Difficult Conversations

Some conversations are difficult to have, aren’t they?  Some are perhaps too difficult.  Who begins the conversation?  Who is willing to risk the loss of friendship, or status, or income, in order to initiate a difficult, yet vital, conversation?

Socially and culturally, we are faced with just such a decision now.

The evidence for environmental collapse, and therefore social collapse, is mounting almost weekly.  We may have already tipped the tipping points of climate chaos.  It may be that we have passed the opportune time to make the changes necessary to avoid runaway climate change.  It may be that no matter what we do now, we will not be able to keep global warming beneath 2 degrees C.

If that is so, and the likelihood is extremely high, then what sort of conversations should we be having?  At a minimum the conversations need to focus on: can we adapt to a rapidly heating world, how do we do so, what do we focus on, do we need to change focus?

What might a post-collapse society look like?  Asking that question is not meant to elicit simply possibilities; such a question requires some deliberate thought put into what do we do to prepare, and what do we do to increase the chance that some form of human existence will rise from the ashes of collapse?  Whatever that future looks like, there is one thing we can be certain of – it will not look like the current society, it will not be a return to “business as usual.”

Those are difficult conversations.

They are difficult because they challenge our sense of hope, they challenge our desire for control, they challenge our wish for certainty.  Fundamentally, they challenge our mortality.  They challenge our self-preservation instinct.  They challenge us psychologically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually.

Tragically, the longer we remain trapped within the, now redundant, conversation of how to avert, stop, and reverse climate chaos, then the longer we put off the conversations that we need to be having.

We had chances before

Since the mid-20^th century we have had chances to engage in difficult conversations – and failed to take them.  Had we taken those chances then, we may have been in a different place today and not have to engage in the difficult conversation about what to do in the face of environmental and social collapse.

In the late 1960s through to the late 1970s we had warnings of environmental crises.  Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was published in 1962, followed by books such as, The Population Bomb, A Blueprint for Survival, the ground-breaking Limits to Growth, and Small is Beautiful.  All these pointed to the degradation of the environment and suggesting that a change was needed in our approach to living with Mother Earth.  These writers and others hoped for some difficult conversations.  They did not happen, or at least did not happen at a large enough scale.

During the 1990s we had a chance to have another difficult conversation – this time about global warming (later termed climate change and now climate chaos.)  Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature in 1989 heralded the possibility of such a conversation.  Although a global climate conference had been held as early as 1979, it was not until 1988 that the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established.  Since then there have been numerous reports and conferences related to climate change.  It would be hard to contend that the difficult conversations needed then (twenty or thirty years ago) took place.  The difficult conversations related to climate change have only begun to occur in the last decade or so.

Far too late!

Climate change has passed us by whilst we stood about engaged in small talk.

Will we let this opportunity to initiate difficult conversations also pass us by?

The conversations we need to be having now are even more difficult than the ones we should have had over the past sixty years.

Recognising Our Mortality

It is claimed that human beings are the only species able to contemplate our own death.  Other species (e.g., elephants) do seem to mourn the deaths of one of their own, but we do not yet know whether they associate that with their own eventual death.  Understanding that we will die on an individual level confronts us with our emotional and psychological response to that knowledge.  There appears to be two broad responses; a fear and anguish-inducing despair, or a calm and deliberate acceptance, almost a contented yearning (for some.)

At a societal and cultural level any talk of demise of humanity raises possibilities of despair and dismal gloominess.  Such feelings can easily lead to inaction and a lacklustre outlook – a “what’s-the-point” attitude. 

These difficult conversations will need to acknowledge and embrace that possibility.

However, recognising the collapse of society need not be faced with despair and anguish.  Moving beyond despair, anguish, anger, and denial may enable us (collectively) to re-discover what is beautiful in the world.  We may move into a realm of love born out of our grief.  Rupert Read, an English academic and active in the UK Extinction Rebellion movement, counsels that, “Grief is how love survives loss.”  Wise words. 

For the future post-collapse to embrace beauty and love we need difficult conversations.  We need to be able to move the conversation from one based on fear (the threat of climate change) to one based on love.  Charles Eisenstein notes in his book Climate: A New Story¹ that what often brought people to an environmental awareness and activism was love – a love for the forests, bush, mountains, oceans, birds, animals, trees. 

It is possible to re-animate that love of nature and beauty, even whilst acknowledging social collapse.  Those who are closer to the end of their lives may be able to recognise that easier than someone much younger.  Yet, paradoxically, that is why we must engage in the difficult conversations. 

