A conversation with Sherry Turkle

7/30/2019 A conversation with Sherry Turkle

1/12

53

The iCub robot, made at the Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia in Genova, Italy, shakes hands with an attendee during

the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) in San Francisco, California, on Wednesday,

September 28, 2011. The theme of the IROS conference was Human-Centered Robotics and featured interactive presen-

tations along with special-topic symposia celebrating 50 years of robotics.

A Conversation withSherry Turkle

James Nolan

DavidPaulMorris/BloombergviaGettyImag

es.


2/12

H e H e D g e H O g R e V I e W / S P R I N g 2 0 1 2

54

Yuvsknyurbk,Alone Together,

sbkrntnc.nringiyu

curctnthtsttnt,inrticur

sitrtstyurtrviusbks,Lifeon the ScreennThe Second Self.

I dmit tht chrctriztion is probbly on th

stron sid. In ct, I did xprss rsrvtions in

The Second Selfnd Life on the Screen, prticulrly

bout popl ttin stuck in simultd worlds,

whr thins r riction r nd lss complx

thn in th rl world. Tt lck o complxity

is sductiv. and I hv lwys bn concrndbout th sductions o simultion s childrn

row up. But in nrl, th irst two books

wr books o discovry. I lt tht psycholo-

istsboth clinicins nd rsrch psycholo-

istswr not pyin suicint ttntion to

th vst nw trrin o diitl li. Computrs

wr voctiv objcts tht ord psycholoy so

mny nw qustions. rom th vry binnin,

conrontd with vn simpl lctronic toys ndms computrs, childrn wr conrontd with

th Pitin qustions bout wht is liv nd,

indd, wht it mns to b prson. and thn,

in virtul worlds, popl wr bl to ply with

idntity in nw wys.

Crtinly by 1995, whn I wrot Life on the

Screen, th thin tht most xcitd m bout

cybrspc ws my ndin tht thos who md

th most o thir livs on th scrn wr thoswho pprochd it in spirit o sl rfction. I

ws xcitd by th id tht w could us wht

w lrnd in th virtul to improv our livs in

th rl.

and thn som thins chnd tht chnd

my mind. So whn I sid rpntnc, I think

I mnt rpntnc or not sin ths thins

tht wr chnin. or xmpl, on importnt

chn ws nw dirction in rticil intllinc

[aI]. In prticulr, I bn to s nw kind orobotics kind known s socibl robotics.

T rticil intllinc tht I hd rsrchd

or The Second Selfnd Life on the Screen ws n aI

whr rsrchrs wr tryin to mk th com-

putr smrt. In socibl robotics th intnt ws

lss to mk th computr smrt thn to mk

crtur tht pushd popls buttons, to do

wht ws ncssry to convinc popl tht this

mchin ws sntint nd crd bout thm. Itws plyin on wht th aI scintists knw bout

peoplesmk-up. T point is not so much tht

th mchin is smrt but tht w r vulnrbl.

So, or xmpl, I bn to s socibl robots

tht lookd you in th y, kpt y contct, sid

your nm, trckd your motion.

and thr ws somthin ls. It turns out

tht i n rticil bin, no mttr how primi-

tiv, sks us or nurturnc, w ttch to it.Tink o th littl motchis, th littl virtul

crturs on tiny littl scrns tht kids crrid

round in th lt 1990s. hs motchis

skd you to d thm, mus thm, nd cln

up tr thm. Whn thy did this, w ttchd.

Popl nurtur wht thy lov, but thy lso lov

wht thy nurtur. and tht whol dirction in

socibl robotics, to crt rticil crturs tht

miht som dy bcom substituts or humncompnionship, nd th rliztion o how vul-

nrbl w r to such crturs, ws somthin I

rlly didnt ncountr until 1995, s I ws nish-

inLife on the Screen.

Rsrch on this nw rsrch trdition nd

our vulnrbility to socibl robotics bcm

Sherry Turkle is Abby Rockefeller Mauz Professor of the Social Studies of Science and Technology in the

Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT and the founder (2001) and current director of the

MIT Initiative on Technology and Self.

James L. Nolan, Jr., is Professor of Sociology and Chair of the Department of Anthropology and Sociology

at Williams College.


