Reviews.
Having written just a few, I rarely write blogs concerning the specific content of various media.
I prefer attempting to come up with my own ideas rather than spending a lot of time critiquing others’ ideas. If I am a critic at all it is of culture-at-large.
However, regarding the current book I have just completed, The New Childhood: Raising Kids to Thrive in a Connected World, by Temple University Professor Jordan Shapiro, I cannot help myself. Shapiro has an amazing ability to view the world through an informed lens of human history as opposed to confining his understanding of the world through our current cultural context alone.
When one views the world historically, and I do mean from the beginning of human history as we know it, it becomes apparent our species practices a very consistent behavioral pattern concerning, well, just about everything.
This book is a history, parenting, philosophy, technology, sociology and psychology book rolled up into one cohesive outlook, critically analyzing our current relationship with technology from multiple points of access.
I have typically understood our culture’s relationship with technology through the lens of the dystopian/utopian continuum: that is, there are those who either believe the internet, and technology in general, are leading us onto a path of great dystopian destruction or to a wonderful utopian place of enlightenment and progress…with every view in between these two extremes.
No more.
Shapiro has challenged my thinking in this regard. Yes, both dystopian and utopian views exist, yet I would create a new category for him, perhaps called, a “realist-ian” or better yet, a “justdealwithit-ian.” He has convinced me that this dichotomy is misguided and unhelpful in 2019.
Shapiro looks at human history and examines the invention of the child’s playground sandbox, family dinners, the family hearth, television, clockwork mechanics, the Dewey Decimal system, even penmanship, among other overlooked cultural phenomenon, to assist us in better understanding the human condition and the monumental change technology is having upon contemporary global culture.
Just as with every innovation in human history having its fair share of naysayers, it is not long before the “back in my day” crowd slowly dies off and humanity progresses forward without the irritation of the OFD sufferers (not to be confused with prophet-like critics whose warnings are a needed and necessary aspect of moving forward with discretion).
Engaging in the dystopian/utopian discussion is akin to still giving those who refuse to get a car (“my horse works just fine, thank you very much, the world is too damn fast anyway”), or a computer (“nothing wrong with my Royal typewriter”) or even a phone (“if someone wants to talk to me they can put forward the effort to get on their damn horse and knock on my door”) some credence and validity, as if they possess reasonable objections to these contemporary conveniences.
In other words, “Dystopians, (in my richest Italian accent) get over it already! It’s called progress.”
Shapiro examines historical human innovations and details the strangely similar human reactions have been toward such innovations.
“What is it with these mechanical clocks? Was something wrong with the sun dial?”
He has convinced me that blaming the ills of society on a technology is simply misguided. Rather, any negative outcomes we believe a technology may result in, rests in our incorrect and misguided use and application of it.
“Air bags, shmare bags. I would prefer the old fashioned way of enduring accidents. Death.”
Speaking of which, imagine when the automobile became mass produced and we were driving for the first time as a society en masse: it was some time after that when we figured out stop signs would be a really good idea (1915 to be exact), that speed limits needed to be imposed while a universal lighting system consisting of green, yellow and red would really help us apply this new technology most safely and effectively. It took a while for us to figure out that, say, crosswalks and limit lines would be nice…but that took some trial and error as well, perhaps an accident or two, before we got there. These better ways to apply this new technology did not happen overnight.
Like in the application of most technologies, there is a learning curve. (As an aside, whoever thought of the left turn, red light arrow was just a flat-out mad man who should have been kicked out of the traffic meeting).
Therefore, we need to best figure out this internet technology thing as we are still in the infancy stages of its use.
How do we best apply new technologies? What new “stop signs” do we need to employ? How do we invent digital versions of crosswalks and limit lines? Shapiro asks these questions and more.
So, for a good read, I would highly recommend The New Childhood. Like myself, you may find yourself at odds with some of his extreme progressive positions on certain applications of technologies (for example his strong encouragement for his young boys to engage in, what I would deem, excessive video game play), yet his points are very well taken and his message very much needed in an age when there is no turning back.
But be warned, Shapiro can either be viewed as a utopian on steroids, or simply a person who recognizes that there is no putting the cat back in the bag nor the toothpaste back in the tube. Technologically, it is what it is and this is what it shall be until our next great innovation, at which time we will have to figure it out best practices all over again.
Now, enough reviews. I need to come up with some of my own ideas.
In the meantime, you can find the book here, among other places.
Does he mention that progress for the sake of progress is seldom a good idea. Progress is great but progress for it’s own sake?
Hi Georgia! “Progress for the sake of progress” is truly in the eye of the beholder. One of my favorite thinkers (who passed about 10 years ago) is Neal Postman, author of Amusing Ourselves to Death, among some other great books. I would describe Postman as a somewhat “anti-technologist” who would likely be a “progress for the sake of progress” perspective taking person. Interestingly, I watched an interview with him when he was lamenting the technology of cruise control in vehicles, stating it is a worthless technology that has no practical application. Ironically, when I watched that interview I was in the market for a new car with cruise control. Why? I have a very bad lower back and lower leg issues, on my 2 hour commute to Redlands my leg would start seizing up in my then vehicle which did not have cruise control. What Postman viewed as worthless technology, actually made my commute bearable and was a necessity for my health. I understand that now heat seeking drones can find people who are lost in forests and such. I would not suggest that every single piece of new technology has a practical application, yet I would suggest MOST do….and if we do not know what that application may be today, we likely will find one tomorrow. Without a concrete example of a worthless technology (read: progress for progress sake), I would argue that progress moving forward is what will inspire new thought forms and applications. Thanks for the question Georgia 🙂
The way I used to view the progress of technology was only beneficial towards society. Only until about relatively recently have I changed my view towards a more skeptic approach to new technology. Bird scooters are everywhere and because of how new it is, rules and regulations haven’t been created yet specifically made for them. I took a trip to Los Angeles a year ago and see people leave their Birds in doorways, Birds laid down on the sidewalk, and in designated car parking spots, all instances where Birds were not intended to be used. Don’t get me wrong, I love the advancement of technologies like phones or computers. I love the new and improved Motorola Razr as much as the next guy. I just believe before rolling out a new piece of technology, the companies involved should research the possible negatives and set up countermeasures.