're not supposed to write everything the professor says verbatim, just keywords. And good professor (most of them) repeat the same thing twice in 2 different way to ensure proper retention by more student, obviously just write a synthesis. The act of thinking up the synthesis under pressure is mentally taxing, but it's what makes you learn! (You may already know this, or think you do, but every time I checked over the shoulder of someone who "take better notes by typing" IRL, they were not synthetizing enough)
You cann't avoid needing to grind taking notes a bit to get good at it.
Hand written is absolutely more effective if your goal is learning.
I never got that far, it was just panic mode scramble-writing the whole time I was attending, and my grades reflected that.
This is true, though I get some benefit from typing notes as well because I often quickly reread as I go, but some students will need an benefit from accommodations for tech anyway (even if they don't get those accommodations)
I used to type out my notes because I could easily transcribe what someone was saying very quickly while typing and then go back and hand-write my notes on my iPad, adding in illustrations or other necessary information that wasn't included in the lecture. Just because it's good to do something one way doesn't mean it needs to be done that way at the time of the class.
They've done studies and shown that you tend to remember handwritten notes better than typewritten notes. iirc, I think it engages more hooks into memory
I just read the post, and I don't see anything about accommodations in it. Has the post been changed since you read it?
Ah, I didn't realize they were that different but I had clicked through to the original(?) on the author's own substack at some point when looking into their other works. They're two versions of the same essay.
My bad for not realizing, though my opinion of the author remains the same
The author seems to consistently conflate idea of ability with willingness.
I very much doubt that. They could read a "serious adult novel", which are apparently anything written by Barbara Kingsolver, Colson Whitehead, and Richard Powers. They just don't want to. There's a difference there. Being functionally illiterate means they can't read those novels. The fact that they don't, doesn't mean they can't.
If I pointed a gun to the head of most college graduates and told them to read The Nickel Boys, then give me a summary or I'll kill them, I have no doubt in my mind that the vast majority of them would be able to do a somewhat decent job.
The author of the article seems to think that his class has similar stakes, but for most students, it really doesn't. They can pass without reading a book they don't want to read, so they don't read it.
The entire premise of the article is based on this false assertion. I could just as easily make the argument that the author functionally can't ride a pink tricycle 200 feet, simply because he's never done it before and has no desire to.
Yes, exactly! I wrote a long response to this but ended up deleting it because nobody needed that negativity. What kind of asshole calls someone illiterate because they don’t like a compulsory class? It’s honestly astonishing how out of touch they are with their students.
Not exactly a new sentiment, I know, but I've been screening applicants recently for an entry-level position, and the percentage of current college students and college-age people who refuse to read through 350 words and follow simple instructions is DEPRESSING. I'd say maybe only 15% actually read it.
This follows the recent post about film students who aren't sitting through films.
Slightly orthogonal to the posts’ academic focus: I’ve noticed around me over the past few years a precipitous uptick in phone usage. I’ve always been annoyed by phone usage when hanging out with people, but now I notice when I’m around people in basically any situation, most cannot avoid pulling out their phones. When I go for walks in my neighborhood I notice nearly everyone walking is scrolling on their phone, and even more alarmingly I see a stupid number of people doing this while driving. Texting while driving has always been a problem since mobile phones were invented, but I feel like since short form videos surged in popularity and nuked our collective attention span it’s gotten worse.
I try to limit phone usage for myself because I’m so frightened by all this but despite all my awareness and fear around it even I struggle. I’m convinced smartphones with purposefully addictive apps are a quiet, massive plague with wide downstream implications. It seems it’s bad for everyone too, not just younger people, but they are more vulnerable. I know there are so many upsides that raving against them may sound out of touch and naive, but I desperately wish I knew some way we could change this horrible societal status quo.
I’ve always thought getting into teaching towards the end of my career would be a rewarding way to cap it off. My career is long from over (hopefully), but I really struggle to see that as a desirable path with the way I hear teachers talk these days.
At the same time, the explosion of long-form content has been interesting. Many people regularly listen to 2-3 hour podcasts now, which was very rare beforehand. I guess there's a K-shaped trajectory in people's attention spans. If you don't have a taste for short-form content, there's not much worthwhile medium-form content to consume.
You listen to podcasts while doing other things. I don’t know how many people would listen to a 3 hour podcast if they could do nothing but stare at paint dry while they did so.
If you listen to a podcast while goonmaxing or whatever the kids are doing these days, does that count as having a long attention span?
A regular joke on Tiktok is when someone who tells an interesting story with good presentation/speaking skills posts a long video the comments being full of "see I don't have an attention span problem, I was locked in" and "I want 37 more parts." And this makes me think that for a lot of folks it's just about interest, and many presenters and professors have not updated their style for 10+ years. If you can scroll to something else at any time, then why stay if the thing you see isn't interesting. Is that actually damaging the attention span or is it really that, much like long form podcasts, when it's interesting they can engage.