Older people must engage with younger people.  Because the older generation failed to have difficult conversations in the past, it now means the older generations have failed their children and future generations.  We must have difficult conversations.  We need to tell the truth.  We need to acknowledge that we have failed.  Trying to protect children from that truth is another failure.  We must have the difficult conversations even if it means admitting that our previous failures have condemned future generations to ecological and social collapse.  We must not fail again.

Colonising cultures must engage with colonised cultures.  The colonisers of the world (primarily euro-centric, western-styled cultures) must admit that our impact upon the earth and upon indigenous society has been a failure.  Ignoring that and continuing to act as if we can “solve” the problems we have wrought is another failure.    

No matter who we are, or where we are on our individual life’s journey – we must have difficult conversations.

Note:

1. Charles Eisenstein, Climate: A New Story, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, California, 2018.

Women Show Men How It Is Done

Delegates at the Hague conference.  Jane Addams is second
from the left at the front.

Today is International Women’s Day, so I thought I would write about an historical event that seems to have almost been forgotten – or perhaps deliberately side-lined.

Nine months to the day after the start of the First World War well over 1,200 women from all over Europe, plus Canada and the U.S., met in The Hague for the International Congress of Women.  This conference had two major foci:

1.     That international disputes should be settled by pacific means.

2.     That the parliamentary franchise should be extended to women.

Of the thirteen nations represented at the conference only one – Norway – had extended the franchise to women at the time.  Within five years of this conference votes for women had been extended in a further six countries.  Two more had done so partially.  Indeed, prior to the outbreak of World War 1 in only two nations in Europe was it possible for women to vote – Norway and Finland.

Women clearly understood the connection between political power and the possibilities for peace.

Newspapers of the time criticised the conference as “hysterical, base, silly, and futile.” Women from Germany, Austria, and Hungary were labelled “Kaiser’s cat’s paws” and denounced as German spies.

Despite these attacks and attempts to discredit, 1,136 women attended as delegates and several hundred more as visitors and observers.  Hundreds more were unable to attend; either because they were stopped by government decree (as 150 or more from the U.K. were when the Home Office refused to issue passports) or were impeded by the lack of shipping because of the war. 

Women who attended risked the opprobrium of families, the disavowal of friends, and the censure of their own governments.  Far from succumbing to massive criticism and ostracism, Jane Addams¹ (who presided over the conference) summed up the fortitude of the women when she remarked after the conference that:

“The great achievement of this congress is to my mind the getting together of these women from all parts of Europe, when their men-folks are shooting each other from opposite trenches.  When in every warring country there is such a wonderful awakening of national consciousness flowing from heart to heart, it is a supreme effort of heroism to rise to the feeling of internationalism, without losing patriotism.”

The congress endorsed a document containing twenty resolutions ranging from protesting the violence against women, to the principles and process leading to peace.²  The document outlined steps necessary towards international cooperation and the need for pacific approaches to conflict resolution to be taught in schools.  The role of women in peace processes was noted and included the call for all countries to extend the parliamentary franchise to women.

Participants at this congress did not stop with the endorsement of this document.  Following the conference, the document was printed in English, French, and German and sent to European heads of state in May 1915.  Furthermore, thirty delegates toured Europe from May until June speaking with political leaders and others.  However, the fighting continued.

Today, many of the resolutions from this congress are used as guidelines for many diplomatic negotiations held between hostile nations.

It should be remembered that this conference was held at a time when conferences/congresses were very much the domain of men, and that travel by women (without male company) was largely frowned upon.  Furthermore, at that time (in the middle of one of the most brutal wars in history) travel was extremely difficult.  It is a tribute to the women who participated that they did so, and were not afraid to show their courage and determination.

Had those twenty resolutions been listened to, and adopted, by the European leaders of the time, the world today may well have been a far more peaceful and cooperative place than it is today.

It still could be, if women continue to stand up for their understandings, and if men would stop and listen.

Notes:

1.  Jane Addams was a leader in the U.S. suffragist movement, a founder of the profession of social work, an activist for world peace, and social reformer.  She was once labelled “the most dangerous woman in America.  She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1931.

2.  A PDF of these resolutions is here: https://wilpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/WILPF_triennial_congress_1915.pdf

Older and Elder: It is more than a vowel difference.

