Page 2, paragraph 2. I agree with this sentiment. I believe that we as a society are dealing with a great deficit in attention. Personally, I am painfully self aware of this fact, and yet I am still unable to fully eliminate this habit. In the short term, there are no negative repercussions of mindlessly scrolling from app to app. It gives me the dopamine hits that I want and it feeds into my procrastinating behaviors. However, in the long term, I know that this behavior is only hurting me. It is making me addicted to technology and unable to be focused and productive. This leads to simple tasks, like reading this article, for instance, take twice as long as it should because I am so easily drawn away from the task at hand. I am not alone in this behavior, though. I cannot even begin to count the amount of times I have been studying with friends and at some point we all just end up on our phones.
Page 11, paragraph 3. I have complicated feelings. On one hand, there are clearly upsides to this quick and efficient thinking. It is very productive and can lead to innovative ways to solve problems with maximum efficiency (modern Taylorism). In the age that we live in, this is clearly the best way for our brains to adapt to the inundation of knowledge we are faced with. On the other hand, we must also acknowledge the drawbacks of this adaptation. When tasked with actually having to zero in on an activity, we are slowly becoming more incapable. Try as we might, it is a large task to find a way to organize this distraction. This requires a lot of hard work, and due to a decrease in attention, people are not willing to put in this work. It is much easier to simply conform to what our brains have become, rather than retrain it. Either stance you choose to take, a solution is only achievable if people want to change.
Page 11 paragraph 4
I have complicated feelings in response to Anderson’s argument in this passage. His argument about the “digital natives” provoked many thoughts since it makes you reflect on the strengths and weaknesses about growing up in a world with technology. I do agree that younger generations have gone to develop a different ability to process all the information quickly, and this skill can be valued in the long run. However, I think that the way we can get so much information so fast can weaken our ability to focus deeply. While yes, multitasking can be a good thing to be able to do, it can affect with how you critically think overall. In my own experience, when I use social media for a longer period, it makes it harder to be able to concentrate on longer readings and homework that I need to do. Distraction overall can be unavoidable if one doesn’t do anything to silence the distractions.
Page 3 paragraph 3
I have a more complicated response to this passage since I do agree with Anderson on how technology can be both useful and distracting. I do believe though that we have more control over our response and engagement with technology other than he suggests. Anderson’s perspective in this is though e-mails, which reflects a bigger reality that technology helps and makes communication faster and even more convenient, however it also shows us the endless rescheduling and pieces of conversations. I do see the technological distractions are changing some of life today, but I don’t believe it has complete control over us. Anderson suggests within this paragraph that distraction is overall unavoidable, but I believe that if we can change our habits to work with technology, and not against it as a distraction, its negative impact can be minimized.
Page 5 Paragraph 1
I agree with the ideas in this paragraph about researchers regarding the inefficiency and dangers of multitasking. The evidence is a bit compelling specifically about how our brains are not equipped to handle so much information without loss of efficiency and errors. When I have attempted to multitask it has led to mistakes and reduced productivity. The example about driving while talking on the phone interests me. It clearly shows how multitasking can compromise safety by overloading the cognitive channels. Steering and dialing both require you to do something manual while looking out the windshield and reading a text demand visual attention. I found it interesting that even hands free conversations can be problematic if engaged in the visual channel. This shows us that certain activities shouldn’t be combined due to safety reasons. I also understand that there are situations where people seem to manage multitasking well when they don’t require effort or are routine. Listening to music while doing a chore is possible because they don’t compete for the same cognitive resources. Overall I agree with the core argument that multitasking is inefficient and can be dangerous. However I understand that we need to balance our multitasking of when it’s manageable and when it should be avoided.
Page 10 Paragraph 2
I found the little paragraph about attention being a reflection of one’s character interesting and something I completely agree with. The idea of us focusing our attention reveals more about us than formal things because it doesn’t show the aspects of our daily lives like attention does. If someone dedicates their attention to learning and self improvement it shows commitment to their personal growth. However, allowing attention to unproductive activities harms your personal growth. We need to be mindful of where our attention goes because it can lead to a better or worse life. I agree with the core idea of this paragraph but it is important to know that there are plenty of external influences that influence where our attention goes. For example social media and keeping up with what your friends are doing. Attention is a powerful indicator of who we are and it is so important to find a balance between ourselves and influences.