I'm not sure of the answer but I found playing Heardle with my class between their group presentations really helped them lock in to the next one.
I didn't get into Podcasts until I was near the end of my time in college. Started listening to them on my walks to work/campus and immediately got hooked to the point that they have taken up the majority of my audio time. They also got me to look forward to doing housework. It's great to learn new things or be entertained while tidying up the place or doing acts of service for my wife (which is one of her main love languages).
I do enjoy long form video essays, but those are usually watched/listened to while I'm folding clothes since I'm in one spot and can fold without paying that much attention to the clothes themselves.
Beyond the phone, I've noticed a troubling increase in the need for multi-stimulation. Scrolling phones while watching a show or movie, watching a stream while playing a game, that sort of thing. I've seen people struggle to focus on just one thing, even if it's something they truly enjoy. There was a funny web clicker/idle game a little while ago that satirized by having the goal to be maximizing the stimulation you're getting by amassing layered sounds, windowed video streams, animated desktop widgets, playing music tracks, and such (I think it was posted here, though I can't recall the name).
I've fortunately haven't had much of an issue with this when there's a clear activity, but I've been thinking about how to handle the "grey area" time like riding a bus, waiting in a queue, or walking somewhere. Sure, there's not much else to do, but there's usually plenty of "mundane" things that can be interesting to observe and think about if given full attention. I've been trying to be "in the moment" more in those situations. It's still a struggle, but it's already paid off with things like noticing new (to me) shops while riding the bus
When you're stuck and there's really nothing worth your attention, like sitting on the toilet, sure, whip that phone out without an ounce of regret while you do your business.
The game was from neal.fun, "Stimulation Clicker": https://neal.fun/stimulation-clicker/
I remember it being posted here too, but I can't find it. I think the post was deleted.
I miss my teen years (dial-up internet days) when I used to actually just chill and do nothing but listen to music closely. I can't remember the last time I did that, now it's always music while scrolling or driving and I'm obviously not paying as much attention to the music and I don't seem to appreciate the music in the same way. Also I had to listen to just a few albums over and over then, now the entire world of music is at my fingertips. Listening to whole albums multiple times has become much more rare.
People probably judge me for reading on my phone while walking the dog (like I'm doing now), but since for the almost 8 years we've had him I've walked him 2-3 times a day around the same neighbourhood, even doing 5 different loops means I've done any given walk about a thousand times. Same with getting the bus to work, though I tend to read a paperback then if I get a seat.
I'm all for finding interest in the "mundane", but even that is thin on the ground after the thousandth iteration. Checking in every once in a while when things may have appreciably changed is plenty, I think.
Thats really interesting, I go on walks with the purpose of not looking at a screen, diverting my full attention to things like a colony of ants eating a dead bug or something.
Maybe the difference is I don’t HAVE to go on these walks, I don’t have a dog that needs to be walked, and so for me if I had my book out while walking, well I shoulda just stayed home.
Phones are a great distraction away from doing things we don’t want to be doing, I think, and maybe the problem is that our entire day is full of things we don’t want to be doing
I was the kid that used to walk around holding my paperback and turning the page with one hand, mostly not running into things. So in some ways ebooks on my phone are just a return to that childhood for me.
I can enjoy outdoors time but sometimes I'm walking to walk not to experience the outdoors. That is just where I happen to be.
On the flipside, with regard to driving, pedestrians stepping off the curb into an intersection and meandering through a crosswalk with their eyes glued to a phone is one of my major pet peeves when I'm trying to make a turn. Put the damn phone down and have a little situational awareness; the phone can wait until you're out of the street and back on the sidewalk!
The pedestrian might be more aware than you realize...
I very often pretend to check my phone when crossing the street, here is my reasoning:
The driver wants to avoid running over the pedestrian almost as much as the pedestrian : pedestrian doesn't want to die, but the drivers don't want the inconvenience of running a pedestrian over (time explaining themselves, and most would even get sad from it (not enough to choose to drive carefully, but still)).
So both interests are mostly aligned.
But both would also rather the other stops and wait until after they've passed. We no longer want exactly the same thing.
And there is asymmetry in that the driver can easely check that the pedestrian has seen him, whereas the pedestrian has much greater difficulty checking the driver has seen him (the reflection in the windshield stops you from seeing if the driver is looking at you, and judging if a vehicle is slightly slowing down is rather hard). So the driver can very easely barely slow down, keep there their foot near the pedal to emergency break if the pedestrian does show intent to cross anyway, but keep cruising if the pedestrian doesn't dare take the right of way (I've come to the conclusion that pedestrian should have priority everywhere, always).