Rabindranath Tagore

Stephen Jenkinson (author of Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble) claims that:

“the presence of elders in a culture turns out not to derive from an aging population.  We’d be awash in wisdom if it did.”¹

David Suzuki (the eminent geneticist and environmentalist) adds to this when he says:

“Native cultures fully recognise that all elderly people have lessons to offer based on their life experiences.  But they also realize that only a few have the specialised knowledge of the cosmos that uniquely equips them to provide wise counsel to the community and the world.”²

So, what might distinguish an elder from an older?  One characteristic associated with older age is that of retirement.  Retirement is viewed largely as the prerogative of older age,

There has been much written about retirement, with much advice and tips on how to enjoy retirement (older age.)  Four factors are often cited as helping to ensure a happy olderness.  These four factors can be useful in elucidating the similarities and differences between older and elder.

1. Health

Taking care of one’s health is crucial to enjoying olderhood.  Most retirement counsellors and advisers recommend active exercise of at least three times per week.  Advice is also given on the types of foods best consumed by those of an older age.  Regular health check-ups by a GP are suggested.  Basically, the advice comes down to: take care of your body.

An elder, however, takes in a bigger picture and considers the health of the entire planet (and cosmos as Suzuki alludes to.)  An elder recognises that one’s personal health is inextricably linked with the health of the planet.  Earth is understood to be a single system – the Gaia Principle – in which everything is linked to everything else.  Everything is inter-dependent.

2. Finances

Older people are advised to manage their finances to ensure an adequate income in their retirement.  Indeed, a cursory glance at the retirement advisory sites would suggest that finances, money, investments etc are the number one retirement planning priority for an older person.  “Putting aside for old age,” or “creating a nest egg for retirement” seem to be two of the catchphrases that are used to promote sufficient wealth to live off in the retirement years.

An elder views wealth in quite different terms.  For an elder it is of little comfort if the accumulation of wealth has come at the cost of damaging the earth or its inhabitants along the way.  An elder is less likely to ask themselves if they have accumulated sufficient wealth for old age.  They are more likely to ask if they have given back more to the earth than they have taken.

3. Relationships

Having supportive friends and family in one’s social circle is cited as very important to how well one is likely to enjoy retirement.  We all know how important the sense of belonging and companionship is to our mental well-being.  In older age this becomes even more important as other sources of self-worth (e.g., work, or social standing) become lessened.

For an elder, relationships are also fundamental, although an elder is more inclined to extend that circle of relationship to the more-than-human world.  The role of the elder in this relationship is one which “assigns human beings enormous responsibility for sustaining harmonious relations within the whole natural world rather than granting them unbridled license to follow personal or economic whim.”²

4. Goals

Almost from the time we are born (in western-styled societies at least) we are imbued with the notion that we must have goals.  As youngsters we are continually asked, “What do you want to be when you grow up?”  At school we are told that we must have a goal in life, and education enables that goal to be realised.  At work we are exhorted to climb the corporate ladder or move to a higher paying/higher status job.  It seems that upon retirement the same encouragement to have a goal (or goals) is made.  In retirement it is advisable, so the advisers say, to have goals, to maintain some sort of interest or hobby. 

An elder, too, may find themselves with some goal, although often the achievement of the goal is of far lesser importance than the journey.  Furthermore, the goal may be for something that, once completed, the elder will obtain no benefit, nor well-being from.  The distinguished Bengali poet, philosopher, and elder, Rabindranath Tagore, expressed this idea well:

“The one who plants trees, knowing that he or she will never sit in their shade, has at least started to understand the meaning of life.”

Or, as Stephen Jenkinson eloquently puts it:

“The elder serves best by toasting the coming of the next day while he or she stands there at five minutes to his or her personal midnight.”¹

Essentially

What these four facets essentially tell us is that an elder takes a wider, more holistic, cosmic view than does someone who has arrived at old age simply by negotiating many years.  An elder is most likely to have begun their journey towards elderhood many many years before they even get close to old age.  Elderhood does not simply a cloak that is put on upon the attaining of a required age.  An elder weaves, stitches, and darns the cloak of elderhood for many years before the local community tells him or her that it is time to don the cloak.

Notes:

1. Stephen Jenkinson, Come Of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, California, 2018.

2.  Peter Knudson & David Suzuki, Wisdom of the Elders, Allen & Unwin, North Sydney, Australia, 1992.

Leave Only Footprints

Fossilized 3.66 million-year-old footprints
from Laetoli, Tanzania, 
Photograph by Raffaello Pellizzon.

When I was young my parents often took us on picnics.  We would pack a hamper of food, throw in a picnic blanket, climb in the car, and drive to some wonderful spot.  Dad would always take his camera on these trips.  Before we sat down for the picnic itself, we would all go for a walk somewhere – along a bushy trail, beside a river or lake, or along a beach.  Dad would take photographs along the way.

