I've been thinking a lot, lately, about the tendency that a lot of people I encounter have towards communicating through text. For a lot of people, text-messaging (through the various forms it takes on cellphone devices and computers) has become more common and even preferred over verbal communication. For someone who is shy, for example, it might be easier to send a text than to call or to literally speak to someone, especially if it is someone they've never met before. But for neurotypical people, all these changes are perceived as added possibilities, as choices one makes from various ways of communication. Certain people seem to take pride in choosing the "old-school" way of verbal communication, devoid of the use of electronic devices. I've heard such people describe savvy cellphone users as "addicted" or "dependent".
It strikes me more and more, however, how inherently ableist such a discourse is, because a lot of people have no choice but to use technology as a means of communication. Would it be ok for someone to "take pride" in their ability to walk without a cane or a wheelchair? I feel that the same logic applies here.
It seems to me that, our ever-expanding use of cellphones and other electronic devices for communication should be seen as a step forward rather than backwards. In a TED Talk I recently watched, Amber Case frames our ever-expanding reliance on our cellphone devices as a form of evolution, and defines the cellphone user as a cyborg. All this made for a very catchy and clickable video title, but it got me thinking about this. It seems to me like writing is a shared form of communication for both autistics and neurotypicals, so perhaps technology could be the way to eventually provide better gateways of dialog. Is it crazy to imagine a future where technology permits autistics to communicate more directly with other people? Could the role of the mediator be eventually fulfilled by a computer? I have more questions than answers, of course...
It strikes me more and more, however, how inherently ableist such a discourse is, because a lot of people have no choice but to use technology as a means of communication. Would it be ok for someone to "take pride" in their ability to walk without a cane or a wheelchair? I feel that the same logic applies here.
It seems to me that, our ever-expanding use of cellphones and other electronic devices for communication should be seen as a step forward rather than backwards. In a TED Talk I recently watched, Amber Case frames our ever-expanding reliance on our cellphone devices as a form of evolution, and defines the cellphone user as a cyborg. All this made for a very catchy and clickable video title, but it got me thinking about this. It seems to me like writing is a shared form of communication for both autistics and neurotypicals, so perhaps technology could be the way to eventually provide better gateways of dialog. Is it crazy to imagine a future where technology permits autistics to communicate more directly with other people? Could the role of the mediator be eventually fulfilled by a computer? I have more questions than answers, of course...
Facilitation can take many forms and is at its most powerful when it creates new modes of sociality. New forms of media have definitely played that role for autistics (and for many of us). What we sometimes miss, however, is that techniques change as socialities change. How do we create conditions for a sensitivity to the techniques that are necessary at a given juncture?
ReplyDeleteThis is a line of questions I've been thinking about too. There is a notion of isolation or lack of connection when it comes to the use of smart phones. The critique is usually pointed towards some functions of social media and how they have replaced actual human connection while creating this type of addiction you mention. For example, receiving "likes" on a photo or a post will most likely release the types of chemicals to your brain that addictive substances and activities would. Considering this fact, it's important for everyone to evaluate how these interactions will affect their brains as well as how they socialize with people. It could also be harmful for anyone to use texting as their only means of interaction. Of course, this will vary, but most people need human connection. I think mindfulness is what is important here rather than the condemnation of the technology you brought up.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me like every single type of technology can be beneficial and progressive for some while remaining exclusionary for others though. Texting is great, but that means those you use it must be able to view it and decode it, which is not the case for everyone. Some might not be able to hold the devices in their original state, some might not have the ability to read or see the text. Even affording the technology or additional devices to mediate said constraints adds another layer of accessibility.