Technology. What used to be once a concept that was unimaginable is now accessible at your fingertips. Much of today’s world revolves around technology. In classrooms students’ entire days are spent on their computers, in the street you cannot go 100 feet without someone bumping into you since their head is buried into their phones, or infant children cannot eat dinner at a restaurant without their parents iPhone propped up against the salt and pepper shakers. The world that we live in today is infected with technology and there does not seem to be any slowing down. Sherry Turkle, a researcher from the world-renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology, uses her book The Empath Diaries to bring to light these issues and argue for change. I feel however that America is too fixated on technology and has become too reliant on it, making it impossible for them to ever learn to live without and in turn the continuation of the dampening of emotions of Americans.
While yes, much of 21st century America is essentially built on this new form of technology, the reliance Americans have on it has caused them to transition from empathetic human beings to mindless drones. This effect is most notably seen in children. In Turkle’s piece, she states, “And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist – that we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathic than they should be for their age and that is seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at a family dinner” (349). In other words, only positive stories of technology are shared because it is those stories that reinforce the idea that technology is a positive in our life when it has created a disconnect between humans and wiped clear the emotions of children. The Oxford dictionary defines empathy as “the ability to understand and share the feelings of another”. These children who live two lives, one in the real world and one behind their screens, are slowly being swallowed by their devices, leaving them emotionless. No longer are kids concerned about one another’s feelings, rather an “every man for himself” mentality has been adopted as the children do not know the difference. The longer that this issue dwells, the bigger it will get, and it will be too late. Change needs to take place but there is no sign of that change occurring any time soon. People still rush to buy the newest iPhones; and families still eat dinner with their big screen television playing in the foreground. For decades now humans have been indoctrinated by the big tech companies so much so that they live in the palm of their hands. Unless action is taken at their end, which financially speaking is not anticipated anytime soon, the cycle will continue, and emotions will be further flushed down the drain.
If you find yourself feeling more at home in the world of screens, The Empathy Diaries by Sherry Turkle offers a point of view worth serious consideration. Have screens taken away our social interaction skills? Turkle reflects on the impact of screens on humans, especially younger generations, and their ability to empathize and engage with others. The memoir argues that excessive immersion in technology takes away parts of ourselves that we take for granted. Screens replace deep face-to-face interactions with surface level conversations.
Turkle writes, “It all adds up to a flight from conversation – at least from conversation that is open-ended and spontaneous, conversation in which we play with ideas, in which we allow ourselves to be fully present and vulnerable. Yet these are the conversations in which the creative collaborations of education and business thrive.”(p. 344 pg. 5) To put it another way, she describes that the lack of open-ended and spontaneous conversations have a huge impact on areas such as education and business, that depend on creativity and free flowing, unfiltered, and screen-free communication. These types of conversations encourage collaboration, allowing new ideas to emerge naturally. Through experience, the best collaboration happens through in-person interactions. When ideas bounce off of each other more organically and especially in real-time, I can easily see my team on the same page working in harmony. Ultimately achieving our end goals together. Unfortunately, screen dependency has truly disrupted this idea of in-person harmony, as Turkle describes a “flight from conversation,” we would much rather hide behind our screens in the comfort of only ourselves. Whether it’s a fear to be judged or criticized, or pure laziness, fully present and vulnerable conversations are no one’s priority anymore. During Covid, many became comfortable with work and school at home, due to the flexibility and convenience. This temporary adjustment became a lot of peoples normal ways. When Covid ended, and it was time to return back to in-person ways, people seemed to have forgotten their skills completely. Many also chose to continue on working at home, now that in-person was deemed “optional.” Turkle’s emphasis on vulnerability and empathy really sticks with me. I absolutely agree with those who say these situations are hard and possibly straining, but that only builds our character and helps us grow into the people we are. In today’s world, vulnerability is seen as a privilege to experience from others. I wonder if before screen popularity, this experience was more common.
If you went into your phone settings and looked at your daily screen time, how high is that number compared to how much human-to-human interaction you’ve had today? If that ratio is greatly skewed towards your phone, chances are you’re not alone. Cell phones, and technology in general, have taken up such a large space in our lives and have altered the level of importance that we assign to human interaction, for better or for worse. Sherry Turkle, a social science professor at MIT, takes the stance that technology has a harmful effect on people’s ability to have meaningful conversation and their levels of empathy in her essay titled, “The Empathy Diaries.” Turkle urges the reader to “reclaim conversation” (352) and I believe this is something that is entirely possible, despite the massive role that technology plays in the 21st century. I believe this can be accomplished by strengthening our relationships with ourselves, model the good habits we want to see in others, and calling out this behavior of being “forever elsewhere.”()
When discussing how a sense of self can impact conversation with others, Turkle writes, “In solitude we find ourselves; we prepare ourselves to come to conversation with something that is authentic, ours. When we are secure in ourselves we’re able to listen to others and really hear what they have to say. and in conversation with other people we become better at inner dialogue” (347-348). The idea that Turkle is proposing is the interconnection between one’s relationship with themself and one’s relationships with the people around them. The more comfortable somebody is being on their own, the more they will have to offer in their interactions with others. Once someone is secure in who they are, they are more likely to have open and vulnerable conversations, and also be able to truly listen to others in conversation, because they are not caught up in their own insecurities. I agree with this quote, and I feel that it is a point that few people bring into this conversation about how technology impacts conversation. I have noticed in my own life that when I was younger (around 14/15), I had a very hard time making friends. I would always have my headphones in at school and was either listening to music or on social media, doing anything I could to make sure no one would talk to me because I didn’t know how to carry a conversation. Around my junior year, I realized that this behavior was not healthy, and I started to put my phone down more and opted for less technology-focused hobbies like reading and origami. These hobbies gave me a lot of time to be by myself in silence, and I learned a lot about who I was. This was the first year that I had a solid group of friends, and I was able to be myself and have amazing conversations with them. I was able to break out of my technology-obsessed ways and turn into a secure, productive person, and I did so by focusing on myself and found joy in solitude, away from my phone.
Encouraging genuine conversation is hard, especially when it feels like you’re the only one trying. However, once the expectation of being present and vulnerable is set, the behavior shift is inspiring, as seen when Turkle points to a heartfelt example, “Despite the pull of our technology, we are resilient. For example, in only 5 days at a summer camp that bans all electronic devices, children showed an increased capacity for empathy as measured by their ability to identify the feelings of others by looking at photographs and videos of people’s faces” (348). She also references the fact that they have, “nightly cabin chats” (348), which further shows that not only is the empathy of these children improving, so is their ability and desire to have conversations with each other, despite being essentially strangers.
