Your phone: is it your property?

[Tim]

And if you hate phones so much, surely you must hate computers equally? They're not all that different... And yet here you are using one.

I just hate mine because its old technology. :P

[Furah]

Thank god for this thread, nearly forgot to put mine on charge. I definitely own my phone, I only really use it for music, killing time, MSN, maps, carrying smallish files, and the occasional text. My mum is the only one who calls me, and that's when I needed her to call me anyway.

[i_love_burritos]

Half the time I forget to carry my phone with me, and the other half of the time it isn't charged. So yeah. I can see why there is significant discussion, because if I do forget my phone and someone is trying to reach me, they're quite angry. Other than that, the phone itself is [cabbage]. It's a $30 Samsung, so, it's just the bare necessities. Additionally, I only have around 7 contacts. :thumbup:

[unkn0wnwarrior]

Additionally, I only have around 7 contacts. :thumbup:

I have no more than double that. And only about 5 of them ever message me (nobody calls).

[Myweponsg00d]

 

You asked yourself that yet? I've never seen someone dismiss so many valid points in an attempt to protect their own argument.

 

 

And yet the news article you link to admits that research is still in progress. And also, it says that heavy use COULD be a factor. SO you dont think that someone who uses their cell heavily over this 20 year period has any indication for light use over a 50 year period? Yet, you use this article as though it says "HEY THERE IS NO CHANCE EVER THAT BRAIN TUMORS WILL BE CAUSED BY CELLS!" All you did was link to an article with positive things to say. In no way does that article extinguish the concern that my article even talked about.

 

What is even more idiotic about your use of this article is that the article I quoted talks about how we really wont know the 40-50 year effects of cell radiation until we reach the 40-50 year mark of cell use. And the article you link to isn't a study of biological response to radiation. Its just looking at the frequency that brain tumors are emerging. Your article does nothing to reject the hypothesis that bad things will start happening after 40+ years of cell use.

 

Whats even more ridiculous is that you still even refer to this as an argument. I ask you, where did I say "Guys, cells need to be put down RIGHT NOW, they are evil. Stop using them, and I am correct"? I'm not arguing anything. I wanted to know what people thought of the issue. You STILL bring in some type of logical arguments as though there is a battle to be won. My post is a philosophy that I hold, and I dont really know what the hell you are even trying to "prove" me "wrong" about.

 

Imagine for a second that, instead of specifically talking about cell phones, I made a thread that just said "So if we live in a society where it is becoming more and more popular to be expected to carry the same electronic device with you all day every day, is that a good or bad thing?" Leave out the cell phones, the specific object of a cell phone is irrelevant to the thread. I wanted to discuss the societal view of the technology. Not the technology. Re read the OP, and all of my comments from the beginning. I did not mean to say if the cell phone itself is "good" or "bad" but whether our attitude toward it is "appropriate".

 

Also, Tripsis said...

I carry a phone because these days people expect to be able to reach you instantly

I hold this statement as further evidence of what I am talking about.

 

And no, Tripsis, I don't have a problem with computers. My computer stays in my house, and has not become an extension of my anatomy. The only similar problem I could see would be e-mail...i.e. "Why havent you responded to my email?!?!" But still, people only expect you to check your email if you have been near a computer (for now...).

 

I am questioning the ethics of the technology.

I know what an invention is. I know what a tool is. I know why tools are invented and used.

A tool is technology in it's most simplistic form .We improve our technology to make our lives easier You question the ethics of technology but dismiss everything asides a cell phone.

Because cells are the first technology that we carry with us all the time. We might have had keys, wallets, glasses, etc...but I'm sure you understand how these are different from a phone. A phone (especially the increasingly popular web phones) are keeping people plugged into a virtual network 24/7. Something that a key does not do.

I am questioning the ethics behind creating a device that is, more or less, designed around the principle that you will always be carrying it.

Whats unethical about it?

 

I simply find it morally reprehensible for such digital technology to become like a part of our body that we carry with us. I am sure you have your own "line". What if we can replace everything but our brains with robotic technology?