So when I'm a pedestrian and I want to cross, I do keep an eye on the cars from the corner of my eyes (to abort in case of an inattentive driver which is way too common), but I try to make it as unobvious as possible such as by pretending to check my phone. Drivers have no choice then but to give the right of way.
I believe driver can do the good thing, as long as they don't really have a choice...
Interesting, I might have to try this. My go to method is to stare down the driver and start walking in front of them. In my experience, very few drivers will fail to stop with a pedestrian who is staring at them, despite the inattention. I have only had to bail a handful of times.
And I think people like you are probably few and far between. My guess is that people like you are probably as common as people using torrents for Linux isos. Yeah, they exist, but if you pick a random sample there is basically zero chance.
Yeah this is what I do too haha my face is like I dare you to keep going
My intuition is that everyone has that sixth sense they’re being watched, so even if I cant see them see me, they know I’m staring at them cause everyone knows when they’re being stared at.
Well this doesn't work well if the driver is checking the other - left side for the incoming vehicles. Some intersections have such a layout that the driver needs to check both sides - right for pedestrians and left for vehicles.
well yes, this is why
this segways us beautifully back to the main topic.
This makes me wonder if when people see me walking my dog and being on my phone that they think I'm scrolling on social media when I'm usually reading a book.
I know I try to avoid being on my phone when I'm with people unless I'm specifically looking for something relevant to what we're doing, and notice when I'm in the room and everyone else is doing something on their phone. I am trying to be better at being off my phone around my kids at the end of the day, as there will be those exhausted days when I want to read an article or finish a chapter of my ebook, but my kids don't know what I'm doing and just see me on my phone. To help with this I've started keeping one of the books I'm currently reading in my kids' bookshelf. When they're happily playing together, and I want to do something for myself I can keep my phone in my pocket and read that book instead.
I'm also often reading while walking, or listening to an audiobook while multitasking. Even my social media scrolling might be focused on educational or informative media. We're all a bit more nuanced than "phone bad"
My cats care far less about our quality time being phone free as long as they can headbutt me regularly.
True, not all phone time is the same and I may be misjudging some people! I suspect you’re not the majority of people in this case though.
Where I lived in Hungary, there was a municipal trend of painting large, bright yellow signs on the ground right before you entered crosswalks crossing the street, signs that said "Stop using your phone! Do not cross the street while using your phone!"
I thought that it was simultaneously very creative of the local govt, and also a sad commentary that the signs were apparently necessary (I hate to think what prompted them to start making those signs...).
Someone looking at their phone while I'm talking to them has to be one of my biggest pet peeves of all time. It's absolutely infuriating to me, and I've just stopped conversations halfway through and walked off when people have done it to me before.
It's one of the rudest things you can possibly do, and I hate how it's becoming somewhat socially acceptable.
I've noticed a lot of student apathy in these essays, and I'm curious where it comes from. The addiction to short-form content isn't something I experience, and my friends and coworkers are either conscious about it or are older and don't have the habit. I know it's not good but I didn't realise it was this damaging?
My initial thought was a pessimism about their future; entry-level jobs being threatened by AI (whether justified or not), and houses, cars, and childcare are becoming out of reach as wealth concentrates up. The effects of global warming are getting more visible too. I certainly remember worrying about those last two when I was at university in the early 2010s, but I don't think this is the whole story.
There are more legal highs/stimulants since I was at uni, and phone gambling is also new. Again I'm not very knowledgeable about the impact of these on young people other than the potential addictiveness.
I don't blame them for their actions, on some level it must make sense, I'm just not seeing their perspective yet.
From what I've heard, you hit almost all of the popular GenZ maladies on the head with this list.
While a Gen Y like me looking back at "The Kids" always comes with a hint of misunderstanding about the generation, one point not mentioned really tracks: they're not dating and they don't want to.
That's a bit inflated - I'm sure that they want to, but news accounts point to social media as the reason why aren't.
They're busy talking about dating, reading stories about romance and looking good, but there are some alarming stats about just how many of them are asking people out, going on dates, having sex and going through those formative motions of elation, heartache, loss and learning.
So... In my experience many of Gen Z does a lot of those things but insists they're not in a relationship because it isn't that serious. (To the point that I can't ask about their relationship with the other person because they'll insist that they're not in one and I have to explain that relationship in this context means any type of interpersonal connection.) They're "just talking." And yet they'll absolutely be jealous if the person they're "talking" to is even messaging another (relevant gendered) person.
I do wonder if there's a skew to the surveys there about dating in particular.
I don't think this is exclusive to younger generations unfortunately. I'm in my late 30s, and I'm married now, but was dating as recently as four years ago, and had to go through this whole charade a few times.