3/12

55

C O N V e R S a I O N W I H S H e R R Y U R K L e

mjor proccuption o min. evry yr nw

socibl robot would com out, nd vry yr I

would mbrk on nw study o kids nd this

nw robot. I studid urbis, aibos, My Rl

Bbis. and nlly robots wr dsind or th

ldrly in nursin homs, nd I bn to trck

tht story s wll.So th rowth o socibl robotics is on thin

tht chnd my mind. Popl r so vulnrbl

nd so willin to ccpt substituts or humn

compnionship in vry intimt wys. I hdnt

sn tht comin, nd it rlly concrns m tht

wr willin to iv up somthin tht I think

dns our humnnss: our bility to mpthiz

nd b with ch othr nd tlk to ch othr

nd undrstnd ch othr. and I rport to youwith rt sdnss tht th mor I continud to

intrviw popl bout this, th mor I rlizd

th xtnt to which popl r willin to put

mchins in this rol. Popl l tht thy r

not bin hrd, tht no on is listnin. Ty

hv ntsy tht nlly, in mchin, thy will

hv nonjudmntl compnion.

Yutthstrygrutstunth

sysshurrrbtvrhun

rtinshi.

Ys. and I studid popl who r hppy now

to iv ths innimt crturs to th ldrly

bcus, wll, thy sy its bttr thn nothin.

Ty ccpt tht thrs nobody ls or thspopl. But how did w t to thrs nobody

ls? Popl hv com to ccpt tht w liv in

socity whr thr simply rnt th rsourcs to

tk cr o our ldrly. But this is socil dci-

sion tht ths rsourcs r not vilbl.

SoAlone Togetheris book o rpntnc in th

sns tht I did not s this comin, this momnt

o tmpttion tht w will hv mchins tht

will cr or us, listn to us, tnd to us. Ttsth rst sns. a scond thin tht chnd my

mind hs to do with whr I s socil ntwork-

in nd th intrnt oin. My initil xcitmnt

bout ntworkd communiction took plc

durin tim whn I sw th world o onlin

ply s n idntity workshop: plc whr po-

pl xprimntd with vtrs, plyd out spcts

o sl tht otn wr not ully xprssd in thir

vrydy livs. Tt still os on, but now onlinli hs bcom li o continul prormnc.

Whn I studid onlin li in th mid-1990s, I

nvisd it s plc you wnt to xprimnt.

But now, with our mobil dvics lwys on/

lwys-on-us, w r lwys on cmr.

I didnt s tht comin, lthouh it ws riht

bor m. and with it hs com th cultur o

distrction, which isnt vn xprincd s dis-

trction bcus its just how w liv. Popl lthy hv th riht to customiz thir livs, to put

thir ttntion whr thy wnt it to b. I thy

r t mtin nd wnt to txt, thy do. I thy

r t dinnr nd wnt to txt, thy do. Studnts


4/12


56

in clss tll m tht tht i thy dont chck thir

txts, it mks thm nxious. Ty cnt l prs-

nt i thy r not lso in som wy bsnt. I

didnt s tht comin. as in th cs o sociblrobotics, this nw lck o ttntion to ch othr

is somthin, in, whr I l tht w r not

doin our humnnss justic.

Thrstrtyurbkisnrbts,n

thscnisnscintrking.ac-

nthinbthisthyinhichths

ntchngisbthxrssn strgrtrninss.Cnyutkbutthis

rx,hryunbingr

cnnctthnvr,butsrny?

Wr movin rom convrstion to connc-

tion. In convrstion wr prsnt to ch othr

in vry powrul wys. Convrstion is kind

o communiction in which wr liv to ch

othr, mpthtic with ch othr, listnin toch othr. Whn w substitut wittr or sttus

updts on cbook or this, wr losin som-

thin importnt. Somtims its not clr to m

i its th volum, or vlocity, or continulnss o

it. Som kids r up to 10,000, to 15,000 txts

month. Tt mns thyr nvr not txtin.

In this cscd o communiction, w mov

rom convrstion to mr connction. and so

wv positiond ourslvs in wy whr w cnnd up lin mor lon, vn s wr tkin

ctions tht would sust wr mor continu-

lly connctd. In ll o this thr is nothr loss:

I think w los th cpcity or solitud, th kind

tht rrshs nd rstors. T kind tht llows

us to rch out to nothr prson.

