"Although the modern information age has opened up channels of communication that never before existed, it, paradoxically, has destroyed the foundation of community by isolating individuals in a technological world that involves little real human interaction."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your viewpoint using reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
--------------------------------------
My immediate reaction to the position that modern information age comes with a certain level of destruction of real human interaction as a foundation of community, is that perhaps there is some truth to it. However, I would like to examine the position in detail before taking a stance on it.
Compared to about half a century back, today the human race has at its disposal several facilities and gadgets that gives it the power to communicate any time, anywhere, with our friends, family and contacts, regardless of geography or time zone. The mobile phone is the quintessential example of such a gadget. Today, India and China are the largest markets for mobile phones, making it the single most powerful channel of communication in terms of being connected to individuals around the globe day and night, regardless of them being in the developed or developing world. This points us to the perceived value of possessing a channel of communication that offers incessant connectivity - towards being in touch with our dear ones, towards conducting business transactions. Taking the example of this one most prevalent gadget, it is easy to see that the channel of communication offered by it is being purposefully utilised towards more and more human interaction, rather than lesser interaction.
So, what is lost? If the position stated were to mean face-to-face interaction between human beings as what is real human interaction, perhaps that is not sufficient enough to isolate individuals - more so, into a technological world - then I would agree to it. However, because the very channels of communication opened up are being utilised by people to promote and further human communication rather than destroy it, in the overall analysis, it appears that the position makes a very serious but questionable assumption that only face-to-face communication between people devoid of any burden of purposefulness or lack of choice of individuals to communicate with, connotes a strong foundation in community.
Therefore, because the position does not examine the different dimensions of the foundation of community thoroughly, even within the narrow confines of human-human interaction, it may be far-fetched to state first that there is a paradox in having new channels of communication and not strengthening the foundation of community through them, and also forcing a strong relationship between face-to-face human interaction and the notion of foundation of community. In sum, I disagree with the position taken.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your viewpoint using reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
--------------------------------------
My immediate reaction to the position that modern information age comes with a certain level of destruction of real human interaction as a foundation of community, is that perhaps there is some truth to it. However, I would like to examine the position in detail before taking a stance on it.
Compared to about half a century back, today the human race has at its disposal several facilities and gadgets that gives it the power to communicate any time, anywhere, with our friends, family and contacts, regardless of geography or time zone. The mobile phone is the quintessential example of such a gadget. Today, India and China are the largest markets for mobile phones, making it the single most powerful channel of communication in terms of being connected to individuals around the globe day and night, regardless of them being in the developed or developing world. This points us to the perceived value of possessing a channel of communication that offers incessant connectivity - towards being in touch with our dear ones, towards conducting business transactions. Taking the example of this one most prevalent gadget, it is easy to see that the channel of communication offered by it is being purposefully utilised towards more and more human interaction, rather than lesser interaction.
So, what is lost? If the position stated were to mean face-to-face interaction between human beings as what is real human interaction, perhaps that is not sufficient enough to isolate individuals - more so, into a technological world - then I would agree to it. However, because the very channels of communication opened up are being utilised by people to promote and further human communication rather than destroy it, in the overall analysis, it appears that the position makes a very serious but questionable assumption that only face-to-face communication between people devoid of any burden of purposefulness or lack of choice of individuals to communicate with, connotes a strong foundation in community.
Therefore, because the position does not examine the different dimensions of the foundation of community thoroughly, even within the narrow confines of human-human interaction, it may be far-fetched to state first that there is a paradox in having new channels of communication and not strengthening the foundation of community through them, and also forcing a strong relationship between face-to-face human interaction and the notion of foundation of community. In sum, I disagree with the position taken.