 

Or maybe you have no line. If you do, that would be relevant to what the thread was trying to hit at.

[Will H]

The OP would make more sense if it was about social networking rather than mobile phones, and then there would be a very valid point made. Mobile phones are just damn useful, and they've probably saved the lives of countless people, both literally or metaphorically. What's wrong with the expectation of being able to communicate now the technology's here and is so universal?

 

As for those who must always update their Facebook page or their Birdnoise on a virtually live basis, I don't understand it. I keep an app on my browser that will tell me if someone's trying to talk to me on Facebook, but I only check once a day, and I get all the info from that single check that I need. Why bother doing it more regularly?

[tripsis]

I hold this statement as further evidence of what I am talking about.

 

And no, Tripsis, I don't have a problem with computers. My computer stays in my house, and has not become an extension of my anatomy. The only similar problem I could see would be e-mail...i.e. "Why havent you responded to my email?!?!" But still, people only expect you to check your email if you have been near a computer (for now...).

I do not mean that people would rage if they couldn't reach me.. simply that because they do have the ability to reach me instantly, it can become problematic if they need to reach me and cannot. I have never had anyone rage at me for not responding to their text/phone call/etc. instantly. Our society has adapted to the times and there is NOTHING wrong with that. If I am out doing something someone may need to call me to have me come home, etc. Not being able to receive said phone call/text could result in inconveniences that could easily be avoided.

 

If you don't want to do what people expect - fine. If you want to inconvenience people (and possibly yourself) by not carrying a cell phone - fine. Those are your decisions.. but that does not mean there is anything wrong, unethical or immoral about the technology.

[Myweponsg00d]

The OP would make more sense if it was about social networking rather than mobile phones, and then there would be a very valid point made. Mobile phones are just damn useful, and they've probably saved the lives of countless people, both literally or metaphorically. What's wrong with the expectation of being able to communicate now the technology's here and is so universal?

 

As for those who must always update their Facebook page or their Birdnoise on a virtually live basis, I don't understand it. I keep an app on my browser that will tell me if someone's trying to talk to me on Facebook, but I only check once a day, and I get all the info from that single check that I need. Why bother doing it more regularly?

 

So if someone is trying to contact you on a social networking site, you only feel the need to check on it once a day.

 

But if someone is trying to contact you on your phone, you'd like to know about it sooner.

 

Maybe you can understand my viewpoint by looking at your own viewpoint. You see nothing wrong with phone communication, but someone who wants to keep tabs on something stupid like Facebook 24/7 is being silly.

 

Now to understand my view (part of my view, at least...) imagine going a step further. I lived happily for many years simply coming home at the end of the day and just checking my answering machine...this is really similar to the way you just check your Facebook. I didn't need to know if anybody called instantly. Checking my calls once a day is plenty. The way you see Facebook culture is just the way that I see mobile culture.

 

Thanks for the way you said your post though. It really let me make a good comparison in my head. People who check their facebook all day are like the people who got the "phone-in" answering machines, where you could call your own machine and check your calls. Its all just new technology that was invented to be more obsessive about something. And each step along the way, theres a group of people who use the technology, and a group of people who feel it is silly.

 

If you want to inconvenience people (and possibly yourself) by not carrying a cell phone - fine.

 

Why does it have to be convenience/inconvenience for people? It is ME choosing whether or not I want to use something. Yet you even admit here that other people would probably feel like I am inconveniencing THEM. Therefore, if I don't want people to think "God...why cant Tom just get a cell phone?" I have to own a cell phone.

 

I know I dont HAVE to, like...I know the phone isn't being stapled to my hand. But the choice is "Do I want my family and friends to think that I am inconveniencing them?". I dont want to use the cell, but I dont want to be a pain to the people I love.

 

Ideally, I wish that the people I know/meet just wouldnt be so lazy and reliant on their technology. To them, cell communication is "better" than everything else. If this weren't the case, I wouldnt have a cell. To me, using such communication all the time is lazy and superficial.