Humans need technology. Sure, we need it for jobs and medical uses, but those are complex and necessary uses. Unfortunately, however, we need it for more than our jobs, we need it for even the most basic parts of being human. Such as communicating with each other and even feeling happy or fulfilled, because we are all addicted to it. And we can’t seem to find a way to be happy or communicate effectively without it! The bad part is many people have no awareness of this addiction and see nothing wrong with their need to always be stimulated to be happy. In her book The Empathy Diaries, Sherry Turkle addresses just that, humanity’s ever-growing addiction to technology and constant stimulation, as well as the problems it causes. Ultimately, we are constantly seeking things that make us feel better about ourselves or what we are doing, even if it’s unhealthy or self-destructive.
The idea that we have a sort of… confirmation bias towards technology is briefly and indirectly alluded to, as Turkle states: “We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new – our new comforts, our new distractions, our new forms of commerce. And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist” (349). According to Britannica a confirmation bias “results in a person ignoring information that is inconsistent with their beliefs”. Although this definition isn’t exactly what’s going on in the quotation, it still lays a good baseline. For instance, when Turkle says “We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new.” It shows we look for information that supports our beliefs and is consistent with them making us happy. Thus, we ignore the negative stories that make us feel bad. So when we find information that makes us happy, we take it as a sign of how technology is, as stated by Turkle a “proof of progress” We should feel good about using it… justifying our unhealthy desire to constantly be behind our screens, rotting away in the illusion of happiness and fulfillment it brings us. Despite the fact Turkle never directly stated that we go searching for these stories, it can be reasonably inferred that as a human if we find something that brings us joy, we will continue to look for more things that make us happy, just like all the positive stories online.
The introduction of accessible technology was a major turning point in society’s growing lack of empathy. Sherry Turkle discusses in her Essay “The Empathy Diaries,” how technology is destructive to our culture and the ever-growing dangers it possesses. Since the late 20th century, technology and ease of accessing technology have been expanding at a rapid pace, and with that increase, empathy in kids has been going down. When overused or used in incorrect ways, technology damages the way we can communicate with others by destroying our connection to the real world. This technology can be from our phones to our computers and has been damaging our mental connections with others for too long. If things do not change regarding the use of phones and technology with children, future generations will only succumb to the same lack of empathy that today’s children possess.
In-person conversations are necessary for children to have so that they are ready for the real world. In the subheading “They Make Acquaintances, but Their Connections Seem Superficial” when discussing the connections that kids make with others, Turkle argues, “Time in simulation gets children ready for more time in simulation. Time with people teaches children how to be in a relationship, beginning with the ability to have a conversation” (Turkle 346). In this quote, we are told what the effects of high use of technology are. Turkle is saying that when these children are sitting around all day, responding to what a phone is telling them, they are losing that ability to converse with one another. Turkle further brings home this point by stating that “As middle schoolers began spending more time texting, they lost the practice in face-to-face talking” (346). I like what this quote is saying because it shows how this problem has real-world effects on these kids, and it is being very clearly observed by these teachers. These conversations with technology also hurt us when it comes to the responses, they require kids to give them. Turkle talks about how these conversations with computers do not need certain responses, “Real people demand responses to what they are feeling. And not just any response” (346). Turkle is saying that these connections made with technology are not real connections like those with people who require responses to how they are feeling. I like how Turkle puts it with the quote “…computers offer the illusion of companionship without the demand of friendship” (346). This puts into perspective how damaging technology is to the connections we make because if someone treats a computer poorly, they will only translate that behavior into the real world. They see this computer as a companion so therefore they will, since the computer does not require a response to emotions, treat others that way thinking they will not get emotional and if they do, they can’t respond to those stimuli.
In today’s world, our phones, social media, as well as networks are intertwined into our daily lives. Many believe that we rely on technology daily, just like the air we breathe. In The Empathy Diaries by Sherry Turkle, she forces many people to confront their own truth because, despite its complexities, technology has evolved from a simple tool used every now and then, to now a vital lifeline of many lives. This then causes people to shape their own connections with others and even shape their very own identities and survival.
Having in person conversations face to face is the ideal way to truly connect with one another, but technology often gets in the way. Carrying technology on your person all the time can be very distracting, even when there is a brief pause within conversation, or even a stop while driving, this often leads to reaching for the phone. Sherry Turkle touches upon this subject throughout her whole book. She believes that “technology disrupts this virtuous cycle” (page 348) of conversation with one another due to the hold technology has on people nowadays. People do not feel like themselves without having technology because of the dependency they have built on them, and as a result, the quality of connections are suffering. Face to face communication becomes harder to maintain without reaching for a phone, and it has been very noticeable throughout many conversations I have witnessed. The shift with technology does not only impact the way others are able to relate to each other, but it also gets rid of the sense of self since people are always influenced by the world of technology instead of engaging with others who are physically with or around them. She begins to explain a research experiment where people were asked for fifteen minutes, to sit down quietly without a phone or book, to see what they would do. They were also asked at the beginning if they “would consider administering electroshocks to themselves if they became bored” (page 348), and although many said no, and even said that they would not do it no matter what, “after just six minutes alone, a good number of them were doing just that” (page 348). While analyzing these results, it is clear how dependent people are with their technology, and even when they got bored, they would prefer to just chock themselves instead of waiting for the time to be up. This shows how many people today are so accustomed to always having technology within reach that they do not know how to deal with themselves or function without it even if it is just for fifteen minutes.
The world’s relationship with technology and how it affects humans daily shows that we need to find a balance. It is useful to increase many skills and be a tool. However, on the downside, it can cause anxiety, and laziness and make us less aware. Most importantly it restricts us from maturing and having real-life conversations. I and others need to learn to be comfortable with the uncomfortable. This starts with forcing ourselves to lessen technology in our lives. To stay consistent with a balanced life, we need to be aware of its harm and where it draws us away from real life.