One of the things Dad often said on these outings was: “Take only photographs, leave only footprints.”  I used to think he was clever to come up with such an original piece of advice.  I have since discovered that he was not so original, although I still consider him to have been clever.

The original sage advice predates the invention of cameras.  The original quote has been attributed to Si’ahl (anglicised to Chief Seattle) of the Suquamish and Duwamish people; he lived from the late 18^th to the mid-19^th centuries.  He is quoted as saying:

“Take nothing but memories, leave nothing but footprints.”

Sadly, our modern-day, westernised, extractivist lifestyles do everything except leave nothing but footprints.  We do everything from trampling upon endangered plants through to digging up the earth for resources.

We pave the landscape with roads and parking lots so that we do not even need to use our feet.  The weight of an average car is around thirty times that of a human.  Currently there are almost 1.5 billion cars in the world.  That is a huge weight upon the earth.  Imagine you are a small sand crab attempting to burrow into your home near the high watermark of a beach.  Suddenly along comes an SUV weighing around 2.2 tonnes.  What do you do?  Burrow down further into the sand, thus using up valuable energy, or take your chances that the SUV monster will miss you by mere centimetres?

That is how life can be for some of the smallest of the earth’s non-humans.  For the larger non-humans life can be just as difficult because of human trampling.  The disruption to eco-systems around the world, because of our trampling, is massive.

What too, of the damage done to ourselves?  Note that the quotes above mention footprints; they do not mention bootprints or shoeprints.  Why is that significant? 

Because, by walking upon the earth barefoot we literally ground ourselves.  We feel the earth, we allow the earth’s energies to enter our bodies through the soles of our feet.  We connect back to Mother Earth. 

Walking barefoot has other health benefits.  Barefoot walking encourages the use of all the muscles of the foot, whereas the wearing of shoes impedes some muscle development.  There is also a growing body of research linking healthy immune systems with barefoot walking and contact with the earth.

Imagine what sort of impact we would have on the earth, and upon ourselves, if we took heed of this quote over our lifetime?  For some, as they near the end of their lives, they will look back and ask if they have left the world in a better state than when they arrived?

If we leave nothing but footprints there is a good chance that they can answer that in the affirmative.

Rote-ual Of Life

“Life is simply a ritual of work, eat, sleep…work, eat, sleep…”  At least this is how it appears to be to many people in western-styled cultures.

Yet, such a mechanical, time-constrained, approach to life might better be termed a rote-ual, rather than ritual.  Life has become routine. 

If we give any thought at all to how we spend our days, and our lives, we might well conclude that we navigate our way through life as if following a pre-planned route on a map.  No deviation.  No opportunity to explore a side-road.  No striking off into unchartered territory.  In many ways this map is already drawn; we have had little or no cartographic interest in its production.

We simply follow the route that is marked upon the map of life.

It is perhaps telling that the words route, routine, and rote all derive from the Old French word rute meaning road, way, or path.  Furthermore, it is revealing to note that the word rut derives from the same source.  We are stuck in a rut.

Rather than life being a ritual, it has become a rote-ual.

Perhaps instead of bemoaning or complaining that life is ritualised (rote-ualised) we might be better off considering the loss of true ritual in our lives.  Perhaps our lives are so rote-ualised because we have lost, forgotten, or had stolen from us, the rituals in our lives.

Today ritual tends to be associated with religious practices.  The Roman word ritus predates most of the world’s largest religions, including Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism.  In Roman times it had the sense of being “the proven – or correct – way of performing sacrifices.” 

Therein is a clue – sacrifice; let us follow that lead.  Sacrifice – the practice of honouring the sacred.  Sacred – to set aside as holy.  And holy?  Well, that word comes from a Proto-Indo-European word meaning whole, uninjured.  It has a link to our word (you guessed it) - health.

What is all this tracing of words, meanings, and definitions telling us?

Etymology can be a light-hearted, possibly inconsequential, study or pastime.  Yet, tracing the roots of words can be illuminating.  It can point to what we have lost, forgotten, or had stolen.

In this case (rote, rite, ritual, sacred, holy, health) it is possible to trace a serious loss of something of great significance to humanity.  We can trace the loss of the sacred.  We have forgotten that our health and what is holy are one and the same.  We have had stolen from us the rituals of life.

Some of those lost rituals are simple: such as singing the world into existence each morning with the rising of the sun.