[qeltar]

Ideally, I wish that the people I know/meet just wouldnt be so lazy and reliant on their technology. To them, cell communication is "better" than everything else. If this weren't the case, I wouldnt have a cell. To me, using such communication all the time is lazy and superficial.

But it *is* better than everything else, for many people in many situations. There's nothing that really compares with it.

 

Why do you consider it "lazy" to use a cell phone?

[Myweponsg00d]

Ideally, I wish that the people I know/meet just wouldnt be so lazy and reliant on their technology. To them, cell communication is "better" than everything else. If this weren't the case, I wouldnt have a cell. To me, using such communication all the time is lazy and superficial.

But it *is* better than everything else, for many people in many situations. There's nothing that really compares with it.

 

Why do you consider it "lazy" to use a cell phone?

 

Have you ever met a rich kid and thought "Now I know he could probably buy everything I own...but man, this kid is a little snot." This type of "spoiling" is what I see happening with social interaction.

 

People are spoiled with cell phones. I have some little cousins who just got their phones for christmas (10 years old....) and they are absolutely spoiled on those things. I know what your defence will be "But many people could have it and not be spoiled on it."

 

Yes I agree. But the same can be true with many things. Do you think everyone should be rich? Many rich people donate a ton of money to charity and make other types of benevolent behavior. But many people also get spoiled and choose to live an inconsiderate life.

 

I dont think cells are "better" than other ways of getting in contact with people. Faster? Yes. Easier? Probably. But I dont think that a list of things words like "fast" and "easy" necessarily make something "good". I think that a lack of a challenge can do terrible things to the human spirit. I don't really have any scientific evidence to show you though, so my point of view is probably moot now, right? :razz:

[tripsis]

So you hate cell phones because people can be spoiled by them? >_< By that logic you should hate just about everything in the world. Kids can get spoiled on anything. And besides, you don't have to be rich to buy a 10 year old a cell phone. There are rich inconsiderate people just as there are poor inconsiderate people so I don't see where that argument came from.

 

And cell phones ARE the better way of getting in contact with people. It is faster, easier, and more reliable.. all of those things do make it better than calling someone at home. There are other ways to challenge ourselves in life than challenging ourselves by giving up convenient communication. Communication IS important in life. Challenging yourself to contact someone will not improve your "human spirit." If you REALLY need to contact someone because there is an emergency, you'll probably only be frustrated and upset.. not feel your spirit being refreshed and renewed because of the challenge.

[OldJoe]

Bought a Samsung E2120 for 40 a month ago or so, my old one was dying... Well, the battery was. And that one was from 04, so thought i might as well buy a new one.

I carry it with me all the time, but i'm no cell-phone freak as some in my age are. Just use it for sms+calling, don't need much else. If anything, i'm a computer freak.

Only thing i don't like with cell-phones are the buttons, i often press down two at once since they are so cramped lol.

[qeltar]

People are spoiled with cell phones. I have some little cousins who just got their phones for christmas (10 years old....) and they are absolutely spoiled on those things. I know what your defence will be "But many people could have it and not be spoiled on it."

No, my reaction is mostly confusion. How are kids "spoiled on" cell phones? I don't get it. Seriously.

 

I dont think cells are "better" than other ways of getting in contact with people. Faster? Yes. Easier? Probably. But I dont think that a list of things words like "fast" and "easy" necessarily make something "good".

Not in all things. But in communication? Yeah, faster and easier are pretty much the definition of what makes one form of communication better than another.

 

I think part of why you are so hung up on this is that you don't consider real-time communication important. But many people do.

 

I think that a lack of a challenge can do terrible things to the human spirit.

So why are we having this debate in near-real-time on the Internet instead of using carrier pigeons?

[Myweponsg00d]

And cell phones ARE the better way of getting in contact with people. It is faster, easier, and more reliable.. all of those things do make it better than calling someone at home. There are other ways to challenge ourselves in life than challenging ourselves by giving up convenient communication.

