Has technology hindered mankind from being human, and kind?

[ManaMinori 4,145]

A man named Simon Warren happened to witness a car crash in Tarzana, Ca, and while everyone else was just standing around, recording on their phones, he was the only one to jump into action to save two people from the burning vehicle- one man with a busted up and bloody face, and a woman who had both her legs broken. They could've burned to death, and people were just standing around, recording it.

How sick and how sad is this? Has technology actually crippled humanity from being...human? (We have our devices to be "smart" for us, we'd apparently rather record tragic events to have them go viral, instead of leaping into action and helping our ownkind who may be victims of said tragic event, etc.)

[SRN 146]

I don't think so. If smartphones (or advanced technology) wouldn't exist, people would just stand there, watching instead. ^^

 

Thats how humans are, ofc not all but sadly a big part of it.

[Invincible 2,091]

No, mankind has hindered itself from being human and kind.

 

Technology is and always will be a tool. If whoever uses it is stupid, oblivious, or uncaring then no amount of "smart" will suddenly turn them into the opposite.

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,632]

"With great technology, comes Tweeting and memes."

 

It is not the technology that causes the issues in this case, it is mankind itself. In the situation you are talking about, regardless of technology, a lot of people would not intervene out of fear and this is basically the same thing, they are just catching it on footage too. I wouldn't record it, but I would not be one of the people going into that place, because I would be too afraid to. Technology has nothing to do with that in my books. 

[Steel Accord 6,660]

@@Nightmare Muffin,

 

You sit here and type this question to be heard by people from all corners of the Earth. Phones, from Grahm Bell to Steve Jobs, along with the internet are communications technology that has allowed people who otherwise would never have met to form lasting friendships and to reach out and help one another from the other side of the globe.

 

So no, your cynicism to the modern world is, as often is with your posts, very much misplaced.

[Magpie 623]

No, but that instance had other causes, I'd imagine those people probably wouldn't have stepped in anyways. There's this thing called the bystander effect (also known as bystander apathy), which basically means that people tend not to act if there are a lot of them. Everyone tends to assume that any second now someone else will jump in It was first really popularized by a murder in NYC in the 60's where a woman was stabbed to death outside her apartment complex, with numerous people watching. No one helped, or even called the police, because they saw no one else was doing it.

 

There are a few other famous examples as well, such as a man drowning while dozens of civilians and even firefighters watched for several minutes until finally someone pulled him out. He died not long after. Or Wang Yue, the 2-year-old girl hit by a van in China, then run over again when no one moved her. She was left on the street for seven minutes as people ignored her, and even walked around her blood and continued on, until finally a recycling worker saw her and called for help. She died 8 days later.

 

There are things you can do to help, though! The obvious one being stepping in to help if you see something like this happen, but if you need someone to go get help, don't say "Someone call for help!" Instead, Point out one person in particular, tell them to get help, if they're singled out this is less likely to happen.

 

I learned about a lot of this, such as the stabbing murder of Kitty Genovese, in a psych class, but I'm mostly just going off of this wikipedia article, so I'll leave a link here as to back up what I'm saying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

Edited January 10, 2016 by Brosparkles

[Gestum 2,493]

If cellphones didn't exists then they would have just watch the car crash. That's human nature. They don't want to die and therefore don't risk it even if it means that someone else dies.

 

So no, technology doesn't stop us from being "human" and kind. Our human nature does that.

[Sunny Fox 5,952]

Give two people a pointed stick and a reason to fight, and you'd have at least one dead person with a sharp stick in them.

 

Technology is not the problem, basic human psychology is.

[Spanish In Physician 295]

Human kind. No matter the era, we spend more time condemning our fellow man, than showing kindness to one another. No, it isn't technology that has removed our humanity, but instead our morbid cynicism. With further technology, perhaps one day we can all coexist. This lack of trust in one another is the seamstress of our sin, not strands of metal on plastic plates. The machine isn't the issue. It's the beast holding that machine.

[Slendy 2,918]

Humans have always been cruel. We're supposed to share what, 98% of our DNA with chimps, right? They are also quite naturally vicious. So, it wouldn't surprise me if we got our violence from them.

 

Not everyone is violent, but everyone has the ability to be in certain circumstances. Same with people not caring about their own kind.

 

Technology isn't why we are cruel and non caring. We have just always had that trait and probably always will. It's sad, but that's how the world works.

[simba86 1,541]

I think it is more along the lines that technology has hindered mankind from being able to live WITHOUT technology.

people standing around and not helping people in trouble is nothing new, just read about the good samaritan in the bible where all those people passed by without helping, apparently it is a tale as old as time, most stand and watch and the one brave person jumps in and becomes a hero

[cider float 2,538]

That's why I like to jokingly call it the dumbphone.

 

Dumbfound it all!!!!111

[K1NG_NAZARA 15]

No. Humanity was doing dumb mistakes way before technology of today, as many have pointed out

[KatonRyu 1,033]

Not at all. In stressful situations, people generally don't know what to do, so they do nothing. There's also Bystander Syndrome, in which everyone expects everyone else to act, without taking the initiative themselves. Technology isn't to blame for that.

