Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Roberts's avatar

I'm coming down hard on Steph's side of this debate. I'm 63 and I've seen every younger generation maligned. It's the "thing to do" from time immemorial.

At the same time that we want our children to do better than we did, we want to hold on to the illusion that our generation was the best.

Now there's a whole industry of people who write books and articles about Gen Z and Alpha being hopelessly corrupted by the Smartphone and other screens. People like Jonathan Haidt have made their careers on this premise, and I don't believe there is any data that would convince him and his colleagues that Smartphones and social media are not apocalyptic.

Once someone finds a meme that's a winner and makes them famous or richer, how often do we see them change their mind or admit that they don't know or they might be wrong.

Daniel Solow's avatar

> i haven’t met one who’s too inept to make phone calls, can’t complete tasks without ChatGPT, or attempts to cancel people IRL

It's just implausible that you've never met people like this, and if you're claiming otherwise you're almost certainly one of them.

> but we’re doing so in an increasingly untraditional reality

The reality on your phone is very untraditional, but reality itself is still pretty traditional. And that's the real problem: Gen Z is kinda stuck at whatever maturity level they were when they were given a smartphone. The phone shows this hyper-stimulating fake world that you systematically confuse for the real world.

There's also been a removal of early-life distress, which makes Gen Z intolerably sensitive but also innocent and wholesome. But people can only avoid distress for so long, it always finds you eventually and Gen Z will end up pretty much the same as everyone else, just somewhat delayed. The real question is how people will function when they're so delayed, like it's hard to imagine Gen Z women choosing to have kids before they're 40.

36 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?