 

I just don't think instant gratification is necessarily the best thing. I also wouldn't say that I "hate" cell phones. Well...I know I said that phrase in my OP... :^_^: ...but a lot of the OP was my attempt at a creative/humorous rant. I carry my cell as a gesture to other people who don't feel the same way that I do. And sometimes, I end up feeling "Wow..I'm glad I had this thing on me". But that doesnt mean that, in theory, I see the device creating a lot of laziness.

 

I also would like to remind you yet again that this post is not an argumentative essay trying to convince all humanity that we need to turn back the clocks and disinvent cell phones. It is an invitation to think about the philosophical meaning of the device.

 

I mean, lets look at another invention: guns. Do I agree with anything that could ever be done with a gun? No. Especially now that tasers and such exist. The only good thing a gun could do was to defend yourself, and now we have better means of doing that. Do I want to destroy all the guns on the planet? No. Will people ever stop using guns? No. But that doesn't mean that I can't find the philosophy of the device morally reprehensible.

[Albel]

I mean, lets look at another invention: guns. Do I agree with anything that could ever be done with a gun? No. Especially now that tasers and such exist. The only good thing a gun could do was to defend yourself, and now we have better means of doing that. Do I want to destroy all the guns on the planet? No. Will people ever stop using guns? No. But that doesn't mean that I can't find the philosophy of the device morally reprehensible.

Now you have lost me. When did we go from talking about phones to guns?

I don't quite see how you can be spoiled on a cell phone. Im spoiled because I want to talk to my friends now? I dont think so. As I said in my first post on this topic I want to get things done now. It has always been like this. Best analogy I can use is when the first mores code machine was invented, that was how people sent massages to other across great distances; instead of using the mail system.

 

It's just human nature in my opinion. We are not spoiled on cell phones... we just want to get things done faster. That dose not make you more or less of a human being.

[Myweponsg00d]

No, my reaction is mostly confusion. How are kids "spoiled on" cell phones? I don't get it. Seriously.

I think that if Bobby can get ahold of Timmy whenever he wants to, then Bobby doesn't learn the full lesson that other people live seperate lives and you can't have everything every time that YOU want it. I'm sure you probably will disagree with this, but you should realize that we are disagreeing on it. I see problems with many people, and a lot of the time I blame it on the fact that their head is glued to their cell. Much like my grandparents blamed my disrespectful behavior on TV watching, I blame kids behavior on their unrestricted cell use. Now that I have grown up, I look back at my childhood and see how much of a delusion of reality the TV caused me, and I do feel that my grandparents were correct.

 

Not in all things. But in communication? Yeah, faster and easier are pretty much the definition of what makes one form of communication better than another.

I disagree for a few reasons. One reason: if it is easy to contact somebody all the time, then I feel you are less likely to appreciate the time that you actually spend with the person.

 

So why are we having this debate in near-real-time on the Internet instead of using carrier pigeons?

 

Because I have had held this discussion with some of my good friends, and we had a lively enjoyable discussion on the effect that technology has had on our social lives. Some of them mentioned when they were dumped via text message, fired over video-conference, and other such things. I thought I would bring this to one of the online communities I frequent. Also, I only refer to a lack of challenge "most/all" of the time. I don't think people should go out and work their hands to the bone and never have any luxury. But I don't think people should spend every day in a mansion and never go out and build a fence with their bare hands, either. A life full of nothing but hardships will probably make you depressed. A life full of nothing but luxury will probably make you spoiled. A fair mix will give you an appreciation for your luxuries and an overall more satisfying experience. Thats how I see it.

 

Similarly, I don't think it is a good idea to give a child a phone at age 10, and then every day for the rest of his life he is going to have a cell by his side.

 

It's just human nature in my opinion. We are not spoiled on cell phones... we just want to get things done faster. That dose not make you more or less of a human being.

 

You know what else is human nature? To look purely at the benefits of an idea and ignore the fact that there may be unforeseen negative effects.

 

Lets consider, for a moment, the food industry. As commercialism grew, we started to grow chickens with growth hormones, artificially force cows to produce milk, and feed livestock with grain loaded with pesticides. Now we are beginning to see that this way of producing food is unnatural, and many illnesses (cancer, ADHD) have been linked to incorrect methods of producing food. Now the organic methods of food production are gaining popularity because the unnatural methods caused people to die. Another thing: our eco-system. Humans disturbed the natural balance of life, and now many species are dying off, many plants are dying off, and this is causing a change in global precipitation and climate.