[Solid 1,327]

Not at all. In stressful situations, people generally don't know what to do, so they do nothing. There's also Bystander Syndrome, in which everyone expects everyone else to act, without taking the initiative themselves. Technology isn't to blame for that.

Exactly.

 

As for topic, I would at least call the emergency institutes. But if someone has zero experience whatsoever on matters like this, would you rather them:

 

1. Trying anyways and run the risk of doing secondary damage to the subjects

 

2. Standby

 

 

As much as some want and will choose 1, the responsibility that comes with it could be really huge. If you screwed up, you'll have to deal with some pretty serious consequences, be it from yourself or others. In the case that you have little experience, it makes choice 1 even less appealing. So choice 2 usually seem to be easier, though seemingly cold.

 

On a side note, technology really just substitute watching with recording. It's still in the same category of bystanding.

[20% Cooler Than Cake 161]

Though it may seem that without smartphones people would just be watching, the reason mankind tends to behave this way in these situations is perhaps a result of our technology.  Not just technology in particular, but our society in general.  Studies and scientists have proven over and over again that we are greatly influenced by the world around us, and recently, economic competition, expectations set for us by society, and yes, technology, have steered us away from being human and kind.  If the majority of the crowd had rushed in to help, then the rest would have almost certainly joined.  But if our surroundings don't tell us to do it, and we are potentially risking our safety in trying to help, then we don't think that we should help, even if the lives of others are at stake.  Now, many people would argue that this tendency of mankind isn't a result of our technology at all.  But imagine what our world would be like with less technology.  Without electronics, we would have little reason to stay inside, aside from poor weather and certain hobbies such as reading.  With more outdoor time, we would socialize far more, and we would slowly grow to be more accepting and friendly in general.  In time, this world would perhaps become more like Equestria than the world that we live in.  I'm not saying that technology is bad, but the way we use it is becoming a potential problem.  Wow, this post is long. 

[cider float 2,538]

It seems machines control humans now when it's supposed to be humans control machines. Humans are supposed to be the masters. People record things for their blogs or whatever they got for fame so they can tell their friends what they've witnessed. I know the usual excuse that they do this for evidence that the victim can use but it's an excuse because you only need one or two pictures, and how much time does that take seeing as how clear those phone photos come out. 

[LeonShi500 155]

No, they just make our flaws more visible to others who are actually paying attention.

[On-Locoweed 108]

Technology is good and bad at the same time, but if you don't want to leave it at just that then let us consider the larger implications of the car crash event...

 

Technology is replacing the natural world as the primary host of human existence, and, gradually, the modern world has become less focused on individual production and more so on mass-consumerism. This simply means that the world we share is becoming more efficient at the cost of also becoming more impersonal as technology comes to dominate our lives and actions.

 

Technology is both good and bad; technological advancement is necessary to our world because the speed at which we are growing as a species demands it. On the other hoof, and as I mentioned before, technology has the potential to alienate humans from a perspective outside of his or her own. The reason for this dissociation, and specifically the reason for the inability for people in the given situation to react in a way other than what will serve their own interests (documenting a tragedy), is that our world today surprisingly demands less of us as thinking, feeling individuals. One may not feel as compelled to act in a situation if one's direct interests are not at stake; what I'm talking about is, in a word, "alienation." 

 

How does technology enforce a kind of alienation upon humanity, you might be frustratedly asking me or yourself? Well, here's how:

 

Many aspects of living in this modern world, like watching television, driving to work with other commuters, or replying to a thread about technology on a pony forum, are in their own way alienating if you think that you are the only one acting and all else is being acted upon. All of these things put a lot of emphasis on ignoring other people and mistrusting that others exist and are capable of thinking or acting the same way oneself does. It's a lack of empathy. Life becomes like what in critical philosophy is called "the society of the spectacle", in which one's role as a viewer, or spectator, psychologically prevents one from being compelled to actively participate in some actions. (or something)

 

Do you see what I'm saying, or at least some of it? Am I making sense here? I don't have all the answers, but I think about the questions a lot.

 

The bottom line is that "technology", whatever that word means to you, is a way of life and a way to get things done that won't slow down. Technology removes aspects of decision making and responsibility in human interaction, leading to a more self-obsessed world dissociated from reality. Technology is good; technology is bad. The civilization we live in is problematic sometimes, but that doesn't make it all "bad" or, conversely, all "good". 

Edited January 25, 2016 by On-Locoweed

[Nsxile 27,170]

I think it depends on how the technology is used imo.

[Olly 1,011]

Technology has shown us how human we are, it's not an obstacle, it's more of an amplifier. And kindness exists and is created in kind environments... that is, someone who is raised to be kind by fairly kind people will be so as well, with or without technology. 

Edited June 2, 2019 by Olly

[Dreambiscuit 9,934]

I think a lot of social media, as an extension of technology, has taught people to be as rude as they wanna be without any visible consequences. It puts too much focus on quick, meaningless gratification and detracts from more substantial things that require more introspection and reflection. 

[Lucky Bolt 35,064]

I believe social media has had a big impact on the behavior and actions of people, and not in the best way. The sad thing is, social media and technology wouldn't even be a problem if people used it right, for the better.