Very few of the larger, more meaningful rituals of communal life have been retained.  Those that remain – such as marriage – are now so rote-ualised that any remnant of ritual has been largely stripped away.  Most that do still exist have been watered-down and deprived of meaning.

The rituals that used to mark the transitions from one life stage to the next (childhood to adolescence, adolescence to adulthood, adulthood to elderhood) are all but forgotten.

Yet, pockets of society remember something.  Amongst teenagers, for example, there appears to be a sub-consciously remembered collective, and cultural, memory that they strive to recreate in rituals.  But, without the guidance of true adults and elders, all that comes out is drunken, rave, parties, or “schoolies.”¹

Although this blogpiece could be read as advocating for a return of ritual in our lives, we should remember that rituals often mark the transition from one state to another.  The states between the rituals are what is important; the sacred - if you like.

Returning to the word holy.  We now live in a time when, for most of the western world, the states of childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and elderhood, are but a shadow of what they could be.  Those states today are unhealthy ones, states that are no longer holy.  In such an unhealthy situation we cannot expect to mark transitions in any sort of truly ritual manner.²

Before we embark upon a journey to lead from rote-ual to ritual we will need to re-discover, to re-learn, what it means to be healthy, holy; and reclaim what is sacred.

That is no easy journey.

Notes:

1.  Schoolies is an Australian term referring to a week-long holiday that high-school graduates take after their final exams.  Often, but not always, associated with drunken parties.

2.  For more on this theme see: Nature and the Human Soul, by Bill Plotkin.

Three E.V. sites

Lithium mine, Australia

E.V.?  It could stand for Electric Vehicle.  It could also mean Environmental Vandalism.  Or, it could indicate both.  There is a connection.  But first, let us check out three sites of Environmental Vandalism.

1. Bolivia, Argentina, Chile.

Within the borders of these three countries is an area known as the Lithium Triangle.  So called because within this triangle can be found over 50% of the world’s lithium reserves. 

Current global lithium reserves are estimated to be around 80 million tonnes.  Bolivia contains 21 million tonnes, and Argentina and Chile contain 17 million and 9 million, respectively.

The Lithium Triangle is one of the driest places on earth, and that creates potential for massive environmental disaster from lithium mining.  Extraction of lithium in this area requires huge amounts of water (500,000 gallons for each tonne of lithium extracted.)  In the Sala de Atacama region of Chile lithium mining takes 65% of the regions water.  That is a massive load on a very dry region.  This has (as can be expected) a devastating impact on the local farmers.

Furthermore, toxic chemicals are needed to process this lithium.  Spills and leaching contaminate water systems, harming local ecosystems. 

The problems are not confined to environmental ones.  In November 2019, a coup (sometimes referred to as the Lithium Coup) in Bolivia toppled the Evo Morales government.  Within months it became apparent that the coup had been assisted (if not organised) from with the US government.  In July 2020 Elon Musk was accused, via twitter, of being a leading figure in assisting the coup, because he wanted access to the lithium reserves.  Musk blatantly tweeted in response; “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it!”¹  This is the man behind the batteries for a large proportion (17%) of the world’s E.V.s (electric vehicles.)

Such arrogance does nothing to suggest any respect for sovereignty, nor for the earth.   

2. Tibetan Plateau

In May 2016 hundreds of protestors in the city of Tagong, on the edge of the Tibetan Plateau, threw dead fish onto the streets.  The dead fish had come from the Liqi River where toxic waste from the Gazizhou Rongda Lithium mine wreaked havoc.²  It had not been the first such instance, with similar episodes stretching back to 2009.

This mine is operated by one of the world’s biggest suppliers of lithium-ion batteries.

3. Western Australia

In 2020 Rio Tinto Group was widely condemned for blowing up and destroying 46,000-year-old sacred (and archeologically significant) caves in the Pilbara region of Western Australia.

The Puuta Kunti Kurrama people and Pinikura people who have maintained a respectful relationship with the land on which these caves exist received an apology from Rio Tinto.  Tellingly however, the apology did not apologise for the destruction of the caves, stopping short by apologising for the “distress caused.”³

In an attempt to mend the relationship damage done Rio Tinto appointed a person to oversee this process.  However, only some six months later this person was removed from that role.  The Puuta Kunti Kurrama people and Pinikura people - via the PKKP Aboriginal Corporation - have viewed this as an insult.  At the beginning of February 2021, the Chief Executive of PKKP signed a letter to Rio Tinto questioning whether trust in Rio Tinto could ever be realised.  The letter went on to say:

“… every action by Rio Tinto to date, including the latest announcement under your leadership rings hollow…PKKP is reluctant to participate in a relationship of this nature any longer.”