 

I see a trend that might extend to things like cell phones. Humans are animals. We were around for hundreds of thousands of years before cell phones. You MUST agree that cell phones arent natural, right? Well, what I am saying, is that I would not be surprised if things like cell phones caused mental health problems (anxiety, depression, impatientness...etc...SOMETHING)

[Nadril]

You're just reaching for an argument now. Over the past few pages you've changed what you hate so much about cellphones at least 3 or 4 times.

 

I don't understand what is so hard to believe that some people do enjoy having a cellphone around due to the benefits it gives. It's not around because they're forced to, it's around because it's a great invention.

 

 

And talking about kids and cell phones and them being spoiled... what does this have ANYTHING to do with the debate at hand? Hell, I'm 21 and I'm not "spoiled" by my phone. It's just a stupid argument.

[Myweponsg00d]

And talking about kids and cell phones and them being spoiled... what does this have ANYTHING to do with the debate at hand?

 

Because, it is the reason for why I question the morality of them. I think people are being mentally detrimented by the availability of this technology.

 

Lets look at the food market. 50 years ago people were saying "All chickens are the same, so if we can produce the same size chicken, in a faster time, by feeding it things that normal chickens dont eat, we will save money and deliver the same product." And now we know that eating non-organic food can be dangerous.

 

The same goes for technology and cell phones, in my eyes. People think "Oh its just the same communication, but faster." But it is just different. It is different and unnatural. I'm not saying that people 50 years from now will for sure have mental meltdowns because of their cellphone technology. But I think it would be idiotic to completely neglect the effect that something so unnatural could have on our psyche.

 

50 years ago, the only argument people had against non-organic foods would have been "It isnt natural." Today, my argument against OUR USE of cell technology is basically the same. It just is not natural for a human being (a living, breathing, mammal) to be carrying around some silly little electronic toy so much. It just isn't natural, and if you cant see the merit in the argument against unnatural things (processed foods...global warming...) then I think you are looking at it pretty superficially.

 

I think that constant cell use is a detriment to one's mental health.

[Nadril]

stop making up stuff.

 

It's really hard to take you seriously when you say something such as

 

Lets look at the food market. 50 years ago people were saying "All chickens are the same, so if we can produce the same size chicken, in a faster time, by feeding it things that normal chickens dont eat, we will save money and deliver the same product." And now we know that eating non-organic food can be dangerous.

 

When 95% of the food you're eating are not organic. Unless you eat nothing but "organic" food you are eating genetically altered food.

 

50 years ago, the only argument people had against non-organic foods would have been "It isnt natural." Today, my argument against OUR USE of cell technology is basically the same. It just is not natural for a human being (a living, breathing, mammal) to be carrying around some silly little electronic toy so much. It just isn't natural, and if you cant see the merit in the argument against unnatural things (processed foods...global warming...) then I think you are looking at it pretty superficially.

 

Humans evolve through technology, we have been for thousands of years. Guess what, it's not "natural" to do a lot of things. It is not "natural" to use antibiotics or sterilization on equipment before an operation. It is not "natural" to own a car.

 

Point being is that as time goes on Humans come up with new technology that we do in some form or shape take around with us.

 

Also you can't be taken seriously when you call a cell phone a "silly little electronic toy".

 

I think that constant cell use is a detriment to one's mental health.

 

you think. You don't know. And guess what, no one really cares what you "think" if it's not backed up.

[Myweponsg00d]

stop making up stuff.

 

It's really hard to take you seriously when you say something such as

 

Lets look at the food market. 50 years ago people were saying "All chickens are the same, so if we can produce the same size chicken, in a faster time, by feeding it things that normal chickens dont eat, we will save money and deliver the same product." And now we know that eating non-organic food can be dangerous.

 

When 95% of the food you are eating are not organic. Unless you eat nothing but "organic" food you are eating genetically altered food.

