Rise of the Planet of the Apps

Bill Bornschein | March 2, 2013

"Svaardvaard" Bill Bornschein

“Svaardvaard” Bill Bornschein

Our local paper recently featured a story about our zoo’s cutting edge program that gives iPads to our orangutans, Teak, Bella, Segundo, and Amber. The stated purpose is to provide mental stimulation that helps prevent boredom and depression. Without the slightest sense of irony, the zoo officials go on to explain that “Freedom of choice is critical to their well-being.” Good grief, of course they are bored and depressed. They are prisoners. If the doors were opened I doubt they’d stick around to play with the iPads. A friend suggested that for amusement the orangutans be shown Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Or was that Planet of the Apps?

As I reflected on this my mind turned to my own students, iPads in hand as they chart a brave new world of education. As with the apes, many students have regarded their formal education as a form of imprisonment. No less an authority than Professor A. Cooper gave expression to the general sentiment in his seminal work School’s Out For Summer.  Indeed, like prison, the reward of graduation is to finally “get out.” I suspect this may be as true for doctoral candidates as for high schoolers. Of course, the iPad is being promoted as a form of engagement, which it certainly is. But to what degree is it liberating? We have probably all read critiques of our cyber-age and the anomie it engenders. Are we happier, more fulfilled, living better lives than before? Is cyber community a complement to or a substitute for earlier forms of community?

Framing this in a Beckerian perspective, do the iPads reflect a genuflection at the altar of our new god Technos who has stepped into the void created by the demise of standard brand religious and cultural myths?  Facing myriad problems, insofar as we place faith in anything, we seem to place our faith in technology, even for our orangutans. One of Becker’s most compelling images is that of the philistine, which he borrowed from Kierkegaard. The modern philistine loses himself in the minutia of the daily routine and thereby represses existential anxiety. Does our technology allow us to maintain a distracted existence? Watching my students jump around the internet on their down time, that seems to be the case. I’m always mentally comparing these students to their predecessors in terms of their general awareness of the world and the issues we face. I should hasten to add that I am not talking down today’s  kids. They are simply what I see before me and I suspect the same distracted consciousness exists across generations.

I recently read The Lost Art of Reading: Why Books Matter In A Distracted Time by David Ulin.  He makes the case for reading as a type of depth experience that leads to both a clearer understanding of self and at the same time a sort of negation of self as we turn the reins of our consciousness over to another. It is this sort of dialectical inner conversation between the author and the reader that produces the consciousness of an avid reader, at once adventurous and discriminating. He goes on to analyze the availability of such an experience on iPads, Kindles, and the like. I return here to the freedom of choice offered to the orangutans on their iPads. What is the difference between amusement and insight, between accessing data and entering the mind of another?  Like the orangutans, we are prisoners of a sort, confined by our mortal condition. Unlike the orangutan, our boredom and depression—and I would add here our self-conscious anxiety—is unlikely to be assuaged by the amusement the iPad provides. No, we are a different kind of prisoner and require something deeper. This may seem completely obvious, but I see people losing themselves in the surface components of technology as surely as Kierkegaard observed the philistines of his day. As we chart a course forward, how will we mediate technological change so as to live rich and productive lives? For me, it will entail a self-conscious effort to continue in-depth reading as well as pursuing in-depth conversations that involve eye-contact. Without such a self-conscious effort we may find ourselves more and more like the orangutans, prisoners of a lower order. Okay, enough of that. It’s time to check Facebook.

6 Comments

  1. I think your connection to Becker is right on target. The e-world is so addictive because it pulls the demi-god from the animal and gives nearly complete isolation from facing mortality. Why else would someone text while driving a 3000lb machine down a highway at 70 miles an hour? The question is, will man be absorbed so deeply in this alternative space that he stops being man at all?

    jcs

  2. Thanks Bill. I agree – technology serves as a symbolic distraction as well as a fast-acting mental solvent. It might ward off depression, but it is not without its consequences. I think it is humorous how these folks believe that other primates can utilize our symbolic avoidance strategies when they cannot get the symbolic? Might as well give them a flickering flashlight.

    In their efforts to forget themselves, humans are slowly forgetting how to relate. It is depressing how often I see it, both in the classroom, and in the therapy office. I will often ask a therapy client: “so, did you tell them how you felt about that?” A client will often respond, “yes.” But I have learned to ask the follow up question: “was this in person, or through text-messaging?”

    • Thanks Brad. I’m curious what you say to them if they acknowledge that the communication was by texting.

      • Also, the March issue of Discover magazine has a cover story touting the next stage of human evolution through technology, Homo Evolutus. As Becker points out, the longer life spans provided by technology do not address death anxiety. The human condition remains constant. To quote Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins, ” Despite all my rage(and technology) I am still just a rat in a cage.”

      • Well, I usually follow-up a series of leading questions: “do you think there might be some limitations to communicating that way?” “Is it at all possible that something might get lost in translation?” “What would feel better, someone saying those comforting words to you in person, with a sincere feeling or expression, or through text messaging?”

        People figure out quite quickly what point you are driving at. If not, I usually mention those cliche points about 80% of the meaning derived from communication being non-verbal, and about how important it is with regard to intersubjectivity (feeling felt by someone) and emotion-regulation.

  3. Look! – they’re just like us!

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.