Tts th communictions prt o it. T

robot prt is complmnt to itvrythin

bout socibl robotics is dsind to convincyou tht you r connctd, but you r con-

nctd to nothin. Popl lwys sy to m,

how is tlkin to robot dirnt rom tlkin

to doll? Iv studid kids nd dollswhn-

vr I do robot study, I do prlll study

with doll. and vrythin is dirnt with

doll. With doll you hv th psycholoy o

projction. a child will ct out with doll whtis on hr mind: littl irl with Brbi who

ls uilty bcus sh brok hr mothrs chin

will put th Brbi in dtntion. Bcus o its

pssivity, bcus its inrt, th doll is projc-

tiv scrn or th childs imintion, ntsis,

sns o wondr, nxitis. evrythins pro-

jctd onto th doll. But rltionl rtict,

socibl robot, is in position to initit con-

vrstion. T robot is in position to voic nopinion. With robot, on is not r to projct

wht is on ons mind. T psycholoy o pro-

jction ivs wy to th psycholoy o n-

mnt. T robot is prsntd s ctiv, in plc

to b nw kind o bst rind.

Why do w nd robots to do tht? With vry

tchnoloy w nd to sk i its srvin our humn

purposs. Wht is th humn nd? Wht humn

purpos dos it srv to hv imittion popl,who rlly rnt popl, prtndin to b popl?

I dont sy tht thr my not b som intrstin

rsons, but w nd to hv convrstion bout

this. Ts crturs r comin into our cultur.

W nd to hv this convrstion.

ipstnustrsthqustin,

htisthrbthichthistchn-gyisthsutin?Thstnsibsutins,

ccring tpstn,r tn crt

nytrthtchngyxists,ntbcus

thrsrrbthichthtch-

ngysthnsr.tsstht,ins-

uchsnnsrisbingrshr,

itisthtthsntchngisrssth

rbkinninss.rbr

thqutrnthyuintr-vihsi,shsnh

ishsrrbt,nshyus-

nh,igivnthtin,urr

hun.


5/12

Riht. Bcus its only collctiv ntsy tht

robot, mchin tht dos not rconiz your

xistnc, cn ddrss your lonlinss. In my

viw, this is ntsy. W nd to undrstndits roots. My rsrch susts tht its roots li

in popl hvin sns tht no on is thr to

listn to thm. W hv to cknowld this. So

mny o us r lonly. But it dos not ollow tht

somthin tht will nvr xprinc nythin

bout humn li cn undrstnd th thins w

wnt to tlk bout, bout our livs.

But thn popl sy to m, but thy cn

mk robots ood nouh to ool us. I thymk mchins smrt nouh to convinc us

thy undrstnd, tht is ood nouh. a com-

mon rction to my book hs bn: Wht r

you complinin bout? h popl in your

book, th ldrly popl who r hppy with

thir robots, cnt tll th dirnc. My rnd-

mothr wouldnt b bl to tll th dirnc.

Why not iv thm this thin? I th mchins

will b so ood w cnt tll th dirnc, whtdos it mttr? I think it mttrs vry much. I

think our humnity is t stk.

Butnticinyurbkthtthrr-

hcntthirnc,inrticur,

yung.Thisisintrstingbcus

hn yu think but vncs in sci

i,yu usuy think thyungrgnrtinsbingrcrtbith

thsntchngis.tsstcuntr-

intuitivthtitsthyunghr

ctuyrustrtnustiththirr-

nts,hrcnstntyistrctbythir

Bckbrrisnthir-is.Cuyu

tkbutsthsnings,nr-

hsiscusshtthisightnintrs

hyungightchstusthstchngisinthutur.

Wll, rst o ll, I r tht its th youn popl

who r rustrtd. Tts tru in both rs, in

Red Tube, Blue Tube

Recent studies have documented the

increasing cultural and political polarization

of ordinary Americans. Eorts to explain thisvary but typically root it in contrasting dispo-

sitions and worldviews.

Results from a 2011 survey conducted by the

market research rm Experian Simmons oer

an intriguing window on these red/blue

dierences. The survey queried self-identi-

ed conservative Republicans and liberal

Democrats about their favorite entertain-

ment television programs (news, sports, and

music shows were excluded). Remarkably,among the top 25 favorite shows ranked by

conservatives and liberals, not a single one

appeared on both lists.