I buy organic, actually. You tell me to stop making things up, but you make up things about me that you have no reason to assume. And non-organic food IS killing us. Sorry.

50 years ago, the only argument people had against non-organic foods would have been "It isnt natural." Today, my argument against OUR USE of cell technology is basically the same. It just is not natural for a human being (a living, breathing, mammal) to be carrying around some silly little electronic toy so much. It just isn't natural, and if you cant see the merit in the argument against unnatural things (processed foods...global warming...) then I think you are looking at it pretty superficially.

 

Humans evolve through technology, we have been for thousands of years. Guess what, it's not "natural" to do a lot of things. It is not "natural" to use antibiotics or sterilization on equipment before an operation. It is not "natural" to own a car.

 

Point being is that as time goes on Humans come up with new technology that we do in some form or shape take around with us.

And I do think that many inventions detriment our work ethic and our morality.

 

Also you can't be taken seriously when you call a cell phone a "silly little electronic toy".

 

I think that constant cell use is a detriment to one's mental health.

 

you think. You don't know. And guess what, no one really cares what you "think" if it's not backed up.

 

Nobody has to care, and you should probably stop treating me like I am trying to take phones away from everyone. I wanted to know what people thought about the notion of ethics and cell phone use. I didn't want some kind of logical inspection and a consensual agreement/disagreement about why my theory either should or shouldn't be implemented for every human on Earth.

 

Truth is that it ISNT logical. It ISNT scientific. But I will say again, when cigarettes became popular, we didn't have the scientific understanding to know they were cancerous. When we started processing food, we didnt have the scientific understanding that it was dangerous.

 

And now, while cell phone technology is still young (especially the ones such as Blackberries) we DONT have scientific reasons to discourage people from using cell phones. Long before the health food knowledge came around, a man named Jack Lalanne did what many people considered illogical and ate natural foods. Now we see him as a pioneer in the world of health awareness.

 

In the modern age, it is easy to think that we have it all figured out. But the truth of the matter is that scientific logic and reasoning is just not always correct. The only way to have prevented yourself from eating unhealthy food was to illogically believe that natural food was better.

 

Today, there is no scientific evidence that technology like cell phones is ruining our society. But I believe, to a degree, that it is highly possible. Thus, my skepticism.

[Riku3220]

stop making up stuff.

 

It's really hard to take you seriously when you say something such as

 

Lets look at the food market. 50 years ago people were saying "All chickens are the same, so if we can produce the same size chicken, in a faster time, by feeding it things that normal chickens dont eat, we will save money and deliver the same product." And now we know that eating non-organic food can be dangerous.

 

When 95% of the food you are eating are not organic. Unless you eat nothing but "organic" food you are eating genetically altered food.

I buy organic, actually. You tell me to stop making things up, but you make up things about me that you have no reason to assume. And non-organic food IS killing us. Sorry.

Seriously? We've been living off of non-organic food for God knows how long and it's killing us?

50 years ago, the only argument people had against non-organic foods would have been "It isnt natural." Today, my argument against OUR USE of cell technology is basically the same. It just is not natural for a human being (a living, breathing, mammal) to be carrying around some silly little electronic toy so much. It just isn't natural, and if you cant see the merit in the argument against unnatural things (processed foods...global warming...) then I think you are looking at it pretty superficially.

 

Humans evolve through technology, we have been for thousands of years. Guess what, it's not "natural" to do a lot of things. It is not "natural" to use antibiotics or sterilization on equipment before an operation. It is not "natural" to own a car.

 

Point being is that as time goes on Humans come up with new technology that we do in some form or shape take around with us.

And I do think that many inventions detriment our work ethic and our morality.

It makes work easier and more efficient allowing us to save time doing things we actually want to do. That is how technology works. To make our live easier. Saying cell phones detroy our work ethic is like saying inclined planes destroy our work ethic.

 

Also you can't be taken seriously when you call a cell phone a "silly little electronic toy".

 

I think that constant cell use is a detriment to one's mental health.