Page 5 paragraph 1 – I think that what Anderson describes is complicated, although I agree, it’s hard to accept. The idea that Anderson presents is that it’s scientifically impossible to multitask. So far in his writing it’s interesting that it’s all scientific based. “Multitasking is a myth.” Constantly just switching rapidly between the two tasks you think you’re multitasking, every switch you lose mental efficiency, which makes you more likely to make a mistake. There’s separate channels, language, visual, auditory, etc. He then gives an example of driving and talking on the phone, the many dangers associated with that. I think this is complicated because I probably haven’t gone a day without multitasking. Especially as a college student, getting as much done as possible in the least amount of time (hopefully efficiently though), is optimal. I find myself switching between homeworks, as I’m doing now. Multiple tabs open on my phone and computer so I don’t forget, all while working at the library front desk and listening to music.
Page 8 paragraph 5(last) – I agree with the idea Anderson presents; “The problem of attention lies right at the intersection of our willpower and our willpower-sapping technologies.” We know that the key to enhancing our brain power and attention span is less screen time, healthy food, daily movement, meditation, etc, but will we actually do it? As our attention span gets worse, so does our self control with restraining ourselves from our guilty pleasures such as doom scrolling. He then continues to talk about the immense use of “lifehacks” and ways to reduce our multitasking, to ultimately get more done in an efficient way. Examples like habit managing “90 second shower” and note taking techniques “mind mapping” and software shortcuts “how to turn gmail into to-do list”, etc, but of course all of these techniques our found online. Personally I see these ideas and self help strategies all the time on social media, either screenshotting or saving for later, but not always put to use.
I agree with the opinions addressed in this paragraph. I found it extremely interesting, and rather eye opening, especially when the idea of the multiple screens pulled up at a time because frankly, I have so many tabs open the websites names are not even visible, just their icons. I think this idea, among the others discussed in the paragraph, is centrally important to the overall theme of Anderson’s essay as it touches on the direct effects of technology and the different ways one can be distracted. I feel as though this paragraph really furthers the overall concept of Anderson’s argument as it provides relatable, real-world examples of how technology provides distractions in our everyday lives. I think the use of anecdotes provides an alternative route for Anderson to explain his point and provide the reader with a moment of realization (which is in fact what happened to me) which I think would allow for more readers to understand his viewpoint and be more apt to support his claims. I think that it is important to note that Anderson does not necessarily take up a claim in this specific paragraph of his essay, rather he provides the readers with the tools to come to their own conclusions.
Page 11 Paragraph 2
This is the paragraph where Anderson’s claim truly comes to fruition: that technology and distraction can be harnessed by the human mind to be a positive. I find this claim complicated and I cannot say I fully agree with it. Anderson believes that an unfocused mind is worse than a mind that is usually constantly distracted (ADHD). I cannot wrap my head around this concept. On the one hand, I can see why Anderson would make this claim. Skin and bones the concept makes sense. On the other hand, I think that there are just too many confounding factors that make supporting this complicated. I cannot see in what world where having an ADHD mind would be more beneficial than an unwavering mind other than maybe a situation in the arts. As someone who does not have ADHD but does have a pretty active mind, I can attest that an unwavering mind would be far more useful than my running mind in situations such as exams.
Page 2, para 2. – I find this quote very interesting as well as complicated because it brings in the idea of our attention. Over the last few decades and through the advancements in technology, Anderson and Simon both argue that we have a “poverty of attention” due to our constant need to consume new and interesting information. I agree and disagree with that statement because lack of attention varies from person to person. Personally, I do have moments where I struggle to pay attention but that is a result of lack of sleep, doing homework, and many other factors. A part of this statement that I do agree with is that we as a society do lack attention and it is normalized. However, the fascinating part about this is that we need to lack attention in order to complete everything we want to do in our day-to-day lifestyles. Overall, the idea of attention and how we lack it has been commonly accepted regardless of the technologies we have available.
Page 5, para 1. I fully agree with this statement. Multitasking is something people do every day and continue to believe that it helps them accomplish their tasks. Even when we are constantly switching between multiple tasks, we are actually taking more time in between them to switch our focus. When I perform simple tasks that include doing my homework, I tend to take much longer because I am continuously switching classes that require me to use different information. This causes me to mix things up, especially when it comes time to take an exam. Whenever I am driving in the car, I tend to see people on their phones swerving across lanes and almost hitting me. People are constantly in a state of multitasking, and it has become so frequent that it is more impressive to balance five things than two things. Multitasking as a myth is very fascinating to me because even though people use it to help them accomplish tasks “faster” they are only exceeding their brain capacity and not actually retaining helpful information.