The overall composition of the two lists is

dramatically different. Liberals like literate

media-savvy comedies and sarcastic

humortheir top shows include The Daily

Show, The Colbert Report, 30 Rock, and

Parks and Recreation. Most of the balance is

sitcoms and dramas, where morally murkyantiheroes, in the words of Entertainment

Weekly, which commissioned the study, tend

to be a draw. Meanwhile, conservatives watch

nonfiction. The leading Red Tube favorites

were documentary-style, work-related shows,

including This Old House, Swamp Loggers,

and New Yankee Workshop. Conservatives

were also fond of auction-type shows, such

as Barrett-Jackson, and reality competition

shows, such as Top Shotand The Bachelor.What might these differences mean? In

the main, Blue Tube television centers on

repartee and complicated relationships, while

Red Tube television centers on doing jobs or

displaying skills. Dierences in programming

suggest some deeper dichotomiesabstract

vs. concrete, words vs. objects, the social

order vs. the practical orderand may also

reect a more fundamental dierence in ways

of ltering and engaging the world.

Sbrisuryt:.

57


6/12


58

th r o socibl robotics nd in th r o

connctivity. Its th youn popl who or

kind o hop. Bby boomrs I intrviwd wr

mor likly to sy, whn tlkin bout robots thtmiht cr or thir prnts, wow, tht could

tk th burdn o m. hr ws on mn

who ws visitin his mothr rulrly. H ws so

hppy tht I ws strtin to iv hr robot s

prt o my study, nd h vry poinntly sid,

You know, whn I lv my mothr strin t

wll, I l horribl. Whn I lv hr strin t

tv, I l bd. Whn I lv hr nd with

robot, I l vn lss uilty. Its how it lookstht mttrs to popl. I prson is intrctin

with robot, it looks lik rssurin kind o

nmnt. But n lvn-yr-old boy consid-

rd robot or his rndthr nd sid tht h

ws not hppy with this id. H sid, dont w

hv popl or ths jobs? H snsd, I think,

tht thr is kind o humn mnin thts ll-

in wy.

ansinthrcnnctivity?

In som wys th story o connctivity is vn

mor drmtic, bcus obviously, youn popl

hv so much xprinc with this. and thr,

too, I do nd tht it is youn popl who or

hop. I thouht I ws oin to b studyin tn-

rs drivin thir prnts crzy. But in ct, Iound prnts drivin thir tnrs nd youn-

r kids crzy bcus it ws th prnts who wr

txtin t brkst nd dinnr, or doin -mil

t school pick-up. It ws th childrn complin-

in: iht- nd nin-yr-olds complinin tht

thir prnts wouldnt look up rom thir -mil

whn thy took thm to th prk, wouldnt look

up t th junl ym whn thy wr tryin to

do trick. It ws th childrn syin thy nvrhd thir prnts ull ttntion. a mjor thm

in th intrviws with kids rom iht throuh

hih school ws tht thy hd rown up in cul-

tur o distrctionprntl distrction. rom

th momnt thy mt this tchnoloy, it ws th

comptition. O cours, now it is th youn who

r thmslvs distrctd by th tchnoloy. But

I do hr popl, nd spcilly younr popl,tlkin mor nd mor bout nd or rtr

blnc. I hr mor nd mor tlk bout thins

such s intrnt sbbticls. I think thr is room

to b cutiously optimistic; I bliv wr oin

to put this tchnoloy in its plc. Mny o th

popl I intrviwd or Alone Together snsd

tht somthin is miss.

at th sm tim, vry much on my mind

riht now is n im rom lst summr. Imvry ortunt to hv cott on Cp Cod. I

cn wlk th duns Toru wlkd. Iv wlkd

thos duns or dcds, nd popl usd to wlk

thm with rind or prtnr, lovr or child.

evrybody hd thir ys up to th snd, to th

sky, to th s, nd this summr it hit m tht so

mny popl wr wlkin thm with dvic in

hnd. T kid is holdin dvic; th prtnr is

holdin dvic. Somtims sombodys tryinto hold sombodys hnd, nd thy cnt bcus

thrs th cppuccino, thrs th dvic. Tr

rnt nouh hnds. Im optimistic bcus I

think tht this nw nrtion snss thrs

somthin miss, But o cours, thr is still so

much vidnc o thir bin trppd in cultur

o distrction. I dont think w hv turnd th

cornr yt.

onyur intrvissisthing

vryintrsting:tchngyisbbcus

rntsstrngsitsu.ds

thtxrsskintchngictr-

inissiynthvthstrngth

trsistit?