 

you think. You don't know. And guess what, no one really cares what you "think" if it's not backed up.

 

Nobody has to care, and you should probably stop treating me like I am trying to take phones away from everyone. I wanted to know what people thought about the notion of ethics and cell phone use. I didn't want some kind of logical inspection and a consensual agreement/disagreement about why my theory either should or shouldn't be implemented for every human on Earth.

 

Truth is that it ISNT logical. It ISNT scientific. But I will say again, when cigarettes became popular, we didn't have the scientific understanding to know they were cancerous. When we started processing food, we didnt have the scientific understanding that it was dangerous.

 

And now, while cell phone technology is still young (especially the ones such as Blackberries) we DONT have scientific reasons to discourage people from using cell phones. Long before the health food knowledge came around, a man named Jack Lalanne did what many people considered illogical and ate natural foods. Now we see him as a pioneer in the world of health awareness.

 

In the modern age, it is easy to think that we have it all figured out. But the truth of the matter is that scientific logic and reasoning is just not always correct. The only way to have prevented yourself from eating unhealthy food was to illogically believe that natural food was better.

 

Today, there is no scientific evidence that technology like cell phones is ruining our society. But I believe, to a degree, that it is highly possible. Thus, my skepticism.

If you're going to debunk every new possible thing because it has the potential to harm us then we might as well stop moving forward and stay where we are never making any kinds of innovations at all. At first, tobacco wasn't as harmful as it is today. It's when major cigarette companies decided to add a bunch of chemicals and nicotine in order to give their products to have flavor and to get their customers addicted. Until cell phone companies begin to have cell phones run on human energy then they are far from being a danger.

[qeltar]

No, my reaction is mostly confusion. How are kids "spoiled on" cell phones? I don't get it. Seriously.

I think that if Bobby can get ahold of Timmy whenever he wants to, then Bobby doesn't learn the full lesson that other people live seperate lives and you can't have everything every time that YOU want it. I'm sure you probably will disagree with this, but you should realize that we are disagreeing on it.

I more than disagree with it -- I think it is laughable. You're assigning motives to people and then using that as if it supports your claim; it doesn't.

 

A cell phone has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not Bobby and Timmy understand the notions of privacy and respecting others' time and space. If anything, giving a kid a cell phone is a good opportunity to *teach* them those lessons. But in the end, it's about parenting, not cell phones.

 

Honestly, you are just inventing utter nonsense out of whole cloth now. It's getting a bit silly.

 

And you didn't answer the question anyway: how does having a cell phone make a kid "spoiled"? Bobby and Timmy are "spoiled" because they can call each other? Huh?

 

I disagree for a few reasons. One reason: if it is easy to contact somebody all the time, then I feel you are less likely to appreciate the time that you actually spend with the person.

Really. So when I go out shopping and my wife calls me to tell me to remember to get X because she forgot to mention it, that means we appreciate each other less?

 

Hadn't realized that.

 

When my wife and I were younger and a cell phone allowed her to feel comfortable enough about leaving the kids with a babysitter that we could get a rare night out, that was actually harming our relationship?

 

Gosh, didn't realize that either.

 

When my wife goes out of town on business and is able to call me from anywhere so we can touch base and tell each other we miss each other, that's a bad thing?

 

And when one of my kids is sick and we need to contact the doctor on call, and he's carrying a cell phone so *he* can go out with *his* wife, and so I can reach him in 10 minutes instead of 6 hours, I'm actually making *all* of us appreciate each other less?

 

Good grief. Where do you come up with this garbage?

 

So why are we having this debate in near-real-time on the Internet instead of using carrier pigeons?

 

Because I have had held this discussion with some of my good friends, and we had a lively enjoyable discussion on the effect that technology has had on our social lives.

That's not what I asked you.

 

You are basing part of your cell phone phobia on the claim that a "lack of a challenge can do terrible things to the human spirit". Yet you are using *exactly* the same sort of convenient, easy, fast, high-speed communication here that cell phones enable.

 

You're being an "Internet Luddite", in other words -- using the very latest in modern communications technology to argue against modern communications technology.