In the “The Empathy Diaries” written by Sherry Turkle she introduces her view, “From the early days, I saw that computers offer the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship and then, as the programs got really good, the illusion of friendship without the demands of intimacy. Because, face-to-face, people ask for things computers never do. With people, things go best if you pay close attention and know how to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Real people demand responses to what they are feeling. And not just any response.” (346) In other words, Turkle is trying to make us aware of what technology is affecting in our relationships. She is making a point that there is a big difference between having an in person conversation compared to being online. Humans want intimacy and responses that the computer cannot teach you. While using technology, you do not have to put yourself in anyone’s shoes and feel empathy however that is what a face-to-face conversation demands. Trying to hold a conversation with someone who lacks empathy is personally something I dislike. It feels like you cannot create a real connection with them or understand any of their emotions. Reflecting on Turkle’s writing, a major cause of this is technology. When you are having a face-to-face conversation and the other person keeps checking their phone is super frustrating. A term I was introduced to through Turkle’s writing was “phubbing” which is new to the dictionary and means maintaining eye contact while texting. Even though there is eye contact the conversation still feels short and it’s hard to grasp if you have their full attention. Turkle’s writing challenges us to see what we are losing from technology when we lean too much on it. Personally, it puts it in perspective to see if we are just passing by interactions or truly connecting with people. She helps readers become aware of how we are showing up in conversations. Technology subtly changes the depth of our conversations and our relationships.
Do you check your phone at the dinner table? Engage in “phubbing”? Check your phone immediately when you hear the ring of a notification? Technology consumes the lives of the vast majority of people and is becoming evident that its presence is hurting the nature of face-to-face conversation. “The Empathy Diaries” written by Shelly Turkle, PhD in sociology from Harvard University, explores this recent crisis coined as the “flight from conversation” (344). Through a well-crafted essay, Turkle argues that there is a degradation of genuine conversation in the recent generation that is caused from an increase focus of technological conversation. This lack of in-person conversation has obvious, tangible, negatives effects on youth and their ability to self-reflect and feel empathy towards others. The exigence of this piece stems from Turkle being asked by a middle school dean to meet with faculty regarding concerns of students’ abilities to form friendships, the exigence of this piece. I agree with Turkle’s argument that there is clear flight from conversation that is having detrimental effects on children’s abilities to develop necessary social skills, however it seems as though Turkle’s inherent bias undermines the connective power that a technological conversation can have. In addition, when it comes to her ultimate call to action, the help of older generations is crucial as 21st century readers would be unable “reclaim conversation” due to a lack of realization to the presence of the problem.
Especially to the current generation, in-person interactions are viewed as awkward and uncomfortable, yet Turkle explains that it is the unpredictable nature of an in-person conversation that allows one to develop crucial social skills, such as empathy. Phones have become an outlet to avoid interactions. When sitting in a waiting room, walking past someone on the sidewalk, or waiting for a class to start, it has become one’s initial reaction to glance at their phone aimlessly, in hopes of avoiding eye contact or awkward small talk. When elaborating on this idea of phones being a way to hide from others, Turkle writes:
It all adds up to a flight from conversation—at least from conversation that is open-ended and spontaneous, conversation in which we play with ideas, in which we allow ourselves to be fully present and vulnerable. Yet, these are the conversations where empathy and intimacy flourish and social action gains strength (344).
As Turkle alludes, conversations via technology are easy: you have time to craft every response, you can choose your level of engagement, and they avoid any effort required in real conversation such as eye-contact, reading body language, and generating quick responses. One of Turkle’s teenage interviewees put it best: “‘On computers, if things are unpredictable, it’s in a predictable way’” (346). However, there is a clear danger with being accustomed to this type of communication, we become unable to take part in the in-person counterpart. As Turkle highlighted, if we don’t constantly engage in real conversation and lack ample practice, we become undeveloped in the skills they provide like empathy and intimacy, which results in an inability to foster genuine connections with others.
Technology has allowed society an escape from the real world. Throughout the years, advancements in technology have gotten better and better with every new iPhone or rocket ship. Most people nowadays are always on their, whether they’re texting their family or sending a Snapchat to a friend, or even walking into someone while doing so. This idea of people being unobservant to the world around them is introduced by Sherry Turkle in her essay “The Empathy Diaries.” Turkle establishes the argument that technology has driven people to converse less in person, which ultimately causes people to be less empathetic to one another. The societal pressures of technology on to the younger generation has caused a lack of conversation and empathy, while society continues to ignore the damage it has done.
Growing up these days is different than what the older generations experienced, and this can be explained through the access to technology. Children can easily ask their parents for the newest iPhone, and it is considered “normal.” This early attraction to screens has caused this younger generation to resort to talking to people online rather than in person. Whenever I babysit kids and they see my phone, I am unable to pursue a conversation for another hour because all they want to do is play games. As these kids grow up, they continue to rely on phones and exploring the internet and finding ways to avoid interacting with the real world. Turkle makes the point that “Many of the things we all struggle with in love and work can be helped by conversation. Without conversation, studies show that we are less empathetic, less connected, less creative and fulfilled. We are diminished, in retreat. But to generations that grew up using their phones to text and message, these studies may be describing losses they don’t feel. They didn’t grow up with a lot of face-to-face talk” (350). Older generations have lived many more years than the kids of this generation, and they often find it hard to hold conversations with them. Turkle points out that because children have access to technology, they do not view it as a negative, rather they want to learn more. I was raised in a household with very few electronic devices laying around, so I respected the idea of having true conversations and listening to what other people have to say. Whenever I converse with an adult, they always compliment my ability to listen and hold eye contact, and it is sad that most people cannot do that nowadays. The lack of in person conversation that occurs in today’s world continues to be unspoken about, but sending a quick text will fix everything.
Sherry Turkle’s essay, The Empath Diaries, is a work about how our relationship with technology has begun to affect our communication with each other and ourselves. Through her experience and conversations with teachers and parents she brings to us the topic of how the internet has begun to stunt children’s growth of empathy and has disconnected us from society. While I believe that the internet has negatively affected us and children in how we interact in society I also believe that the internet has also handed us the ability to connect with a diverse group of people all over the world. Access to the internet can be a great tool for being able to put yourself in other people’s shoes and learn of other’s experiences that you may not be able to with solely conversing with people in your general vicinity.