Page 5, para 1 AGREE
I agree with what he is saying in this paragraph, he is saying that there are many different channels in which we take up information and that it is difficult to take up multiple forms of the same channel at the same time. This paragraph is interesting to me because it speaks on the point that things that, even though they are auditorily being received, they can paint a picture in your brain and, in turn, impair your ability to perceive the visual stimuli you are receiving.
Page 6, para 5 AGREE
I agree with the sentiment that meditation is good for you. I like how he brings this up in his article on how to deal with distractions. Meditation is a great form of dealing with stress and can build your ability to deal with stress and multi task better. I found it interesting that people who meditate produce 30 times more powerful gamma waves then people who do not meditate.
Passage 1: Page 7, paragraph 1
Complicated – I agree with Gallagher’s beliefs about the productive power of attention, however I sway from her argument when she claims that being easily distracted by phones and other outside sources is completely at fault of the user and not the machine. The internet is becoming ever more distracting: content is meant to be overstimulating, unrelated ads constantly scatter your computer screen as you scroll on a website, and it has become normal to have several tabs active at once. Social media companies purposely manipulate their algorithms to accommodate to their users. They are constantly sending you content they know will distract you in hopes of you engaging with them. The internet is the ultimate antagonist. I agree that a lot of accountability is required by the user to avoid this distraction, however it can become near impossible with the constant instigation that the internet offers.
Passage 2: Page 11, paragraph 5
Agree – I agree that the current generation of so-called “digital natives” has skills that allow them to navigate such an interconnected, technology-engulfed, world that individuals from older generations lack. Digital natives may struggle to concentrate on one task for a long-period of time, however to paraphrase one of Sam Anderson’s main claims, they are very proficient in constantly shifting their attention. This skill has proven to be pretty adaptive in the current age. It allows to seamlessly surf the internet, change their focus from post to post, quickly scan an article, and a plethora of other examples. Older generations are quick to criticize this deterioration of attention in digital natives, yet their own inability to embrace distraction helps explain why they are so technologically challenged. The internet is overwhelming to them and it takes them much longer to complete tasks that seem simple to a member of the current generation. Attention deficit is becoming a crucial adaptation that enhances our ability to maneuver the internet and our constantly-changing technology.
Page 3,Paragraph 3
I agree that technology is both super helpful and, yes, it can be a big distraction. But I think we have more control over how we interact with it than he gives us credit for. Anderson uses emails to show how technology makes communication faster but also causes conversations to get fragmented and reschedules to pile up. I totally get where he’s coming from, but I don’t think technology is the one calling the shots. We have the power to set limits and build habits that help us manage it better, rather than letting it run wild. For instance, if we’re thoughtful about when and how we check our phones or email, we can use those tools to make our lives easier instead of letting them overwhelm us. I think with the right approach, we can really take control and minimize the stress and distractions that come with tech.
Page 10, Paragraph 2
I really liked the part where Anderson talks about how attention reflects our character. It really hit home for me. What we choose to focus on says a lot about who we are. For example, if you’re focused on learning and growing, it shows you’re invested in your personal development. But if you spend your time on distractions, it can hold you back. I totally agree with this idea, but I also think it’s important to remember that there are a lot of things that influence where our attention goes. Social media is a good example or just keeping up with what everyone else is doing(trending), can pull us away from things that really matter. At the end of the day, attention is such a powerful indicator of who we are, and it’s all about finding a balance between what matters to us and all the outside distractions.
Page 5, paragraph 3. I agree. Particularly, the statement that talks about how if office workers are “left uninterrupted, they will most likely interrupt themselves.”. This is true for more than just office workers. For example, while I’m doing homework, I’ll be working just fine, go to look at the time on my phone, and twenty minutes or even sometimes an hour later. I’ll look back up from my phone, still not knowing the time, having made no progress on my work, and go back to my phone because I’ve lost all interest. Most of the time I spend on homework is spent trying to “regain” focus back to my work. I say “regain” because all I do is watch videos until I get bored, which never happens. I wouldn’t have to set aside so much time to do work if the temptation of my phone wasn’t looming over me.