I dont think in trms o tchnoloicl dtrmin-ism. I think in trms o humn vulnrbilitis:

tchnoloicl ordncs nd humn vulnr-

bilitis. T tchnolois o mobil connction

mk us som ors w cnt rus. Connctivity


7/12

59


tchnoloy pushs vry button. Trs this nw

rsrch tht shows tht our iPhons liht up our

brins in th sm plcs tht lov lihts up our

brins. Wr wntd. Sombody wnts us, som-body nds us, sombodys cllin to us, som-

body rmmbrd us. Tts why its so hrd to

turn wy rom th rd liht on th Blckbrry: its

sombody rchin out to us. Tis tchnoloy clls

out to th most primitiv nd ril prts o our-

slvs. It clls out to dp lmnts o our psych.

Othrwis popl wouldnt b txtin whil thyr

drivin nd litrlly riskin thir livs nd th livs

o thir childrn. W wouldnt b doin this i itwrnt cllin on somthin vry dp.

I hv to bliv wr oin to t this riht.

Trs plnty o tim to mk th corrctions.

But I think riht now, w r doin ourslvs

dissrvic. W think wr connctd, both

throuh our nw cultur o connction nd in

our nw firttion with socibl robotics. But in

both o ths rs, wr ccptin substitutions

nd wr lvin ourslvs mor lon nd iso-ltd. Wr oolin ourslvs.

atnintinthbk,yukrrnc

tmrsh mcluhns us hris,

thiuisthssg.tsth

thtrunsthrughutthscnrtth

bk:yubsrv,rx,thttxt

ssgscnvysthingsubstntivyirnt thnrittn ttr. fing

ng tht in,ht irntssgs

rsnthnusingigitinstr

birscunictin,hthr

itbctcrhnrittnttr?

You know, riht now, Im not sur i th issu

is diitl vrsus hndwrittn, bcus thr r

som wys txt cn b usd tht r vry inti-mt. Ill iv you n xmpl. Shortly tr my

book cm out, I ws ivin tlk. I ws vry

nrvous; it ws th rst tlk on my book tour.

My duhtr knw it mnt lot to m, nd sh

knw just th tim I ws oin to do it. at th

lctur, I put my iPhon on th podium s tim-

in dvic. My duhtr is twnty, in coll, nd

just s I ws puttin th phon on th podium, txt mss cm up rom hr tht sid, Mom,

you will rock this. It ws lik kiss. Tis ms-

s ws xtrordinry. So I dont wnt to sy tht

th ct it ws diitlly communictd nd not

hnd-dlivrd or writtn on ppr tks wy

rom th intimcy o tht momnt nd wht ws

communictd.

But whn th tnrs I intrviw txt rom

3,000 to 10,000 txts month, tht cultur oconnction is lvin thins out. wo thins tht

r ttin lt out r convrstion nd cpc-

ity or solitud. Tt isnt ood.

nyuriscussinyurttrstnr

yurthr,yutkbuththttrs

ctur sthing n cunict

sthingthttxtssgcnt.whtisthtirnc?

or m it hs to do with sl-rfction. I think

thts wht Im ttin t. Tts why Im tryin

to tlk bout volum nd vlocity nd vns-

cnc, not whthr communiction is diitl

or nondiitl. With lttrs you rciv, you hv

thm to hold. as you do, you think bout th

prson who wrot thm nd how thy thouhtbout you s thy wrot thm. as you writ lt-

tr, you think bout th prson you r writin

to, your rltionship to thm, how thy will soon

hold th lttr. and prhps kp th lttr. T

procss is clos to th body. T procss is slow.

You r crtin somthin tht my ndur.

Tis is wht cn b lost in txt. It is quick. You

know it will not ndur. I think thts wht I ws

tryin to t t in thinkin bout my mothrslttrs nd my lttrs to hr.

