Imagine a world, where every time you physically look down you miss something interesting in front of you; One would try to go through life keeping their head up. However, our culture has been glued on looking down, but toward a phone. An anonymous quote states, “don 't look down and be depressed, look up and be blessed.” The world we live in is being wasted, little by little, from spending countless time on these devices. Technology has been exponentially improving since the start of the 21st century, from self cleaning windows to self driving cars, actions are becoming easier and effortless. Nonetheless, one invention that started back in 1973 has altered the life of humanity in today’s society, the first handheld mobile phone. Martin Cooper,
…show more content…
In current american society people are getting so fixated on these devices that “in fact, nomophobia, or the fear of being without your mobile devices, is now recognized as a serious enough affliction to warrant checking into a rehab facility” (Cell). People could be “addicted” per say, yet what scientist can observe is that when our phones ring from notifications, us responding is a conditioned stimulus. Now, humans have a natural response to sounds, and we all react to this unconditioned stimulus. However, through sound, we hear this constant *ding* over and over and we automatically want to respond (also with looking at a notification). So as time increases, we develop the instinct to look at our phone whenever, in order to get that conditioned stimulus response. Similar to how gambling works, one will want a reward, our reward is having that sound/notification.“Smartphones are essentially the world’s smallest slot machine… It’s very neurologically addicting” (Murdock). There is the classic saying mothers give that say “to get off your phone”, and that teenagers are always on their phones… But, “37% of adults and 60% of teens admit they are highly addicted to their Smartphone” (Some). So people do know what the phone is doing to them, although they will not want to give it up, which is very similar to an …show more content…
Laws, boundaries and protective barriers should have preceded such headway in an attempt to limit a culture of traffic accidents, lower attention spans, and loss of verbal interaction. Unfortunately, the reverse has occurred where laws and ethical boundaries are still playing catchup to cellphone advancement. Therefore, the issue begs a discussion about some sort of “treatment” and who is in control and what is to be controlled. Must society rely on each individual to self impose their cell phone restrictions or it may intervene by allowing cell phone companies or state law to restrict certain
In current american society people are getting so fixated on these devices that “in fact, nomophobia, or the fear of being without your mobile devices, is now recognized as a serious enough affliction to warrant checking into a rehab facility” (Cell). People could be “addicted” per say, yet what scientist can observe is that when our phones ring from notifications, us responding is a conditioned stimulus. Now, humans have a natural response to sounds, and we all react to this unconditioned stimulus. However, through sound, we hear this constant *ding* over and over and we automatically want to respond (also with looking at a notification). So as time increases, we develop the instinct to look at our phone whenever, in order to get that conditioned stimulus response. Similar to how gambling works, one will want a reward, our reward is having that sound/notification.“Smartphones are essentially the world’s smallest slot machine… It’s very neurologically addicting” (Murdock). There is the classic saying mothers give that say “to get off your phone”, and that teenagers are always on their phones… But, “37% of adults and 60% of teens admit they are highly addicted to their Smartphone” (Some). So people do know what the phone is doing to them, although they will not want to give it up, which is very similar to an …show more content…
Laws, boundaries and protective barriers should have preceded such headway in an attempt to limit a culture of traffic accidents, lower attention spans, and loss of verbal interaction. Unfortunately, the reverse has occurred where laws and ethical boundaries are still playing catchup to cellphone advancement. Therefore, the issue begs a discussion about some sort of “treatment” and who is in control and what is to be controlled. Must society rely on each individual to self impose their cell phone restrictions or it may intervene by allowing cell phone companies or state law to restrict certain