TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Why has technology become the Achilles's Heel to human interaction?

Technology has been a wonder to the 21st, It has evolved from basic mathematically computations answered using nature's basics to the first step of Armstrong on the shadows of the moon. Technology has in its entirety in its constant progression has finally gone to an extremity that overshadows human interaction As I discovered at age of 19 that if you can't communicate correctly what you MEAN to say, there half of your problems arise. Do you often notice how our conversations start and end. It begins in the greetings that each person has developed, and through these different variations of greetings we develop our uniqueness. From the quivers of nervous handshakes to the confidence of a roman. Our interactions are everything and how can we through social media pass through the hurdles of it the digital world replaces human interaction?


Closing Statement from Yony Haile

I agree with all our recent comments. It has helped me conclude that technology has made communication easier and I completely agree on this notion. I want to emphasis the concept of the computer face. People have formed these new identities behind the computer, thus the name computerface. I want to emphasis this new identity has formed under this new era. This new identity has not only decreased the level of competency between real people but for the next generation. Technology has brought up into a new era and I am glad for this identity, but lets focus on reemerging the true nature of face to face interactions. We don't want technology to take away the human nature out of our society.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Aug 15 2013: Interesting topic - in the late 1980's the Rand Corp. did a study of the affect of e-mails on group interactions and group decision making. It was found:
    1. the e-mail group had more acrimonious discussion
    2. the discussions lasted longer in the e-mail group and took longer to get consensus, but it was a true consensus
    3. the non e-mail group was dominated by one person due to his personality
    4. the non e-mail group claimed consensus but several members did not think there was consensus

    Today, I think the anonymous situation leads to people saying things they would never say in person and that leads to very bad communication and misunderstanding. The human mtg will always occur and is needed to help settle those misunderstanding.

    I believe that social media will take the place of a certain level of interaction but it will never replace the human mtg.
    • thumb
      Aug 18 2013: So, regardless we are still tribal in nature? It looks to be shaping up to be a tiered circle of online governance or an online democractic process that our elected governments will draw upon for public interaction?
      • Aug 18 2013: I think we are still basically tribal in nature. tell me more about this tiered circle of online governance or an online democratic process, not sure I understand.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.