My duhtr dos not writ m lttrs or

mils. Sh txts m. My duhtr wont hv

rcord o tllin nothr nrtion wht hr


8/12


60

wk ws lik. Sh dosnt hv tht contxt or

rulrly rfctin on wht is importnt to hr,

dicult or hr. Wht I miss bout this or my

duhtr is not tht wv on diitl, but thtthr ws this spc or sl-rfction tht our

cultur no lonr hs s th nturl ordr o

thins. I ws kind o orcd to do it; commu-

nictin with my mothr ncssittd my doin

tht. Whn I ws in coll, it ws not unusul

tht you wrot lttr hom vry wk. and my

mothr wrot m vry wk s wll. Now I txt

my duhtr, snd hr -mils, iv hr quick

phon cll. But Im not disciplind, th wy mymothr ws, bout my own procss o sl-rfc-

tion. and whn I ws nostlic bout this to my

duhtr, sh clld m on it. Whn I ws tlkin

to hr bout th dirnc btwn wht I hd

nd wht sh will hv, my duhtr sid, writ

m lttr, nd so, in sns I rliz thtAlone

Togetheris rlly my lttr to hr.

So th book is writtn s lttr to hr, but

in ct, w hv conspird with tchnoloy tolos sinicnt spcs o sl-rfction. Trs

no wy, i Im ttin thousnd -mils dy,

tht Im oin to b sittin round rfctin s

I dsprtly try to kp up with my -mil.

Its just not oin to hppn. Wv cornrd

ourslvs into communictions cultur, whr

I think wr spndin lss nd lss tim rfct-

in. T issu or m is rfction nd spcs

or rfction. Is this tchnoloy hlpin us ndspcs or rfction? I dont think txtin nd

th wy wr usin -mil is hlpin us do tht

riht now.

Yurnrunitincu-

nity.Yurit,cunitisrcnstitut-

byhysicrxiity,shrcncrns,

rcnsquncs,ncnrsnsi-biitis.whtyukthciby

nythtthsvriussciirus

cnstitutnincunitis?


9/12

61


Socil mdi stisy som nds. Popl l con-

nctd. In som onlin plcs, popl do l

rsponsibility nd blonin. But in ct, popl

cn just lv whn thy wish; th rindd is not rind. Wht Im ndin in my work is tht

onlin li cn crt sns o disorinttion.

h spd o onlin rindship is so st: you

t this sns o intimcy so st nd th sns

o clos connction; you l tht your ttin

riht to th hrt o thins rlly quickly. Your

not oin throuh ll th hrd thins tht com

with shrd li nd shrd community; you

hv th sns o cuttin to th chs. Tt oson or whil, nd thn somhow you dont

know wht you hv. You dont know wht your

rsponsibilitis r. You dont know wht you cn

sk or. So thn popl wondr, Do I hv vry-

thin; do I hv nothin? Wht do I hv?

Its n i you hv coupl o thos mbiu-

ous rltionships; vryon dos. But whn

mbiuous rltionships bcom mor nd mor

o your li, popl bcom vry disorintd. Ihv trmndous rspct or th support nd th

connction nd th un tht popl hv onlin.

But I think whn w dcidd to cll ths onlin

connctions communitis nd rltionships,

w chos th words w hd vilbl to us, nd

w conusd ourslvs.

h bst xmpl o this disorinttion in

my book is th youn mn who os onlin in

Scond Li. Hs onlin s n lphnt bcush nds tht whimsicl nd un, but hs plyin

rol tht is vry community nhncin, whr

h hlps popl. H provids rt srvic to

th community, nd hs suprstr pillr o his

Scond Li community. and s this lphnt h

brinds vry butiul rnch womn whom

h spks to or mny hours wk, who sys

shs contmpltin suicid, nd h counsls hr

nd tlks to hr. Im spkin to th rl mnc to c, th mn bhind th lphnt, nd

h xplins to m tht much o his lin ood

bout himsl, nd sns o rlly contributin,

coms rom his hlpulnss in Scond Li, nd

how hs hlpin this youn rnch womn vrt

suicid. and s hs tlkin to msinc hs

in Scond Li s n lphntth issu coms

up tht w dont know shs youn rnchwomnsh could b n ihty-yr-old uy in

nursin hom in Mimi. H ts rlly upst

bcus hs not rlly willin to considr this

possibility. Hs not rlly willin to o thr.