As Turkle has pointed out in her essay there are numerous negatives that come from the internet mainly relating to children. While interviewing teachers from Holbrooke middle school she came to find out that many of the kids are struggling with empathy. One teacher noted an encounter she had with a middle schooler, “She couldn’t read the signals that the other student was hurt. These kids aren’t cruel. But they aren’t emotionally developed.” (345). The teacher is genuinely worried about their students based off of this comment. The little girl had excluded another child from playing with her and she was unable to recognize that the girl she excluded was upset; not because she enjoyed hurting the little girl but because she genuinely did not understand what she was doing was wrong. Turkle later goes on to relate this behavior to the fact that with the introduction of technology children have begun to understand each other less and less. They aren’t listening and relating as deeply as kids have in the past. The lack of empathy comes from a lack of personal interactions. With this I can agree, kids 12 and younger having access to the internet the way they do mainly in the form of iPhones is negatively affecting them in various ways. You can see the path that leads to children being emotionally stunted starting with being introduced to the internet. This lack of connection that children developed in middle school from the overuse and early access to phones will end up carrying over to their teenage and adult lives.
A conversation is when two or more people exchange words on their thoughts, feelings or even ideas. I somewhat agree with Turkle’s idea of a conversation. I think that being able to have a conversation is very important. Like it says “Conversation helps students build narratives.” (347). But the part that I disagree on is when Turkle states that “because of technology people lack empathy”. Humans show empathy when they show compassion to someone else, and helping others. It holds value on the human experience because when you tend to do those things it really helps express to others the type of person you are towards others. And not only that I tend to believe that technology can help spark up conversation. I don’t completely disagree with Turkle about some people lacking empathy due to overuse of technology but like I said before there is a positive and negative to that statement. A good example of someone using technology to start up a conversation is like when you see someone’s post on social media and you end up seeing them later that day and bring up a conversation on that post. It’s still important that people understand how to conversate with others because if you avoid talking to people, it can leave you feeling really isolated and lonely. Over time, it might mess with your mental health, making stress or anxiety worse. You could miss out on chances to learn new things or connect with others, and problems might pile up because you’re not talking things out. It also makes it harder to understand and manage your own feelings, and the feelings of others. You might start feeling frustrated and your worldview might shrink because you’re not hearing other perspectives. I do think age factors into this whole turkles message on technology. I believe that once you hit a certain age you understand perspective on balancing these two things. You look at it more as a beneficial tool to communicate with others. With the maturity of getting older you learn to value in depth face to face conversations. With all that being said I do feel like getting into technology too young will affect your socializing skills and make things a little harder to understand in the journey of life.
Technology is something that I have known for a good half of my life. Nearly everywhere I look, I see it, from grocery stores to my home and even in my schools. It is pretty hard to ignore the abundance of technology around every corner in our daily lives. It does a lot for us as well, as we have relied on technology to save many of our problems. However, it seems to also be causing a lot of new problems, specifically in terms of social problems. Sherry Turkle is a joint doctorate holder of sociology and personality psychology from Harvard, is a professor of the Social Studies of Science and Technology and the director of the initiative on Technology and self at M.I.T. She has written ten books, all centered around this idea of technology and the self. The essay in question here is an excerpt from one of her books, The Empathy Diaries: A Memoir (2021). In this excerpt, Turkle describes the effect technology has had on people of all age’s ability to properly communicate with each other, as we seem to recede from the real world and rely on a release from it within our screens. However, I believe what she fails to realize is that the effects of technology are more of a gray area than simply black and white.
In one section of her essay, Turkle warns, “We begin to think of ourselves as a tribe of one, loyal to our own party. We check our messages during a quiet moment or when the pull of the online world simply feels irresistible. Even children text each other rather than talk face-to-face with friends – or, for that matter, rather than daydream, where they can take time alone with their thoughts (344, paragraph 4).” In other words, with the increasing use of technology, it continues to further us away from one another and hampers the ability for children and adults to ever gain true connections with one another. It is true that as of right now, technology does indeed have a grasp on people’s attention spans and does lead to them using technology as a way of escaping the moment, and oftentimes it can be considered an addiction, and even can turn us into solitary people. Albeit, I believe saying children lose the ability to daydream altogether just due to a few screens is a little dramatic. It is almost hard coded into young children to be creative and imaginative. A screen does not stop them from doing that, it just alters the ways in which they outwardly express that creativity. However, one point she does talk about is the fact that “children text each other rather than talk face-to-face with friends” is something that I believe we can see not only in our children, but in ourselves. I cannot count the number of times someone who is maybe in the room next to me or close by has decided to text me a question rather than walk over to me and ask it. This reliance on technology to lead conversations is a concerning development and that is something I believe we as a society should truly be focused on understanding.
I’ve always seen the classroom as a place of information highways, in one direction a person who is excited and knowledgeable on a certain topic will lean into an hour and a half of questions and critical thinking debate points. In the other direction, mostly blank stares at a projector screen, tired eyes, and the frantic clicking of keyboards trying to compress an entire chapter’s worth of short-handed notes into a couple pages of blocked and numbered information. One-way is crowded and traffic jam-like, the other is easy cruising by going 55 in the middle lane. It should be an appreciated attempt that most professors take when it comes to teaching on a topic and their time being eating away, trying to bring students into the world that they have been involved in for most of their lives, especially in the STEM fields. This is where the interactions and conversations should be the most crucial part to the outcome of any work, where learning new narratives and communicating are at peak form.
This topic of conversation has been thrown around a lot lately, and in Sherry Turkle’s article, she brings up a phrase from a mentor that I found somewhat puzzling. “The talking trades” (346). In one way, “talking trades” could be taken as someone who is being paid to for the spread of their information: a professor, a lawyer, or a psychiatrist. You absolutely should be a qualified and knowledgeable “talker” in one of these professions. But, what about other scenarios, why is it that communication is a fundamental aspect to nearly every profession we have, yet so many people do not apply their skills in that way? Turkle continues to mention that trust has a major playing factor in this, stating that “after trust has been established, when a researcher’s notebook has been closed, when people who only a few minutes earlier had been ‘participants’ in you ‘your study’ realize that there is something in this for them. Your questions become their questions as all. A conversation begins” (346-7). I find that very intriguing that only when something pulls a person into a topic, then and only then will they be at full, or mostly at full, attention within the communication. It’s almost as if people think they might not have what it takes to be apart of a different classification or group just because they may not be directly involved in the first part of the action. Maybe they haven’t learned enough about feeling comfortable in their own shoes when talking about certain ideas. But Turkle wraps that idea around the leverage that the professor holds. She talks about professors “being able to help students learn to ask questions and be dissatisfied with easy answers” (347). There most certainly needs to be more conversation about conversating within the classroom, but where does it begin? Is it all on the professor, or do the students need to be leading the charge?
