[jancsika]

So the question that I don't know the answer to: would those couples have engaged each other in meaningful conversation (meaningful to them) had cellphones not existed? Or does the presence of cellphones reveal that a large number of people were never particularly interested in engaging meaningfully with others but would only feign interest when the alibi of the cellphone isn't available?

[lamp_book]

Or a more optimistic view: it takes some effort to get to interesting conversation; you have to go through some fakeish small talk to find a topic worth discussing. Phones don't require that effort, they're the path of least resistance.

[msla]

Smalltalk is ideally about finding a hook, a more interesting shared topic which can support a more fulfilling conversation. Otherwise, it's just killing time, and I daresay most here have more intellectually stimulating ways to kill time.

The complexity is when people regard a lack of smalltalk as a chilly isolation. I personally have been called stuck-up because I didn't engage in smalltalk at school. Some cultures are more oriented to this than others.

[prawn]

Your least resistance point is crucial. I suspect that social media likes/karma will act as a low-effort faux-earning that waylays young people. It's a sense of achievement, but one that doesn't pay the bills unless you're one of the few able to derive an income from your broadcast.

[posguy]

Sometimes conversation may occur that otherwise would have been avoided thanks to cellphones, other times you get calming silence instead. Its a definite risk, but the whole equation is ignored usually.

[nulagrithom]

> other times you get calming silence instead

I always like that Pulp Fiction line: "That's when you know you've found somebody special. When you can just shut the fuck up for a minute and comfortably enjoy the silence."

I don't think a moment of silence is any excuse to pull out the cellphone. In fact, I think this highlights part of the problem we have with cellphones. We expect constant entertainment, action, and info. It's really rare anymore to just sit for a minute and do nothing -- and it could be that doing nothing is pretty important.

[chiefofgxbxl]

Phones have indeed allowed people to both need and satisfy that need for constant stimulation. It's pretty sad.

I'm the kind of guy in a coffee shop, waiting room, etc. who just stares into space glad that I owe my thoughts to myself and not my phone. But when everyone else has their phones out except for me, people probably think I'm a weirdo.

And it's not just phones, mind you. It's televisions, also. I used to go to a nice, quiet, and remote barbershop. Affordable haircuts and no noise. What's not to love? As soon as he started attracting more customers, boom: television in the waiting room. Gotta keep people constantly distracted I guess :\

I saw a guy today in a coffee shop. He had no smartphone, tablet or laptop. He just sat there drinking his coffee. Like a psychopath. (https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-5j54a0AOYfg/VqbpdyKMA8I/A...)

[chimprich]

> Phones have indeed allowed people to both need and satisfy that need for constant stimulation. It's pretty sad.

Why is it sad? I think it's fantastic. It's the elimination of boredom and the ability to be interested, productive or entertained at any moment. It's not like anyone is forcing you to look at your phone. I'm quite capable of putting my phone away and staring into space if the mood takes me. Your communal TV example is rather more intrusive by comparison.

[chiefofgxbxl]

It's a matter of opinion, and I agree to some extent that phones can allow people to be productive or feed a curiosity.

At the end of the day, though, I think the greatest thing that gets to me is its impulsiveness and form of instant gratification.

It's gotten so bad that people can't even put their phones down while driving. I've seen enough drivers texting, even if they are just stopped at a red light. Why we permit people to continue driving when they can't respect the notion of operating a several-thousand pound, gasoline-filled vehicle that can kill dozens of those around them is beyond me.

On a less extreme spectrum, sometimes when eating dinner with friends a question will be posed and someone will whip out their phone to look it up. Sure, having answers instantaneously is a benefit, but the drawback is also the loss in ability to take a moment to ponder the question... to come up with your one's own thoughts and exercise the mind, so to speak.

[devotedtoneu]

I have to take a moment to thank you for this comment and that image. It demonstrates the point so well, without a lengthy read.

[i_cant_speel]

This morning I was in the elevator with three other people. All three of them were looking at their phones. Strangely, I felt weird just standing there waiting.

I feel like the world transformed so quickly.

[mirimir]

I remember when I was the only one carrying a laptop. And then a cellphone. And then a smartphone. Then I zoned out on privacy and anonymity zealotry. And the next thing I knew, everyone and their little yellow dog had their face in a smartphone 24/7. WTF? Seriously, WTF?

[Brockenstein]

>would those couples have engaged each other in meaningful conversation (meaningful to them) had cellphones not existed?

certainly some would

>Or does the presence of cellphones reveal that a large number of people were never particularly interested in engaging meaningfully with others but would only feign interest when the alibi of the cellphone isn't available?

I think that people are addicted or at least oblivious at how attached to their phones they are. And they see plenty of other people engaging in the same behavior, which makes it a social norm and validates that behavior. Everyone does it, so it's OK.

Although I can't help but chuckle, because the same sorts of people who wanted to look down on me back in the day for spending hours in front of a computer, building a website, learning how to program, or playing games, are glued to their phones nearly every second they can manage to find. When it came time to practice the sort of etiquette that they preached, they failed miserably.

[croon]

> So the question that I don't know the answer to: would those couples have engaged each other in meaningful conversation (meaningful to them) had cellphones not existed? Or does the presence of cellphones reveal that a large number of people were never particularly interested in engaging meaningfully with others but would only feign interest when the alibi of the cellphone isn't available?

I would add a followup to that. Would this also mean that more people are together now that otherwise wouldn't, without that crutch?

Not sure I want anything said with that, but I couldn't help but draw the conclusion.

[careersuicide]

This is a really good question and one I think about often. Either possibility is pretty depressing to me.