Bcus vn thouh hs so sophistictd in th

wys o Scond Li, his sl worth in this com-

munity is rlly tht h is hlpin sombody,

rl prson, rl youn womn vrt suicid.

and th id tht sh is somhow puttin himon is vry disturbin to him. Hs spndin mny

hours vry wk in this Scond Li community.

Tis is his plc. Tis is sustinin community

or him. But you cn s tht it is trmndously

conusin to him t th sm tim tht h dosnt

know wht h hs in his rltionships thr. Im

ndin tht thm lot, s I continu to work

in this r.

So, its not lik I hv ntiv mssbout ths onlin connctions. Its not tht I

wnt to dnirt thm. Ty r trmndously

voctiv. Ty cn b both nrichin nd con-

usin. Its vry importnt tht popl hv othr

stu in thir livs bcus t th nd o th dy,

its th othr stu popl turn to whn thy nd

rl prson.

nthbk,yutkbuthyung-

rthsvsnfcbk,xn

trnusuntnrgynti

uttingrthcrtinig,nthnuti-

tybcxhustbythsrts.

Yuskkinringxhustin.

whtryungingtgtttht

int?

Wll, or lot o youn popl tht point o

xhustion coms s point o crisis. You hv to

think o th chronoloy. Tyr in hih school.

Tyv writtn prctic coll dmission ssys


10/12


62

rom th tim thyr sophomors. hn thy

writ coll ssys, nd now thyr writin

cbook updts. a ood prt o thir livs is

puttin out prormncs o thmslvs. Tyl s thouh thy r constntly prormin.

O cours, w do this ll th tim. Im hr

tlkin with you nd in crtin sns, Im ply-

in Shrry urkl. But on th phon or in pr-

son, you cn hr my limits. You cn hr my

tiu, my voic, my thinkin. You cn hr m

dcidin how I wnt to nswr th qustion. I w

wr onlin doin th intrviw, you would hr

nothin. You would s on your scrn prct-ly polishd nswr. and on cbook, or or tht

mttr whn thy dscrib how thy compos

txt, thts wht thy do. Tyr constntly pr-

ormin thir prctly polishd slvs. and ovr

nd ovr in th intrviws, you hr thm sy-

in, I dont wnt to tlk on th phon bcus I

wnt to b bl to prorm th prctly polishd

sl. Tts why I lik cbook. I cn b th sl

I wnt to b. But thn, thrs th downsid,which is tht thyr lwys prormin th sl.

and tht strts to t xhustin. Whrs this

intrviw my o wll, or it my not, but bsi-

clly its not tirin in th sns tht your hrin

m wrts nd ll. You didnt snd tn qus-

tions to which I wrot tn nswrs. Tis is

convrstion.

Right. Thrs sthing vry irnt

buttht.

and th point is, whn wr with popl w l

s thouh wr ttin som kind o uthntic-

ity, nd w xprinc ourslvs s uthntic.

Which is why w o s popl in prsonw

know, no mttr how much thyr md up or

fud up or prprd, wr oin to s th rlsomething. and thts wht ths kids r tryin

to void, whn thy only wnt to txt, whn thy

dont wnt to hv convrstion, nd thts

wht thyv bcom xhustd by. Tyv put

thmslvs in world whr thy r prormin

ll th tim. Ty hv ornizd world whr

thyr lwys t thir scrn. Tts whn thy

just kind o crck nd nd som wy to drop outor whil.

tbcsunsustinb.

Ys, thts wht I trid to cptur in th prt

o th book whr I writ bout prormnc

xhustion. Hih school studnts dscrib this

trror o convrstion bcus thy l thtthyv ottn so usd to prormin, so usd to

composin sl, tht thy los condnc tht

thy know how to tlk to ch othr, to listn to

ch othr. Tis on kidI think hs sixtn

sid to m tht somdy, not now, but somdy,

h wnts to lrn how to hv convrstion.

and hs dmittin tht this is somthin tht

luds him. Hs livd li whr h rlly cn

void convrstion.

Sthtchngyisbginningtshur

bhvir.Yutkbuthktch-

ngis,nthnurtchngisk

us.myqustinis,htrbcing?

anrthstchngiskingusss

hun?

