Skip to main content

They're Called Cell Phones Because The Phone is of Out Hot Cell Eat The Phone

    (The title is a reference, if you don't understand, don't worry about it.)

    These two articles are a bit more linked than normal, as one is a direct response to the other. Though aside from the fact that they both talk about phones and are written in English, there aren't many comparisons I can make, they differ from each other quite severely.
    First, and most obviously, their stances on cellphones are direct opposites. The one titled "Have Smartphones Destroyed A Generation?" Is, shockingly (not really,) thinks that the impact smartphones have on the youths is negative overall, whereas the response, "No, Smartphones are Not Destroying a Generation" thinks that this is not the case (another shocking revelation, I know)

    There are also some more minor differences in format, for example, the response is much shorter than the paper it's responding to, which I appreciate greatly because my attention span is garbage. The sources the original work links to are, most often, other papers about this subject, whereas the response mostly links to... definitions of words. Well, okay, there are a good few number of links to actual sources, but I don't think I needed one for the word "teen."

    One thing I found odd from the initial paper was its pseudo-idolization of stuff like teen pregnancies and underage substance abuse. It called out that this was a good, thing but it's still sends mixed messages when you're trying to write about how it's bad teens aren't doing as much anymore and half of the stuff you point to are things they probably shouldn't be doing.

    There's also this line from the original article "There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness." that seems like it's overgeneralizing just a TAD. Like, really? ALL screen activities are linked to less happiness? ALL nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness? "Well I learned that a meteor is about to crash into earth and kill everyone, but at least I read it in a newspaper! If I had learned about it on my phone I might've gotten more upset, thank goodness I dodged that bullet!"

    For my own experience with cellphones, my friends have pretty tight schedules, so the most we can really "hang out" together is by texting. I don't have Snapchat, Instagram, Tiktok, Facebook, or Twitter on my phone. I mostly just browse Tumblr and chat on Discord, so if I gave it up for a day I would definitely be inconvenienced, but I don't think I'd be particularly affected beyond that.

    As for an ultimate lesson? I suppose it would be that cell phones are alright, certainly not the greatest but not the worst, either. I'd say that the number one rule of data can be applied in this situation: never confuse correlation with causation.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pandemic Book Part 2: Electric Boogaloo

      I'm not sure how I'm supposed to follow the note because I can't see what passages other people picked until I submit this. -writing this as I read, I find it  mildly interesting that Jeevan was a paparazzo twice. I thought it was one solid block of his life, but nope. -Also, what kind of name is Jeevan? for the remainder of this blog I'm gonna call him Jeeves -calling it now I think Frank's gonna die or otherwise be separated from Jeeves. -"his hands ached from compressing Arthur's unwilling heart" is a pretty neat line, good contender for the line I'll discuss. -when Jeeves's phone rang and he said "hua" I thought that was an exclamation of surprise, like "HUH?!" -I'm disappointed to find out Arthur wasn't patient zero, makes him less interesting to me, and it also makes the original "and this is when it happened" line I praised very dull in hindsight. Because even if "it" didn't happe...

Forget this book, let's talk about Early Modern English!

-It's nice that they have a traveling acting troupe in the post-apocalypse. -I hope Jeeves died. Not because I dislike him, but because it would be narratively interesting. We get to learn about a person: their past, their hopes and dreams, their struggles... only for their story to be cut-short by the virus. -The farther we get from Shakespeare's time the more incomprehensible plays of that time become. "The safer sense will ne'er accommodate his master thus"?? What does "thus" mean in this context? In modern English it's used like "[cause] thus [effect]," you don't just end a sentence with it! And even if thus wasn't there to muck-up the whole line, what does it mean for a safer sense to not accommodate something? My best guess on what "safer sense" means is caution. Like, "Oh I would go play on the highway but I have a safer sense for that." or something. Does this mean that the person doesn't think cautio...