Page 10, paragraph 3. I agree. While “blowing a couple of hours on the internet” may seem like a waste of time to many people, I believe it’s because that’s not what they would choose to do with their time; wasted time is subjective. The time isn’t necessarily wasted if it’s what you choose to focus on. Is the time misused? Perhaps, but if you “followed your attention” there, then at the time, you viewed it as an interest, not a waste. If you had viewed it as a waste, chances are you wouldn’t be doing it. After the fact, you may look back and say, “Wow, I totally wasted all of that time on Instagram instead of on journal 15.” But I wouldn’t say it’s wasted because you were bored from work, so you went on Instagram. You fixed your boredom problem, and that time was put to use fixing a problem; something was accomplished.
On page 2 paragraph 1 Anderson points out that the price we pay for our attention has “changed dramatically”. With this I agree there are so many new and easier ways to get distracted. For example, instead of writing the essay your teacher assigned or the packet of math problems it is easier to just reach for your phone and watch the new show you started or scroll on TikTok endlessly. I know that I especially struggle with focusing on the task at hand rather than turning to my phone or even my bed. Because in the moment watching that show, scrolling on TikTok or even just taking a nap instead usually feels better in the moment than doing my work that can be hard and tiring. And that good feeling in the moment usually trumps the feeling of just getting my work done and finishing. Before digital technology ways to get distracted and sucked into something else weren’t always readily on hand the way they are now and that makes it much more challenging to say no and just focus.
On page 5 paragraph 3 Anderson mentions a study done where the results came out that people who frequently check their emails scored as less intelligent than people on marijuana. I have complicated feelings about this because I feel like there was more context for this supposed study that was taken which could have explained the parameters for the study. Because I don’t believe that someone who checks their email frequently loses intelligence permanently because then half of the world would be too stupid to complete tasks. I don’t doubt that in that specific moment when the intelligence test was taken that the people who frequently check their emails scored lower than those on marijuana in that moment but no longer than when they gave their brain time to rest. Although I do this this statistic is very jarring whether or not the needed context is present. The fact that checking your email takes up so much of your brain power, enough for you to do poorly on in intelligence test makes me worry. And the idea that digital technology alters our brain and tires it like that is a little scary.
11 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 15”
Page 2, paragraph 2. I agree with this sentiment. I believe that we as a society are dealing with a great deficit in attention. Personally, I am painfully self aware of this fact, and yet I am still unable to fully eliminate this habit. In the short term, there are no negative repercussions of mindlessly scrolling from app to app. It gives me the dopamine hits that I want and it feeds into my procrastinating behaviors. However, in the long term, I know that this behavior is only hurting me. It is making me addicted to technology and unable to be focused and productive. This leads to simple tasks, like reading this article, for instance, take twice as long as it should because I am so easily drawn away from the task at hand. I am not alone in this behavior, though. I cannot even begin to count the amount of times I have been studying with friends and at some point we all just end up on our phones.
Page 11, paragraph 3. I have complicated feelings. On one hand, there are clearly upsides to this quick and efficient thinking. It is very productive and can lead to innovative ways to solve problems with maximum efficiency (modern Taylorism). In the age that we live in, this is clearly the best way for our brains to adapt to the inundation of knowledge we are faced with. On the other hand, we must also acknowledge the drawbacks of this adaptation. When tasked with actually having to zero in on an activity, we are slowly becoming more incapable. Try as we might, it is a large task to find a way to organize this distraction. This requires a lot of hard work, and due to a decrease in attention, people are not willing to put in this work. It is much easier to simply conform to what our brains have become, rather than retrain it. Either stance you choose to take, a solution is only achievable if people want to change.
Page 11 paragraph 4
I have complicated feelings in response to Anderson’s argument in this passage. His argument about the “digital natives” provoked many thoughts since it makes you reflect on the strengths and weaknesses about growing up in a world with technology. I do agree that younger generations have gone to develop a different ability to process all the information quickly, and this skill can be valued in the long run. However, I think that the way we can get so much information so fast can weaken our ability to focus deeply. While yes, multitasking can be a good thing to be able to do, it can affect with how you critically think overall. In my own experience, when I use social media for a longer period, it makes it harder to be able to concentrate on longer readings and homework that I need to do. Distraction overall can be unavoidable if one doesn’t do anything to silence the distractions.