I've been in situations where we were going on dates, sexually exclusive, and talking to each other all the time, but we weren't "in a relationship", apparently. The thing makes no sense. Besides the fact that we were, objectively, in a relationship (I'm "in a relationship" with my doctor, my parents, my coworkers, and anyone else I interact with on a regular basis, by definition), even in the colloquial usage, I was in a romantic, exclusive relationship.
I think a lot of people prop romantic "relationships" as being a much bigger deal than they are. If we're not married, I can just decide one day it doesn't work for me and never talk to you again, and have no further legal obligations to you. It's not a big deal if you ask someone out, date for three weeks, figure out you don't like them then dump them.
People fear them because they think a relationship is like a mini marriage, but it isn't at all.
The whole "talking=fucking" thing is also equally irritating and confusing, but that's probably the entire point of it. My question was always... what if you are actually just talking to someone now and then and haven't had sex?
The whole exercise of courtship feels like it's just driven by fear and overanalysis, rather than fun now.
I'm sure it's not exclusive to the Gen Z folks, but they were just the group being talked about. In my experience. At least millennials will generally say that we are dating at least. But really everyone needs to define their terms so we can operationalize our definitions.
That's a good point, a lot of new technology and methods of escapism encourage isolation rather than group enjoyment. It's a mix of stunting social and mental development while providing a compelling, though shallow, alternative.
Another aspect is the fracturing or lack of people-centered regulation, leading to a loss of agency in daily life. I think everyone is feeling this, I certainly am, but it's probably more damaging if you've never known an alternative. So the temptation to lean into hedonism gets bigger.
All of this might also explain some of the increasing populist/nationalist right among young people; as your world becomes simultaneously smaller and harder to understand, you become more amenable to finger-pointing solutions like blaming other races/cultures.
Happy to hear other perspectives if I've got anything wrong :)
I think urban development patterns contribute to this a lot as well, more than is often talked about.
If your friends live a 45 minute drive away from you, you're not likely to meet up with them on weeknights. If your friends are your neighbors, it's not a huge investment to go to their place for 20 minutes after work, or spend a couple hours getting a beer or playing board games rather than going home to play video games with total strangers.
We pay a huge social opportunity cost in time by living in disconnected suburbs and exurbs, or cities with horrible transit options and development patterns.
Great perspective and not at all wrong. "Wrong" is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to each of us trying to suss out how and why we've arrived here, where "here" is and what it all means.
Frankly, I spend most of my day just trying to detangle my view of the world and what's happening from my stage in life.
It's all a big glorious fucking mess as far as I'm concerned lol. There is no wrong.
Bless those who spend their spare time trying to figure it out.
Your initial thought mirrors mine. I think phones are an issue, but what the article mentioned and then didn't follow up on was:
Yes. Hard to care about Kierkegaard if you don't feel like you have a future. At least in the US the prospects for a young person are bleak. Heck, I'm a working professional and the future can look bleak. I think social media can exacerbate worry about the future, but there are real problems of AI taking jobs (or being used as an excuse to fire), housing being extremely expensive, lack of affordable health care, lack of social safety net (and what we have being torn down). Not to mention global issues like geo-politics and climate change. I believe that for young people, the good ol' Americanism about working hard and making it seems like a joke.
So yeah, I think phones are an issue, but I think this article landed on the easy answer with a bit of a, "Phones bad, young people need to grow up" vibe. The issues facing young people are much bigger, and I don't think higher education is giving them satisfying answers. That said, I understand the frustration. education is hugely important for addressing these big issues and having a motivated critical thinking populace is key as well.
hm, if young people are addicted to their phones, why not take that as seriously as a substance use disorder? i wonder if it would be feasible for a class whose goal was deep textual analysis to begin the semester with a program to wean the attendees off of phones. perhaps such a class might be required as a prerequisite to taking further classes that benefit from sustained attention. it seems cruel to expect young people to be able to manage this on their own when our shared world is pushing this addictive technology on them from childhood.
I've appreciated the shared experiences here, so I'll add my own.
I've definitely witnessed challenges with deep or long-form reading. I vividly remember a scare a while back having a group of highschoolers read a short passage and none of them being able to articulate what it was they just read. It made me realize I lack the language to label this phenomenon, as I was drawn towards describing them as "illiterate" the same as the post here, but I don't think that communicates the issue clearly.
One note that this article doesn't seem to acknowledge is that the weakening of long-term focus and persistence through learning challenges is not limited to poor performers. I think there's a natural association made that "poor attention" correlates with "less intelligence" within a group, thus if a whole generation is showing weaker attention than previous ones, they must be broadly less intelligent. Just based on my experience, I don't believe this to be the case at all. I've seen plenty of extraordinarily bright, hardworking students who share these challenges.
i think these observations fit well with the characterization of tech addition as a disease rather than a personal or moral failing on the part of individuals.