13 thoughts on “JORUNAL # 6”
Technology. What used to be once a concept that was unimaginable is now accessible at your fingertips. Much of today’s world revolves around technology. In classrooms students’ entire days are spent on their computers, in the street you cannot go 100 feet without someone bumping into you since their head is buried into their phones, or infant children cannot eat dinner at a restaurant without their parents iPhone propped up against the salt and pepper shakers. The world that we live in today is infected with technology and there does not seem to be any slowing down. Sherry Turkle, a researcher from the world-renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology, uses her book The Empath Diaries to bring to light these issues and argue for change. I feel however that America is too fixated on technology and has become too reliant on it, making it impossible for them to ever learn to live without and in turn the continuation of the dampening of emotions of Americans.
While yes, much of 21st century America is essentially built on this new form of technology, the reliance Americans have on it has caused them to transition from empathetic human beings to mindless drones. This effect is most notably seen in children. In Turkle’s piece, she states, “And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist – that we are somehow more lonely than before, that our children are less empathic than they should be for their age and that is seems nearly impossible to have an uninterrupted conversation at a family dinner” (349). In other words, only positive stories of technology are shared because it is those stories that reinforce the idea that technology is a positive in our life when it has created a disconnect between humans and wiped clear the emotions of children. The Oxford dictionary defines empathy as “the ability to understand and share the feelings of another”. These children who live two lives, one in the real world and one behind their screens, are slowly being swallowed by their devices, leaving them emotionless. No longer are kids concerned about one another’s feelings, rather an “every man for himself” mentality has been adopted as the children do not know the difference. The longer that this issue dwells, the bigger it will get, and it will be too late. Change needs to take place but there is no sign of that change occurring any time soon. People still rush to buy the newest iPhones; and families still eat dinner with their big screen television playing in the foreground. For decades now humans have been indoctrinated by the big tech companies so much so that they live in the palm of their hands. Unless action is taken at their end, which financially speaking is not anticipated anytime soon, the cycle will continue, and emotions will be further flushed down the drain.
If you find yourself feeling more at home in the world of screens, The Empathy Diaries by Sherry Turkle offers a point of view worth serious consideration. Have screens taken away our social interaction skills? Turkle reflects on the impact of screens on humans, especially younger generations, and their ability to empathize and engage with others. The memoir argues that excessive immersion in technology takes away parts of ourselves that we take for granted. Screens replace deep face-to-face interactions with surface level conversations.
Turkle writes, “It all adds up to a flight from conversation – at least from conversation that is open-ended and spontaneous, conversation in which we play with ideas, in which we allow ourselves to be fully present and vulnerable. Yet these are the conversations in which the creative collaborations of education and business thrive.”(p. 344 pg. 5) To put it another way, she describes that the lack of open-ended and spontaneous conversations have a huge impact on areas such as education and business, that depend on creativity and free flowing, unfiltered, and screen-free communication. These types of conversations encourage collaboration, allowing new ideas to emerge naturally. Through experience, the best collaboration happens through in-person interactions. When ideas bounce off of each other more organically and especially in real-time, I can easily see my team on the same page working in harmony. Ultimately achieving our end goals together. Unfortunately, screen dependency has truly disrupted this idea of in-person harmony, as Turkle describes a “flight from conversation,” we would much rather hide behind our screens in the comfort of only ourselves. Whether it’s a fear to be judged or criticized, or pure laziness, fully present and vulnerable conversations are no one’s priority anymore. During Covid, many became comfortable with work and school at home, due to the flexibility and convenience. This temporary adjustment became a lot of peoples normal ways. When Covid ended, and it was time to return back to in-person ways, people seemed to have forgotten their skills completely. Many also chose to continue on working at home, now that in-person was deemed “optional.” Turkle’s emphasis on vulnerability and empathy really sticks with me. I absolutely agree with those who say these situations are hard and possibly straining, but that only builds our character and helps us grow into the people we are. In today’s world, vulnerability is seen as a privilege to experience from others. I wonder if before screen popularity, this experience was more common.
If you went into your phone settings and looked at your daily screen time, how high is that number compared to how much human-to-human interaction you’ve had today? If that ratio is greatly skewed towards your phone, chances are you’re not alone. Cell phones, and technology in general, have taken up such a large space in our lives and have altered the level of importance that we assign to human interaction, for better or for worse. Sherry Turkle, a social science professor at MIT, takes the stance that technology has a harmful effect on people’s ability to have meaningful conversation and their levels of empathy in her essay titled, “The Empathy Diaries.” Turkle urges the reader to “reclaim conversation” (352) and I believe this is something that is entirely possible, despite the massive role that technology plays in the 21st century. I believe this can be accomplished by strengthening our relationships with ourselves, model the good habits we want to see in others, and calling out this behavior of being “forever elsewhere.”()
When discussing how a sense of self can impact conversation with others, Turkle writes, “In solitude we find ourselves; we prepare ourselves to come to conversation with something that is authentic, ours. When we are secure in ourselves we’re able to listen to others and really hear what they have to say. and in conversation with other people we become better at inner dialogue” (347-348). The idea that Turkle is proposing is the interconnection between one’s relationship with themself and one’s relationships with the people around them. The more comfortable somebody is being on their own, the more they will have to offer in their interactions with others. Once someone is secure in who they are, they are more likely to have open and vulnerable conversations, and also be able to truly listen to others in conversation, because they are not caught up in their own insecurities. I agree with this quote, and I feel that it is a point that few people bring into this conversation about how technology impacts conversation. I have noticed in my own life that when I was younger (around 14/15), I had a very hard time making friends. I would always have my headphones in at school and was either listening to music or on social media, doing anything I could to make sure no one would talk to me because I didn’t know how to carry a conversation. Around my junior year, I realized that this behavior was not healthy, and I started to put my phone down more and opted for less technology-focused hobbies like reading and origami. These hobbies gave me a lot of time to be by myself in silence, and I learned a lot about who I was. This was the first year that I had a solid group of friends, and I was able to be myself and have amazing conversations with them. I was able to break out of my technology-obsessed ways and turn into a secure, productive person, and I did so by focusing on myself and found joy in solitude, away from my phone.
Encouraging genuine conversation is hard, especially when it feels like you’re the only one trying. However, once the expectation of being present and vulnerable is set, the behavior shift is inspiring, as seen when Turkle points to a heartfelt example, “Despite the pull of our technology, we are resilient. For example, in only 5 days at a summer camp that bans all electronic devices, children showed an increased capacity for empathy as measured by their ability to identify the feelings of others by looking at photographs and videos of people’s faces” (348). She also references the fact that they have, “nightly cabin chats” (348), which further shows that not only is the empathy of these children improving, so is their ability and desire to have conversations with each other, despite being essentially strangers.