Page 3 paragraph 3
I have a more complicated response to this passage since I do agree with Anderson on how technology can be both useful and distracting. I do believe though that we have more control over our response and engagement with technology other than he suggests. Anderson’s perspective in this is though e-mails, which reflects a bigger reality that technology helps and makes communication faster and even more convenient, however it also shows us the endless rescheduling and pieces of conversations. I do see the technological distractions are changing some of life today, but I don’t believe it has complete control over us. Anderson suggests within this paragraph that distraction is overall unavoidable, but I believe that if we can change our habits to work with technology, and not against it as a distraction, its negative impact can be minimized.
Page 5 Paragraph 1
I agree with the ideas in this paragraph about researchers regarding the inefficiency and dangers of multitasking. The evidence is a bit compelling specifically about how our brains are not equipped to handle so much information without loss of efficiency and errors. When I have attempted to multitask it has led to mistakes and reduced productivity. The example about driving while talking on the phone interests me. It clearly shows how multitasking can compromise safety by overloading the cognitive channels. Steering and dialing both require you to do something manual while looking out the windshield and reading a text demand visual attention. I found it interesting that even hands free conversations can be problematic if engaged in the visual channel. This shows us that certain activities shouldn’t be combined due to safety reasons. I also understand that there are situations where people seem to manage multitasking well when they don’t require effort or are routine. Listening to music while doing a chore is possible because they don’t compete for the same cognitive resources. Overall I agree with the core argument that multitasking is inefficient and can be dangerous. However I understand that we need to balance our multitasking of when it’s manageable and when it should be avoided.
Page 10 Paragraph 2
I found the little paragraph about attention being a reflection of one’s character interesting and something I completely agree with. The idea of us focusing our attention reveals more about us than formal things because it doesn’t show the aspects of our daily lives like attention does. If someone dedicates their attention to learning and self improvement it shows commitment to their personal growth. However, allowing attention to unproductive activities harms your personal growth. We need to be mindful of where our attention goes because it can lead to a better or worse life. I agree with the core idea of this paragraph but it is important to know that there are plenty of external influences that influence where our attention goes. For example social media and keeping up with what your friends are doing. Attention is a powerful indicator of who we are and it is so important to find a balance between ourselves and influences.
Page 5 paragraph 1 – I think that what Anderson describes is complicated, although I agree, it’s hard to accept. The idea that Anderson presents is that it’s scientifically impossible to multitask. So far in his writing it’s interesting that it’s all scientific based. “Multitasking is a myth.” Constantly just switching rapidly between the two tasks you think you’re multitasking, every switch you lose mental efficiency, which makes you more likely to make a mistake. There’s separate channels, language, visual, auditory, etc. He then gives an example of driving and talking on the phone, the many dangers associated with that. I think this is complicated because I probably haven’t gone a day without multitasking. Especially as a college student, getting as much done as possible in the least amount of time (hopefully efficiently though), is optimal. I find myself switching between homeworks, as I’m doing now. Multiple tabs open on my phone and computer so I don’t forget, all while working at the library front desk and listening to music.
Page 8 paragraph 5(last) – I agree with the idea Anderson presents; “The problem of attention lies right at the intersection of our willpower and our willpower-sapping technologies.” We know that the key to enhancing our brain power and attention span is less screen time, healthy food, daily movement, meditation, etc, but will we actually do it? As our attention span gets worse, so does our self control with restraining ourselves from our guilty pleasures such as doom scrolling. He then continues to talk about the immense use of “lifehacks” and ways to reduce our multitasking, to ultimately get more done in an efficient way. Examples like habit managing “90 second shower” and note taking techniques “mind mapping” and software shortcuts “how to turn gmail into to-do list”, etc, but of course all of these techniques our found online. Personally I see these ideas and self help strategies all the time on social media, either screenshotting or saving for later, but not always put to use.
Page 5 Paragraph 3
I agree with the opinions addressed in this paragraph. I found it extremely interesting, and rather eye opening, especially when the idea of the multiple screens pulled up at a time because frankly, I have so many tabs open the websites names are not even visible, just their icons. I think this idea, among the others discussed in the paragraph, is centrally important to the overall theme of Anderson’s essay as it touches on the direct effects of technology and the different ways one can be distracted. I feel as though this paragraph really furthers the overall concept of Anderson’s argument as it provides relatable, real-world examples of how technology provides distractions in our everyday lives. I think the use of anecdotes provides an alternative route for Anderson to explain his point and provide the reader with a moment of realization (which is in fact what happened to me) which I think would allow for more readers to understand his viewpoint and be more apt to support his claims. I think that it is important to note that Anderson does not necessarily take up a claim in this specific paragraph of his essay, rather he provides the readers with the tools to come to their own conclusions.
