Slashdot Mirror
How Mobile Devices Kill Your Creativity
FuzzNugget writes "ReadWrite has posted a thought-provoking piece on how mobile devices killing our boredom may also be killing our creativity. Quoting: 'Numerous studies and much accepted wisdom suggest that time spent doing nothing, being bored, is beneficial for sparking and sustaining creativity. With our iPhone in hand — or any smartphone, really — our minds, always engaged, always fixed on that tiny screen, may simply never get bored. And our creativity suffers. ... For example, psychology professor Gary Marcus distinguishes between the two primary types of pursuits we use to defeat boredom. "Boredom is the brain's way to tell you you should be doing something else. But the brain doesn't always know the most appropriate thing to do. If you're bored and use that energy to play guitar and cook, it will make you happy. But if you watch TV, it may make you happy in the short term, but not in the long term." So much of what we do on our smartphones, however, is decidedly short-term: a few moments playing a game while we stand in line, a minute to scan Instagram as the person in front of us at the grocery store pulls out their checkbook. ' Of course, you'll probably be reading this on a smartphone."
It's perfectly possible to be "bored" while using an iPhone or iPad or whatever smart device you prefer.
I think point missed by this type of research is assuming that everyone is actively engaged by the device when idly surfing Facebook or Slashdot. In this situation the user may simply be waiting for inspiration to strike (when that happens is unpredictable, otherwise we'd milk it for all it's worth).
Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone in every situation, but to suggest that having access to smart phones is killing creativity is a bit of a stretch.
Peace,
Andy.
I think maybe it was - I know I got bored about 1/3 way through the summary.
#DeleteChrome
Don't be so ridiculously literal ... replace cooking or guitar with whatever floats your boat.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
I have TTC courses, Coursera Courses, and iTunesU courses on my iPhone/iPad. So in my downtime I have learned discrete math/cryptography among others and am presently plowing through a great Coursera course in Computational Investing. I also have Algebra Touch on my iPhone and hand it to my younger daughter when we are stuck waiting. For both of my daughters I have TTC math on the iPad to hand to them when bored (some bribery involved).
So I would not say that Mobile devices are inherently bad but that many people use them to peruse the junk food isle. I go to the grocery store an my cart is devoid of palm oil or HFCS. Often I see other people's carts full of products containing both. We are shopping in the same store.
Hanging out with friends doesn't leave you with anything to show for the time spent, but I doubt you'd find many people who would opt for knitting a scarf or building a shelf instead.
Not everything valuable can be held up and shown; not everything that can be held up and shown is valuable.
Some of the time I most value is time spent with my family, particularly my parents since they are aging and it isn't something I'm going to be able to do forever. I have nothing to show for it, I take home with me nothing but memories, and yet I value those memories highly.
I'll never understand the attitude I see online sometimes where people value only actually creating something, or accomplishing something. That as though if you aren't spending your time building something, fixing something, creating something, etc you are just useless.
On the contrary, I find that much of my time spent with non-tangible results to be of value. Even simple personal things. If I spend a weekend lazing around, playing video games, petting my kitty, sleeping in, and so on I have nothing to show for it. However I enjoy it, and I feel relaxed and happy, so how can you call that worthless?
It seems to me to be a rather empty existence if you define your worth by nothing but what you make. I'm not saying don't take pride in things you create, I know I do (well, when they are good at least) but if your definition of self is only in what you make, then what does that really say? What is the point? If personal happiness and enjoyment don't matter, then why bother? If they do matter, then why define them so narrowly to only include the tangible?
The point is that just about any hobby you have will only make you happy in the short-term
What? The examples given provide lasting value. Things like watching TV and playing games are generally more limited in scope.
You're flipping things around. Most any hobby will provide happiness on the short term, but not all will provide happiness in the long term. The idea here is that the ones that provide both short and long term happiness are better than the ones that merely provide for the short term.
Addiction
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
Hanging out with friends doesn't leave you with anything to show for the time spent
That phrase is not normally used so literally. Healthy, satisfying relationships ARE something you can show for your effort.
The point is that just about any hobby you have will only make you happy in the short-term
What? The examples given provide lasting value. Things like watching TV and playing games are generally more limited in scope.
You're flipping things around. Most any hobby will provide happiness on the short term, but not all will provide happiness in the long term. The idea here is that the ones that provide both short and long term happiness are better than the ones that merely provide for the short term.
I've known lots of people who played a musical instrument for a few years, and then it just collects dust in the corner. It doesn't provide any long term happiness necessarily.
If you claim that active hobbies have greater than chances of providing you with long term happiness than passive term hobbies, you might be on to something - because they are active, they can be followed on for many years, instead of at the whim of the source.
Reading, for example, has provided me with many years of happiness, and I expect it will continue to do so. Is reading any different from watching a TV show? Not really. It is still a passive activity - though I have a greater choice in books (though it is slowly changing, since I am not restricted in watching what passes for entertainment in my part of the world). Now, reading might involve imagination (like a kid who imagines himself as a Knight), but it doesn't have to.
Lasting happiness is a very strange concept - you are happy doing something now. I doubt I'd get much happiness remembering the violin I played as a kid, or the scuba diving trip I took a few years ago, or the TV show I saw a decade ago.
Attention span is the ability to concentrate on a subject for an extended period of time. If you are only able to concentrate when there is continuous external stimulation, it's shallow concentration. This is the difference between reading a book and playing a first person shooter video game. In the video game you are continually reacting. Reading requires mentally retaining the subject matter as you read, and relating what you are reading now to previous material. One is externally organized, the other is internally organized.
Obviously, it's possible to read an ebook on a smart phone, so the device itself is not intrinsically in one mode or the other. This is why so many of the previous posts point to creative activity enabled by electronics.
Having the ability to maintain internal concentration is a learned skill. The problem with pervasive electronics is that chronic users substitute external stimulation for internal concentration. They don't know how to concentrate on their own.
This is ultimately a deficit. It's why people do really stupid things like texting while driving. There are some activities that demand a high degree of internal concentration, like doing mathematics, coding, or surgery. I guarantee that you don't want someone cutting you open who suddenly starts texting about the procedure, or a judge who is not paying attention to the trail proceeding because they are playing a game with the cellphone in their lap.
Why is Snark Required?