Give me back my Ipod mother! I will die if I don’t have my technology! One may ask himself why this matters, and the truth is, it does. Many people are arguing that technology is bad for life, and that it has negative effects on not only one’s social skills, but as well as their entire life in general. Truth is, they are wrong. Technology has enhanced peoples’ social skills by providing more ways to talk to people other than mailing a letter and talking to someone in person.



First, lets start with the world wide web. People think that the internet has done no good for us in society today, and that it ruins our social skills. Well, on the internet unlike in real life, “users have the potential to “meet” a virtually unlimited number of people through chat rooms, bulletin boards, and other services,” instead of just meeting the cashier at a supermarket (Coget + Yukata 1). How would these events be called detrimental to our social skills? By taking part in any of these, “one’s social circle can be considerably expanded (Coget +Yukata 1).



Secondly, there are always cellphones and Ipods. Cellphones are just another way that we keep in touch in society. True they may be addicting, but at the same time they are affecting our social skills in a positive way. Then, by having an Ipod, it’s like taking your own personal bubble out into the world, not knowing that the person you may sit next to likes the music that you are listening to. This is a great way for friendships to be started.



Now I will show you why the other side is wrong. Back in the year 2006, a survey was taken to determine whether how much a person uses technology in their every day life, and how much time they spend doing other things like going to parties, socializing, going to sports events, and so on. (Here is the link: http://www.stanford.edu/groups/siqss/itandsociety/v01i01/v01i01a01.pdf) This chart if you read it closely, basically says that internet-users don’t have a life outside of the internet, and that all internet-users would not do any socially related activity. This is actually two logical fallacies, and you might be able to sneak a third in under certain circumstances. Firstly, it would be a hasty generalization which is a very common fallacy. Hasty generalization is basically stating that since one thing is a certain way, everything else like it is the same. Secondly it would be selective sampling, because it doesn’t tell you who they interviewed to get the results they did. Finally, you might be able to say that this is a false cause, because I’m sure that internet would not be the only things to cause these results.



Another man named Neil Postman disagrees with me on whether or not technology is good or bad for life. In his article Postman references a book called All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. He goes on to talk about this book, which basically tells one that reads it to “share everything, play fair, don’t hit people, pit things back where you found them, clean up your own mess, wash your hands before you eat, and, of course, flush” (Postman 1). Once he introduces the book he basically says that since the internet does not mainly have school related stuff, and “how to live life” kind of stuff on the internet, that the internet is bad, and kids should remain in school and socialize face to face. Now if this “god of technology” that he references in his paper were real, I’m sure there would be a lot of things that he wouldn’t care for on the internet. Everything is on the internet now days, our world relies upon technology so much that if we pull the plug on it, there could be catastrophic results.



This next source states very clearly that the “usage of internet leads to small but statistically significant increases in misery and loneliness and a decline in overall well-being” (Affonso 1). I would say that this is a false cause simply because how do you know for a fact that it was internet usage that caused their depression? After stating this, the article reveals that this test was done in the year 1998, which means that this source cannot be relied upon fully. Yet to my surprise, it pulls another fallacy. The article states that “the appropriately named HomeNetproject studied a sample of 169 people in Pittsburg “ to get their results (Affonso 1). That’s pretty messed up. This article shouldn’t influence anyone’s mind at all under any circumstances it is a walking lie.



At last, my final source “Attack of the iZombies.” This quick article states that the Ipod distracts you from your everyday life, which prevents you from meeting new people. True that the Ipod may be a distraction, but it does not always do such a thing, so that would be a hasty generalization. Again, Krystle Song has to say that since the Ipod is so easy to transport, it prevents people from getting to know each other, much less meet new people (1). I don’t really have anything to say to this, because this is just a bunch of false material compiled together to make the reader feel bad about using technology in public areas.



I believe that the undying truth is and always will be that technology has enhanced peoples’ social skills by providing more ways to talk to people other than going over to their house, and hanging out with them at the mall. What’s the point of this? Well, if you aren’t convinced by now that technology is the way to go and that it really does help life, then you are crazy. Secondly, if we banned technology from the U.S.A. we would definitely die out due to some event, because there is no way that people in this day and age could survive an Amish type life-style. Once you have gone technology there is no going back.