Today, communication via technology is the new theme to all of our lives.
We see technology as innovative, benevolent and necessary to a 21st century society.
However, if we take a deeper look at technology, we realize that what might be a boon to society could potentially be a long term problem with unintended side effects.
Take "social networks" for example.
Would it be illogical for me to say that a social network actually has negative social effects? One could, with justification, act immediately and say something along the lines of "Are you kidding me you anti-techno hippy, how can something that can instantly allow you to interact with other people have a negative social effect.
" I'm sure there are a bunch of different ways for me to outline the immediate outburst someone would respond to my claim with, but hopefully you get the idea.
As I said before, humans tend to act before thinking, or they tend to act after only thinking for a minimal amount of time, and not investigate the entire idea.
Sure, the person who made that contentious comment to my claim has great evidence, that one does not even need to think for a second to obtain.
Social networks obviously, as he said, allow us interact with each other instantaneously.
However, I think he might need to look at the type of interaction that a social network advocates, and consequently, the type of interaction it provides a disincentive for.
Last year I went to a fencing camp at Penn State University.
I could go on forever about some of the things I experienced there, some good, most bad, but what I really want to bring up is something that a counselor said.
During a ride on an elevator to the floor of my dorm, he said something that really got my attention.
While talking about the crazy kids that he had to work with, he mentioned how text messaging had hindered people's ability to communicate in person with people.
I remember he was trying to argue this to someone, and immediately when he said it, I said to the person he was arguing with "He's so right.
" Unfortunately, I still agree with him, although I really hope that he is wrong.
What are the deeper implications that arise when the newest mode of communication is soundless, emotionless and lacks the feeling of the company of others? I am no social scientist, but the latter statement, which all must agree is true, definitely does not sit well in my stomach.
A further inquiry must be made on the implications of this "social network.
" To start off, what exactly is a social network? This is a pretty easy definition, as it can be easily exemplified by the following websites: Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.
What do all of these websites have in common though? They connect us.
They have done something that mankind has not been able to do throughout its entire existence.
They allow us to not just communicate with each other like a text message conversation, but they go much further.
To me, these websites that make up the "social network" are like a digital cafe, where we can all enter at any time we please, express ideas and emotions and communicate to an unlimited amount of people.
Twitter, the Facebook "status" and the ability to make posts, "like" posts and comment on them, and videos on YouTube are all ways that the average human being can express himself, like I am doing on this blog.
Certainly the founders of the internet, and the founders of the websites that make the internet such a (most of the time) great place deserve to be lauded.
Yet at what point does the "social" network become detrimental? It is my greatest fear that at one point in society we will live in a world where, like my fencing coach said, we find it difficult to communicate in person with each other.
And even worse, I would hate to see a world in which less people venture outside their homes, and outside their "digital cafes" to meet people and interact.
The real question that now needs to be asked is this: Can the social network we now have truly make the world a place like I just described? I'm beginning to become afraid that it can.
Think about the idea of decreased "real life" interaction.
I know most of us can agree that our technology is almost addictive.
I'm currently taking summer classes at Brown University, and students here love to bring their computers to class.
However, about 50 percent of the time, a student is on the website Facebook when I look at their computers, opposed to typing notes.
I mean, just ask yourself, how often do you think you're on Facebook? The number you come up with might be shocking to you.
You might realize that number is higher than the amount of time you spend with your family during the day, or the amount of time you spend on school work.
The amount of time that we spend fulfilling our urge to communicate through a computer is time we could have spent fulfilling that need with people in real life.
This brings me to my other proposition about what "social networks" could eventually do to society, which is hindering our social skills.
This is probably the hardest thing one can prove, as there is no way for me to determine the aggregate social ability of people influenced by the social network.
Yet hard evidence might not be that important if I can logically deduce what I'm trying to prove.
Human's are learning creatures.
No matter what we're doing, were bound to learn something.
Whether it's realizing not to touch that hot stove because you remember what happened last time or if it's remembering not to talk to women the way you did last time, we are always using knowledge to better our lives.
In terms of being social, the same thing applies.
When we interact with people in real life, we're learning about how to be social, how to express our emotions, how to not piss people off, how to make people happy, etc.
But what happens when a large amount of the time we spend with people is replaced by fonts and letters like the ones right in front of you? And more importantly, how close, if close at all, does this way of communicating provide the same benefits that communicating with people in real life gives.
Although it is not set in stone, it's not hard to reason that hanging out with people less in real life might make it harder for us to act like the social beings we are.
Do we hang out with each other less because of social networks, and if so, does this make it harder to be social? This is a question that really only time will tell.
When my generation, the generation that was youngest when social networks were unveiled to the world, has matured to our later stages of life, and we feel find out that we are less socially active than our parents, I might have been right.