Humans need technology. Sure, we need it for jobs and medical uses, but those are complex and necessary uses. Unfortunately, however, we need it for more than our jobs, we need it for even the most basic parts of being human. Such as communicating with each other and even feeling happy or fulfilled, because we are all addicted to it. And we can’t seem to find a way to be happy or communicate effectively without it! The bad part is many people have no awareness of this addiction and see nothing wrong with their need to always be stimulated to be happy. In her book The Empathy Diaries, Sherry Turkle addresses just that, humanity’s ever-growing addiction to technology and constant stimulation, as well as the problems it causes. Ultimately, we are constantly seeking things that make us feel better about ourselves or what we are doing, even if it’s unhealthy or self-destructive.
The idea that we have a sort of… confirmation bias towards technology is briefly and indirectly alluded to, as Turkle states: “We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new – our new comforts, our new distractions, our new forms of commerce. And we like to hear them because if these are the only stories that matter, then we don’t have to attend to other feelings that persist” (349). According to Britannica a confirmation bias “results in a person ignoring information that is inconsistent with their beliefs”. Although this definition isn’t exactly what’s going on in the quotation, it still lays a good baseline. For instance, when Turkle says “We like to hear these positive stories because they do not discourage us in our pursuit of the new.” It shows we look for information that supports our beliefs and is consistent with them making us happy. Thus, we ignore the negative stories that make us feel bad. So when we find information that makes us happy, we take it as a sign of how technology is, as stated by Turkle a “proof of progress” We should feel good about using it… justifying our unhealthy desire to constantly be behind our screens, rotting away in the illusion of happiness and fulfillment it brings us. Despite the fact Turkle never directly stated that we go searching for these stories, it can be reasonably inferred that as a human if we find something that brings us joy, we will continue to look for more things that make us happy, just like all the positive stories online.
The introduction of accessible technology was a major turning point in society’s growing lack of empathy. Sherry Turkle discusses in her Essay “The Empathy Diaries,” how technology is destructive to our culture and the ever-growing dangers it possesses. Since the late 20th century, technology and ease of accessing technology have been expanding at a rapid pace, and with that increase, empathy in kids has been going down. When overused or used in incorrect ways, technology damages the way we can communicate with others by destroying our connection to the real world. This technology can be from our phones to our computers and has been damaging our mental connections with others for too long. If things do not change regarding the use of phones and technology with children, future generations will only succumb to the same lack of empathy that today’s children possess.
In-person conversations are necessary for children to have so that they are ready for the real world. In the subheading “They Make Acquaintances, but Their Connections Seem Superficial” when discussing the connections that kids make with others, Turkle argues, “Time in simulation gets children ready for more time in simulation. Time with people teaches children how to be in a relationship, beginning with the ability to have a conversation” (Turkle 346). In this quote, we are told what the effects of high use of technology are. Turkle is saying that when these children are sitting around all day, responding to what a phone is telling them, they are losing that ability to converse with one another. Turkle further brings home this point by stating that “As middle schoolers began spending more time texting, they lost the practice in face-to-face talking” (346). I like what this quote is saying because it shows how this problem has real-world effects on these kids, and it is being very clearly observed by these teachers. These conversations with technology also hurt us when it comes to the responses, they require kids to give them. Turkle talks about how these conversations with computers do not need certain responses, “Real people demand responses to what they are feeling. And not just any response” (346). Turkle is saying that these connections made with technology are not real connections like those with people who require responses to how they are feeling. I like how Turkle puts it with the quote “…computers offer the illusion of companionship without the demand of friendship” (346). This puts into perspective how damaging technology is to the connections we make because if someone treats a computer poorly, they will only translate that behavior into the real world. They see this computer as a companion so therefore they will, since the computer does not require a response to emotions, treat others that way thinking they will not get emotional and if they do, they can’t respond to those stimuli.
In today’s world, our phones, social media, as well as networks are intertwined into our daily lives. Many believe that we rely on technology daily, just like the air we breathe. In The Empathy Diaries by Sherry Turkle, she forces many people to confront their own truth because, despite its complexities, technology has evolved from a simple tool used every now and then, to now a vital lifeline of many lives. This then causes people to shape their own connections with others and even shape their very own identities and survival.
Having in person conversations face to face is the ideal way to truly connect with one another, but technology often gets in the way. Carrying technology on your person all the time can be very distracting, even when there is a brief pause within conversation, or even a stop while driving, this often leads to reaching for the phone. Sherry Turkle touches upon this subject throughout her whole book. She believes that “technology disrupts this virtuous cycle” (page 348) of conversation with one another due to the hold technology has on people nowadays. People do not feel like themselves without having technology because of the dependency they have built on them, and as a result, the quality of connections are suffering. Face to face communication becomes harder to maintain without reaching for a phone, and it has been very noticeable throughout many conversations I have witnessed. The shift with technology does not only impact the way others are able to relate to each other, but it also gets rid of the sense of self since people are always influenced by the world of technology instead of engaging with others who are physically with or around them. She begins to explain a research experiment where people were asked for fifteen minutes, to sit down quietly without a phone or book, to see what they would do. They were also asked at the beginning if they “would consider administering electroshocks to themselves if they became bored” (page 348), and although many said no, and even said that they would not do it no matter what, “after just six minutes alone, a good number of them were doing just that” (page 348). While analyzing these results, it is clear how dependent people are with their technology, and even when they got bored, they would prefer to just chock themselves instead of waiting for the time to be up. This shows how many people today are so accustomed to always having technology within reach that they do not know how to deal with themselves or function without it even if it is just for fifteen minutes.
The world’s relationship with technology and how it affects humans daily shows that we need to find a balance. It is useful to increase many skills and be a tool. However, on the downside, it can cause anxiety, and laziness and make us less aware. Most importantly it restricts us from maturing and having real-life conversations. I and others need to learn to be comfortable with the uncomfortable. This starts with forcing ourselves to lessen technology in our lives. To stay consistent with a balanced life, we need to be aware of its harm and where it draws us away from real life.
