On the first Sunday of May, my math teacher showed our class a video called “Look Up”. It featured a British man named Gary Turk reciting a poem about the pitfalls of being eternally engrossed in digital technology. In the background there was heartwarming music and it told at the end the story of a man who met the girl he would marry, because he happened to look up from his phone while lost in the street.

“We’ve created a generation of idiots”, he argues- “smart phones and dumb people.” We spend hours together while we really aren’t; groups of friends sitting in a room on their phones and ignoring each other. It doesn’t have to be this way, he suggests. As individuals, we can make the choice to close Facebook and put our phones away. We can look up.

I can’t help but feel motivated to follow his words- I even feel hypocritical typing this now when there’s people around, staring silently, mindlessly, into a glowing screen. It always bothers me when I’m talking to somebody, and the words I’m saying or the eye contact I’d like to make bounces off of a wall of texts, tweets, emails, messages, and snapchats.

I’m guilty of it too. I’m sure I’ve offended people in this way before, and I make my own excuses for using my phone more than I should. However, this video shocked me to my core- the core of a major proponent of digitalization and information technology. Should we make a change in how we live to halt our gradual addiction? Should we follow the South Korean model of the government placing limits on online gaming for under-sixteens at night, to avoid the fate that Turk is warning us about?

Upon reflection, I realized that I don’t subscribe to the belief that we should “get rid of technology” like crusading teenagers often say we should, because this raises concerns about how far we should go. “Technology” is a very general word, in that it can apply to any innovation in human history, from the horse-drawn plow to the iPhone. Usually teenagers are referring to inventions such as the internet, and other electronic means to gain access to information more rapidly than ever before. However, in what way do we decide what needs to be limited? This is a question that would spark too much unnecessary debate and imposing limits on people would be an infringement of their rights to privacy.

Besides, concerns that new developments in how people live will destroy society are nothing new. Elderly cave-dwellers 10,000 years ago may have lamented that back in their day, hunting was enough entertainment for young boys. Now, however, they were painting pictures of game on the walls instead of being “productive” and “social”. In the 1800’s, doomsday predictors may have said that the introduction of larger amounts of books into the lower rungs of society would cause nobody to work, go to church, or interact with one another.

Yes, these are extreme examples. And yes, information technology (especially that which gives us an illusion of social interaction) is unprecedented in the history of the world. But it helps us in other ways, and we shouldn’t discredit it on a whim. Instead I think that moderation is the best course of action; people should do their best to use their phones and computers responsibly. When people calm down from watching this video, allowing their kneejerk impulses to kick in, they should see the reason in allowing these changes to take place.
In time, a balance will be found- we’re not all holed up in our homes reading novels 24/7 or missing work to watch television every day. And likewise, computers in the long run will have miraculous effects on our standard of living, our economy, and what we can do as a species. With proper reason and sense, they can join the ranks of inventions that have benefited humanity without fragmenting society. So quit fussing, and embrace the technology that is already transforming our world.