 

Sorry, but it really, really doesn't make much sense.

 

Similarly, I don't think it is a good idea to give a child a phone at age 10, and then every day for the rest of his life he is going to have a cell by his side.

Yes, we get that you don't think it's a good idea. You just don't seem able to explain *why* it's not a good idea.

 

You know what else is human nature? To look purely at the benefits of an idea and ignore the fact that there may be unforeseen negative effects.

Especially when the person claiming such negative effects exhibits no ability to specify what they are, lol.

 

Lets consider, for a moment, the food industry. As commercialism grew, we started to grow chickens with growth hormones, artificially force cows to produce milk, and feed livestock with grain loaded with pesticides.

Okay, so now you've turned to guns, and then to chickens. Boggle.

 

I have no comments on your foray into agriculture, do find it amusing that you are using the same bogus argument with respect to guns that you are with cell phones. There is nothing "morally reprehensible" about guns, just as there is nothing "morally reprehensible" about cell phones, or cars, or chain saws. They are all tools that can yield tremendous benefits if used properly, and disastrous horrors if abused.

[____]

Today, there is no scientific evidence that technology like cell phones is ruining our society. But I believe, to a degree, that it is highly possible. Thus, my skepticism.

I'll be blunt and say that there are two things I feel are ruining society

 

1) political correctness

2) technophobia

 

Right now you seem to be someone who fits into cat 2.

[Myweponsg00d]

I have no comments on your foray into agriculture, do find it amusing that you are using the same bogus argument with respect to guns that you are with cell phones. There is nothing "morally reprehensible" about guns, just as there is nothing "morally reprehensible" about cell phones, or cars, or chain saws. They are all tools that can yield tremendous benefits if used properly, and disastrous horrors if abused.

 

If we can't agree that you can feel a sense of morality about an invention then theres no point in even talking anymore. I thought this was a discussion board, not a board where we write a doctoral thesis and prove something correct or not. I wanted to hear peoples thoughts on something, but apparently you guys are too stuck up to expand your minds and discuss philosophical impacts of things. I raise an idea and instead of giving me your ideas, you guys start to poison it with tearing it apart like I am trying to either prove or disprove a theory.

 

I have my reasons for my thoughts, and instead of discussing your thoughts and the reasons behind them, you continually misinterpret the post and just try to prove me wrong. When I am not even trying to prove anything.

 

My adventure into the realm of aggriculture was an attempt to show you that not everything is as it seems from a scientific point of view. I cited these examples because you guys are trying to tear down my philosophical ideas because they have no scientific merit.

 

Well there was no scientific merit for a long time to feed beed with natural grass instead of cheap feed that was grown with tons of pesticides. Now we are figuring out that it is creating obesity and other disorders.

 

I cited this in an effort to show you guys that accepting nothing but current scientific "facts" can lead to situations that aren't really what they seemed to be.

 

I wanted to make this connection so that we could let go of the pointless "claim and support" crap that has been plaguing this thread.

 

But alas. We can't. So I'm just going to let this thread die since we cant discuss our points of view on a philosophical problem. I'm sorry you guys see things so superficially. Not everything is right or wrong. Its okay to tell me what you think, without trying to prove some kind of point. I did not set out to prove a point. I did not set out to convice you that the phone itself was good or bad. For 6 pages I have been trying to get people on track and open your mind to the possibility that things might be wrong even if there is no evidence to prove so. Some of you have given decent replies, and to those people, I thank you.

 

I'll be blunt and say that there are two things I feel are ruining society

 

1) political correctness

2) technophobia

 

Right now you seem to be someone who fits into cat 2.

 

Thank you for giving me something interesting: an opinion. And stating it as something that is your opinion. I wish you would elaborate on why you feel that way (why technophobia is bad to you, what you feel society is working towards) but nonetheless, I feel you have added more to this thread in your brief, honest, opinionated post than many others have added in lines and lines of over-analytic material that is completely off-mark.

[Alakazam]

*lights up a smoke while eating a big mac*

 

We're all going to die sooner or later, matter of time.