Page 11 Paragraph 2
This is the paragraph where Anderson’s claim truly comes to fruition: that technology and distraction can be harnessed by the human mind to be a positive. I find this claim complicated and I cannot say I fully agree with it. Anderson believes that an unfocused mind is worse than a mind that is usually constantly distracted (ADHD). I cannot wrap my head around this concept. On the one hand, I can see why Anderson would make this claim. Skin and bones the concept makes sense. On the other hand, I think that there are just too many confounding factors that make supporting this complicated. I cannot see in what world where having an ADHD mind would be more beneficial than an unwavering mind other than maybe a situation in the arts. As someone who does not have ADHD but does have a pretty active mind, I can attest that an unwavering mind would be far more useful than my running mind in situations such as exams.
Page 2, para 2. – I find this quote very interesting as well as complicated because it brings in the idea of our attention. Over the last few decades and through the advancements in technology, Anderson and Simon both argue that we have a “poverty of attention” due to our constant need to consume new and interesting information. I agree and disagree with that statement because lack of attention varies from person to person. Personally, I do have moments where I struggle to pay attention but that is a result of lack of sleep, doing homework, and many other factors. A part of this statement that I do agree with is that we as a society do lack attention and it is normalized. However, the fascinating part about this is that we need to lack attention in order to complete everything we want to do in our day-to-day lifestyles. Overall, the idea of attention and how we lack it has been commonly accepted regardless of the technologies we have available.
Page 5, para 1. I fully agree with this statement. Multitasking is something people do every day and continue to believe that it helps them accomplish their tasks. Even when we are constantly switching between multiple tasks, we are actually taking more time in between them to switch our focus. When I perform simple tasks that include doing my homework, I tend to take much longer because I am continuously switching classes that require me to use different information. This causes me to mix things up, especially when it comes time to take an exam. Whenever I am driving in the car, I tend to see people on their phones swerving across lanes and almost hitting me. People are constantly in a state of multitasking, and it has become so frequent that it is more impressive to balance five things than two things. Multitasking as a myth is very fascinating to me because even though people use it to help them accomplish tasks “faster” they are only exceeding their brain capacity and not actually retaining helpful information.
Page 5, para 1 AGREE
I agree with what he is saying in this paragraph, he is saying that there are many different channels in which we take up information and that it is difficult to take up multiple forms of the same channel at the same time. This paragraph is interesting to me because it speaks on the point that things that, even though they are auditorily being received, they can paint a picture in your brain and, in turn, impair your ability to perceive the visual stimuli you are receiving.
Page 6, para 5 AGREE
I agree with the sentiment that meditation is good for you. I like how he brings this up in his article on how to deal with distractions. Meditation is a great form of dealing with stress and can build your ability to deal with stress and multi task better. I found it interesting that people who meditate produce 30 times more powerful gamma waves then people who do not meditate.
Passage 1: Page 7, paragraph 1
Complicated – I agree with Gallagher’s beliefs about the productive power of attention, however I sway from her argument when she claims that being easily distracted by phones and other outside sources is completely at fault of the user and not the machine. The internet is becoming ever more distracting: content is meant to be overstimulating, unrelated ads constantly scatter your computer screen as you scroll on a website, and it has become normal to have several tabs active at once. Social media companies purposely manipulate their algorithms to accommodate to their users. They are constantly sending you content they know will distract you in hopes of you engaging with them. The internet is the ultimate antagonist. I agree that a lot of accountability is required by the user to avoid this distraction, however it can become near impossible with the constant instigation that the internet offers.
Passage 2: Page 11, paragraph 5
Agree – I agree that the current generation of so-called “digital natives” has skills that allow them to navigate such an interconnected, technology-engulfed, world that individuals from older generations lack. Digital natives may struggle to concentrate on one task for a long-period of time, however to paraphrase one of Sam Anderson’s main claims, they are very proficient in constantly shifting their attention. This skill has proven to be pretty adaptive in the current age. It allows to seamlessly surf the internet, change their focus from post to post, quickly scan an article, and a plethora of other examples. Older generations are quick to criticize this deterioration of attention in digital natives, yet their own inability to embrace distraction helps explain why they are so technologically challenged. The internet is overwhelming to them and it takes them much longer to complete tasks that seem simple to a member of the current generation. Attention deficit is becoming a crucial adaptation that enhances our ability to maneuver the internet and our constantly-changing technology.