In the “The Empathy Diaries” written by Sherry Turkle she introduces her view, “From the early days, I saw that computers offer the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship and then, as the programs got really good, the illusion of friendship without the demands of intimacy. Because, face-to-face, people ask for things computers never do. With people, things go best if you pay close attention and know how to put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Real people demand responses to what they are feeling. And not just any response.” (346) In other words, Turkle is trying to make us aware of what technology is affecting in our relationships. She is making a point that there is a big difference between having an in person conversation compared to being online. Humans want intimacy and responses that the computer cannot teach you. While using technology, you do not have to put yourself in anyone’s shoes and feel empathy however that is what a face-to-face conversation demands. Trying to hold a conversation with someone who lacks empathy is personally something I dislike. It feels like you cannot create a real connection with them or understand any of their emotions. Reflecting on Turkle’s writing, a major cause of this is technology. When you are having a face-to-face conversation and the other person keeps checking their phone is super frustrating. A term I was introduced to through Turkle’s writing was “phubbing” which is new to the dictionary and means maintaining eye contact while texting. Even though there is eye contact the conversation still feels short and it’s hard to grasp if you have their full attention. Turkle’s writing challenges us to see what we are losing from technology when we lean too much on it. Personally, it puts it in perspective to see if we are just passing by interactions or truly connecting with people. She helps readers become aware of how we are showing up in conversations. Technology subtly changes the depth of our conversations and our relationships.
Do you check your phone at the dinner table? Engage in “phubbing”? Check your phone immediately when you hear the ring of a notification? Technology consumes the lives of the vast majority of people and is becoming evident that its presence is hurting the nature of face-to-face conversation. “The Empathy Diaries” written by Shelly Turkle, PhD in sociology from Harvard University, explores this recent crisis coined as the “flight from conversation” (344). Through a well-crafted essay, Turkle argues that there is a degradation of genuine conversation in the recent generation that is caused from an increase focus of technological conversation. This lack of in-person conversation has obvious, tangible, negatives effects on youth and their ability to self-reflect and feel empathy towards others. The exigence of this piece stems from Turkle being asked by a middle school dean to meet with faculty regarding concerns of students’ abilities to form friendships, the exigence of this piece. I agree with Turkle’s argument that there is clear flight from conversation that is having detrimental effects on children’s abilities to develop necessary social skills, however it seems as though Turkle’s inherent bias undermines the connective power that a technological conversation can have. In addition, when it comes to her ultimate call to action, the help of older generations is crucial as 21st century readers would be unable “reclaim conversation” due to a lack of realization to the presence of the problem.
Especially to the current generation, in-person interactions are viewed as awkward and uncomfortable, yet Turkle explains that it is the unpredictable nature of an in-person conversation that allows one to develop crucial social skills, such as empathy. Phones have become an outlet to avoid interactions. When sitting in a waiting room, walking past someone on the sidewalk, or waiting for a class to start, it has become one’s initial reaction to glance at their phone aimlessly, in hopes of avoiding eye contact or awkward small talk. When elaborating on this idea of phones being a way to hide from others, Turkle writes:
It all adds up to a flight from conversation—at least from conversation that is open-ended and spontaneous, conversation in which we play with ideas, in which we allow ourselves to be fully present and vulnerable. Yet, these are the conversations where empathy and intimacy flourish and social action gains strength (344).
As Turkle alludes, conversations via technology are easy: you have time to craft every response, you can choose your level of engagement, and they avoid any effort required in real conversation such as eye-contact, reading body language, and generating quick responses. One of Turkle’s teenage interviewees put it best: “‘On computers, if things are unpredictable, it’s in a predictable way’” (346). However, there is a clear danger with being accustomed to this type of communication, we become unable to take part in the in-person counterpart. As Turkle highlighted, if we don’t constantly engage in real conversation and lack ample practice, we become undeveloped in the skills they provide like empathy and intimacy, which results in an inability to foster genuine connections with others.
Technology has allowed society an escape from the real world. Throughout the years, advancements in technology have gotten better and better with every new iPhone or rocket ship. Most people nowadays are always on their, whether they’re texting their family or sending a Snapchat to a friend, or even walking into someone while doing so. This idea of people being unobservant to the world around them is introduced by Sherry Turkle in her essay “The Empathy Diaries.” Turkle establishes the argument that technology has driven people to converse less in person, which ultimately causes people to be less empathetic to one another. The societal pressures of technology on to the younger generation has caused a lack of conversation and empathy, while society continues to ignore the damage it has done.
Growing up these days is different than what the older generations experienced, and this can be explained through the access to technology. Children can easily ask their parents for the newest iPhone, and it is considered “normal.” This early attraction to screens has caused this younger generation to resort to talking to people online rather than in person. Whenever I babysit kids and they see my phone, I am unable to pursue a conversation for another hour because all they want to do is play games. As these kids grow up, they continue to rely on phones and exploring the internet and finding ways to avoid interacting with the real world. Turkle makes the point that “Many of the things we all struggle with in love and work can be helped by conversation. Without conversation, studies show that we are less empathetic, less connected, less creative and fulfilled. We are diminished, in retreat. But to generations that grew up using their phones to text and message, these studies may be describing losses they don’t feel. They didn’t grow up with a lot of face-to-face talk” (350). Older generations have lived many more years than the kids of this generation, and they often find it hard to hold conversations with them. Turkle points out that because children have access to technology, they do not view it as a negative, rather they want to learn more. I was raised in a household with very few electronic devices laying around, so I respected the idea of having true conversations and listening to what other people have to say. Whenever I converse with an adult, they always compliment my ability to listen and hold eye contact, and it is sad that most people cannot do that nowadays. The lack of in person conversation that occurs in today’s world continues to be unspoken about, but sending a quick text will fix everything.
Sherry Turkle’s essay, The Empath Diaries, is a work about how our relationship with technology has begun to affect our communication with each other and ourselves. Through her experience and conversations with teachers and parents she brings to us the topic of how the internet has begun to stunt children’s growth of empathy and has disconnected us from society. While I believe that the internet has negatively affected us and children in how we interact in society I also believe that the internet has also handed us the ability to connect with a diverse group of people all over the world. Access to the internet can be a great tool for being able to put yourself in other people’s shoes and learn of other’s experiences that you may not be able to with solely conversing with people in your general vicinity.