E.V. (Electric Vehicles)

There is currently a push to produce E.V.s world-wide.  The supposed benefit of these vehicles is that they emit less carbon dioxide (CO₂) over their lifetime than do fossil-fuelled vehicles. 

Sounds good doesn’t it?  Well, not really.  As the first two examples above show, the environmental damage from the mining of lithium can be disastrous. 

All three examples highlight the harm and hurt done to local, often indigenous, peoples by mining corporations.  Even though Rio Tinto were not mining for lithium (they were mining iron ore) the lack of trust in such mining giants is readily apparent.  Can we expect them to be trustworthy simply because they are mining minerals that are used for “renewable” purposes?

Questions are being raised within all three of these regions.

Guillermo Gonzalez, a lithium battery expert at the University of Chile, suggests that “This (lithium batteries) isn’t a green solution – it isn’t a solution at all.”⁴

A Tibetan website declares that “Green transport in one place should not come at the cost of environmental and social damage in another.”

Questioning from the Puuta Kunti Kurrama people and Pinikura people has already been quoted.

The push for EVs (electric vehicles) leads to environmental damage, social disruption, and a neo-colonisation of indigenous peoples.  Electric vehicles do nothing to enhance our relationship with the earth.

It is not the fuel of transportation that we should be focusing upon.  We should be asking questions about transportation itself.  Whatsmore – we should have been asking such questions some time ago.  If we had, we may well have arrived at more suitable answers.

Notes:

1. 

2. Washington Post, 26 December 2016.

3. https://www.riotinto.com/en/news/releases/2020/June-statement-on-Juukan-Gorge  Accessed 9-02-2021

4. https://www.varsity.co.uk/science/20401#:~:text=In%20a%202009%20interview%2C%20Guillermo,not%20a%20solution%20at%20all.%E2%80%9D  Accessed 9-02-2021

Losing The 'Com' in Communication

Last week’s blogpiece suggested that our craving for technology was a desire for an unnatural us.  That, of course, raises the question as to what is natural?  What is in-nate to us as humans?

One of our natural (or innate) instincts may be to trust others.  Some philosophers have suggested that humans are basically competitive and individualistic, resulting in life being “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.”¹  However, many are now recognising that it has been our willingness to cooperate, show kindness, and trust one another, that have been the reasons for our survival and evolutionary development.²

But, is our trust now under threat from our technology?

Some research is showing that the use of cells phones is having a detrimental effect upon our levels of trust.  At least one piece of research suggested that even having a cell phone visible (and not being used) during a conversation about meaningful matters had a deleterious effect upon the quality of the conversation, and the level of trust within the relationship.³

Of course, we don’t need a piece of research to show us this.  Simply observing what goes on around us should be sending alarm bells.  More than five billion people globally send and receive SMS messages every day.  Many of us check our phone 63 times each day with 2/3rds or more checking 160 times every day.  90% of all texts are replied to within three minutes of them being received.

We’re addicted!

And that addiction has harmful outcomes.  Not only is our level of trust compromised, but cell phone use is also implicated in an elevated risk of obesity and suicide risk.  Research in the US concluded that teens who spend five or more hours per day on electronic devices are 71% more likely to exhibit suicide risk factors than those who spend an hour or less.

Some will proclaim the benefits of these ‘communication’ devices, claiming that they give us greater access to information, at a faster rate.  All very well, except that the use of smartphones tends to diminish our ability to understand the information that we are getting access to.  Again, we don’t need to probe too far to realise why this may be the case.  How often have you gone online to search for the answer to something and been able to obtain that answer instantly?  Yet, if asked what that answer meant, you may have struggled to reply?  Simply obtaining an answer does not mean comprehension or understanding.

Yet, we think our instantaneous answers improve our understanding!

Communication.  The word is telling, isn’t it?  The first part of the word, com, is derived from words that mean together or with, and is related to words such as community, common, accomplice.

It is that part of communication that we are losing through our cell phone addiction.  We are losing our togetherness, our sense of community, and ultimately, our trust in one another.

Notes:
1. Thomas Hobbes in Leviathon (originally published 1651)
2. See for example, Stefan Klein, Survival of the Nicest, Scribe, Melbourne & London, 2014.
3. Andrew Przybylski & Netta Weinstein, Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, July 19, 2012.