Page 3,Paragraph 3
I agree that technology is both super helpful and, yes, it can be a big distraction. But I think we have more control over how we interact with it than he gives us credit for. Anderson uses emails to show how technology makes communication faster but also causes conversations to get fragmented and reschedules to pile up. I totally get where he’s coming from, but I don’t think technology is the one calling the shots. We have the power to set limits and build habits that help us manage it better, rather than letting it run wild. For instance, if we’re thoughtful about when and how we check our phones or email, we can use those tools to make our lives easier instead of letting them overwhelm us. I think with the right approach, we can really take control and minimize the stress and distractions that come with tech.
Page 10, Paragraph 2
I really liked the part where Anderson talks about how attention reflects our character. It really hit home for me. What we choose to focus on says a lot about who we are. For example, if you’re focused on learning and growing, it shows you’re invested in your personal development. But if you spend your time on distractions, it can hold you back. I totally agree with this idea, but I also think it’s important to remember that there are a lot of things that influence where our attention goes. Social media is a good example or just keeping up with what everyone else is doing(trending), can pull us away from things that really matter. At the end of the day, attention is such a powerful indicator of who we are, and it’s all about finding a balance between what matters to us and all the outside distractions.
Page 5, paragraph 3. I agree. Particularly, the statement that talks about how if office workers are “left uninterrupted, they will most likely interrupt themselves.”. This is true for more than just office workers. For example, while I’m doing homework, I’ll be working just fine, go to look at the time on my phone, and twenty minutes or even sometimes an hour later. I’ll look back up from my phone, still not knowing the time, having made no progress on my work, and go back to my phone because I’ve lost all interest. Most of the time I spend on homework is spent trying to “regain” focus back to my work. I say “regain” because all I do is watch videos until I get bored, which never happens. I wouldn’t have to set aside so much time to do work if the temptation of my phone wasn’t looming over me.
Page 10, paragraph 3. I agree. While “blowing a couple of hours on the internet” may seem like a waste of time to many people, I believe it’s because that’s not what they would choose to do with their time; wasted time is subjective. The time isn’t necessarily wasted if it’s what you choose to focus on. Is the time misused? Perhaps, but if you “followed your attention” there, then at the time, you viewed it as an interest, not a waste. If you had viewed it as a waste, chances are you wouldn’t be doing it. After the fact, you may look back and say, “Wow, I totally wasted all of that time on Instagram instead of on journal 15.” But I wouldn’t say it’s wasted because you were bored from work, so you went on Instagram. You fixed your boredom problem, and that time was put to use fixing a problem; something was accomplished.
On page 2 paragraph 1 Anderson points out that the price we pay for our attention has “changed dramatically”. With this I agree there are so many new and easier ways to get distracted. For example, instead of writing the essay your teacher assigned or the packet of math problems it is easier to just reach for your phone and watch the new show you started or scroll on TikTok endlessly. I know that I especially struggle with focusing on the task at hand rather than turning to my phone or even my bed. Because in the moment watching that show, scrolling on TikTok or even just taking a nap instead usually feels better in the moment than doing my work that can be hard and tiring. And that good feeling in the moment usually trumps the feeling of just getting my work done and finishing. Before digital technology ways to get distracted and sucked into something else weren’t always readily on hand the way they are now and that makes it much more challenging to say no and just focus.
On page 5 paragraph 3 Anderson mentions a study done where the results came out that people who frequently check their emails scored as less intelligent than people on marijuana. I have complicated feelings about this because I feel like there was more context for this supposed study that was taken which could have explained the parameters for the study. Because I don’t believe that someone who checks their email frequently loses intelligence permanently because then half of the world would be too stupid to complete tasks. I don’t doubt that in that specific moment when the intelligence test was taken that the people who frequently check their emails scored lower than those on marijuana in that moment but no longer than when they gave their brain time to rest. Although I do this this statistic is very jarring whether or not the needed context is present. The fact that checking your email takes up so much of your brain power, enough for you to do poorly on in intelligence test makes me worry. And the idea that digital technology alters our brain and tires it like that is a little scary.