As Turkle has pointed out in her essay there are numerous negatives that come from the internet mainly relating to children. While interviewing teachers from Holbrooke middle school she came to find out that many of the kids are struggling with empathy. One teacher noted an encounter she had with a middle schooler, “She couldn’t read the signals that the other student was hurt. These kids aren’t cruel. But they aren’t emotionally developed.” (345). The teacher is genuinely worried about their students based off of this comment. The little girl had excluded another child from playing with her and she was unable to recognize that the girl she excluded was upset; not because she enjoyed hurting the little girl but because she genuinely did not understand what she was doing was wrong. Turkle later goes on to relate this behavior to the fact that with the introduction of technology children have begun to understand each other less and less. They aren’t listening and relating as deeply as kids have in the past. The lack of empathy comes from a lack of personal interactions. With this I can agree, kids 12 and younger having access to the internet the way they do mainly in the form of iPhones is negatively affecting them in various ways. You can see the path that leads to children being emotionally stunted starting with being introduced to the internet. This lack of connection that children developed in middle school from the overuse and early access to phones will end up carrying over to their teenage and adult lives.
A conversation is when two or more people exchange words on their thoughts, feelings or even ideas. I somewhat agree with Turkle’s idea of a conversation. I think that being able to have a conversation is very important. Like it says “Conversation helps students build narratives.” (347). But the part that I disagree on is when Turkle states that “because of technology people lack empathy”. Humans show empathy when they show compassion to someone else, and helping others. It holds value on the human experience because when you tend to do those things it really helps express to others the type of person you are towards others. And not only that I tend to believe that technology can help spark up conversation. I don’t completely disagree with Turkle about some people lacking empathy due to overuse of technology but like I said before there is a positive and negative to that statement. A good example of someone using technology to start up a conversation is like when you see someone’s post on social media and you end up seeing them later that day and bring up a conversation on that post. It’s still important that people understand how to conversate with others because if you avoid talking to people, it can leave you feeling really isolated and lonely. Over time, it might mess with your mental health, making stress or anxiety worse. You could miss out on chances to learn new things or connect with others, and problems might pile up because you’re not talking things out. It also makes it harder to understand and manage your own feelings, and the feelings of others. You might start feeling frustrated and your worldview might shrink because you’re not hearing other perspectives. I do think age factors into this whole turkles message on technology. I believe that once you hit a certain age you understand perspective on balancing these two things. You look at it more as a beneficial tool to communicate with others. With the maturity of getting older you learn to value in depth face to face conversations. With all that being said I do feel like getting into technology too young will affect your socializing skills and make things a little harder to understand in the journey of life.
Technology is something that I have known for a good half of my life. Nearly everywhere I look, I see it, from grocery stores to my home and even in my schools. It is pretty hard to ignore the abundance of technology around every corner in our daily lives. It does a lot for us as well, as we have relied on technology to save many of our problems. However, it seems to also be causing a lot of new problems, specifically in terms of social problems. Sherry Turkle is a joint doctorate holder of sociology and personality psychology from Harvard, is a professor of the Social Studies of Science and Technology and the director of the initiative on Technology and self at M.I.T. She has written ten books, all centered around this idea of technology and the self. The essay in question here is an excerpt from one of her books, The Empathy Diaries: A Memoir (2021). In this excerpt, Turkle describes the effect technology has had on people of all age’s ability to properly communicate with each other, as we seem to recede from the real world and rely on a release from it within our screens. However, I believe what she fails to realize is that the effects of technology are more of a gray area than simply black and white.
In one section of her essay, Turkle warns, “We begin to think of ourselves as a tribe of one, loyal to our own party. We check our messages during a quiet moment or when the pull of the online world simply feels irresistible. Even children text each other rather than talk face-to-face with friends – or, for that matter, rather than daydream, where they can take time alone with their thoughts (344, paragraph 4).” In other words, with the increasing use of technology, it continues to further us away from one another and hampers the ability for children and adults to ever gain true connections with one another. It is true that as of right now, technology does indeed have a grasp on people’s attention spans and does lead to them using technology as a way of escaping the moment, and oftentimes it can be considered an addiction, and even can turn us into solitary people. Albeit, I believe saying children lose the ability to daydream altogether just due to a few screens is a little dramatic. It is almost hard coded into young children to be creative and imaginative. A screen does not stop them from doing that, it just alters the ways in which they outwardly express that creativity. However, one point she does talk about is the fact that “children text each other rather than talk face-to-face with friends” is something that I believe we can see not only in our children, but in ourselves. I cannot count the number of times someone who is maybe in the room next to me or close by has decided to text me a question rather than walk over to me and ask it. This reliance on technology to lead conversations is a concerning development and that is something I believe we as a society should truly be focused on understanding.
I’ve always seen the classroom as a place of information highways, in one direction a person who is excited and knowledgeable on a certain topic will lean into an hour and a half of questions and critical thinking debate points. In the other direction, mostly blank stares at a projector screen, tired eyes, and the frantic clicking of keyboards trying to compress an entire chapter’s worth of short-handed notes into a couple pages of blocked and numbered information. One-way is crowded and traffic jam-like, the other is easy cruising by going 55 in the middle lane. It should be an appreciated attempt that most professors take when it comes to teaching on a topic and their time being eating away, trying to bring students into the world that they have been involved in for most of their lives, especially in the STEM fields. This is where the interactions and conversations should be the most crucial part to the outcome of any work, where learning new narratives and communicating are at peak form.
This topic of conversation has been thrown around a lot lately, and in Sherry Turkle’s article, she brings up a phrase from a mentor that I found somewhat puzzling. “The talking trades” (346). In one way, “talking trades” could be taken as someone who is being paid to for the spread of their information: a professor, a lawyer, or a psychiatrist. You absolutely should be a qualified and knowledgeable “talker” in one of these professions. But, what about other scenarios, why is it that communication is a fundamental aspect to nearly every profession we have, yet so many people do not apply their skills in that way? Turkle continues to mention that trust has a major playing factor in this, stating that “after trust has been established, when a researcher’s notebook has been closed, when people who only a few minutes earlier had been ‘participants’ in you ‘your study’ realize that there is something in this for them. Your questions become their questions as all. A conversation begins” (346-7). I find that very intriguing that only when something pulls a person into a topic, then and only then will they be at full, or mostly at full, attention within the communication. It’s almost as if people think they might not have what it takes to be apart of a different classification or group just because they may not be directly involved in the first part of the action. Maybe they haven’t learned enough about feeling comfortable in their own shoes when talking about certain ideas. But Turkle wraps that idea around the leverage that the professor holds. She talks about professors “being able to help students learn to ask questions and be dissatisfied with easy answers” (347). There most certainly needs to be more conversation about conversating within the classroom, but where does it begin? Is it all on the professor, or do the students need to be leading the charge?