W r llowin tchnoloy to ld us in two

dirctions tht or m cll into qustion l-

mnts o our humnnss. T rst is inppropri-

t substitution: whthr it is th substitution o

n objct or prorm tht dosnt undrstnd

humn mnin whn you rlly nd to tlk to

prson or th substitution o connction or con-

vrstion. So I think w r t momnt o tmp-

ttion. W r tmptd to ccpt substitutionswhr substitutions should not b considrd,

whr substitutions constitut lssnin o our

humnity. T scond is our rowin incpcity

or solitud. T qustion o solitud is rlvnt


11/12

63


to th issus o both connctivity nd robotics.

I ws rcntly in th Nthrlnds, spkin on

Alone Together, nd sombody sid to m, I s

socibl robots s solvin th problm o soli-tud. at rst I thouht I ws hvin problm

with thir enlish, tht wht thy mnt to sy

ws tht th robots wr solvin th problm o

lonlinss. I sid, Dont you mn solvin th

problm o lonlinss? Ty sid, No, solvin

th problm o solitud. I worry tht w dont

vn know th dirnc btwn ths two

words nymor.

Thtsvryintrsting.

Its s thouh w dont vn hv th word soli-

tud nymor whr solitud is ood thin.

I hv hrd this ormultion, how w nd to

solv th problm o solitud, not just on this

on occsion. So, or xmpl, popl think o

lwys hvin dvic t hnd s wy to solvth problm o solitud. W hv vry hrd tim

thinkin o li tht dos not includ rchin

or dvic whn on is lon. So you rch or

dvic or you put in robot to solv th problm

o n ldrly prson lonits not vn sibl

tht thy miht b hvin momnt o solitud.

Trs story in my book tht I lik vry much:

n oldr womn tlks bout hr unt who usd

to sit combin hr hir in ront o th mirror,nd how sh rmmbrs hr unt not s snil,

just rfctin on hr li. and nobody in th

mily worrid bout this womn bin lon.

Somtims sh cm down to join th mily,

nd thy spok to hr, but sh spnt lot o tim

lon, lookin t picturs, combin hr hir,

rdin quitly. Nobody thouht, wv ot to

iv hr robot, shs spndin too mny hours

lon. Sh ws just rfctin on hr li. Trws sns tht sh hd cpcity or solitud.

and I think w hv n incrsinly hrd tim

vn iminin tht, iminin nythin but

lonlinss. Robots r not yt widsprd in th

cultur, but lrdy w s popl drmin o

how somthin s simpl s Siri, th convrs-

tionl nt on th iPhon, miht t smrtr

s sh rows up, miht b somthin tht thymiht tlk to. a bst rind tht would nvr

jud thm. Ty would nvr hv to b lon.

and o cours, our connctivity dvics iv us

th ntsy tht w will nvr hv to b lon.

Right.

In th rviw o my book in th New York Times,I ws tkn to tsk or bin nostlic bout cs

in which popl wr prsnt, nd not lswhr.

Prsnt to thmslvs in solitud. and prsnt to

ch othr, in convrstion with ch othr. So

I v this lot o thouht. I wnt to th cs

in, I lookd round, I sw vrybody burid

in thir dvics, nd I wondrd i I ws bin

nostlic nd curmudonly. Im stickin to my

uns. T cpcity or solitud is crucil to ourbility to rch out to popl, not in nxity but

with nuin bility to or rltionships. and

it ws wondrul whn popl spok to th othr

popl who wr in th sm physicl spcs.

unrstn.thinkingbuthtus

thnhngtnn.t

ustbthtthyuhvcnvr-stiniththrsnsittingnxttth.

tightnybbri, butn n s

thtnyr.evrynjustsitsnn

ugsin.

Riht. actully, I hd n intrstin xprinc

t pnl discussion on intrnt tiqutt with

two dvic columnists rom The Boston Globe.

Sombody in th udinc skd wht is thcorrct tiqutt whn your in chck-out lin,

with rl humn chck-out prson, nd you

hv your phon nd wnt to txt? Im work-

in mom, I dont hv lot o tim, nd this is


12/12


64

prct tim or m to b in touch with my

rinds. But I cn tll tht th uy t th chck-

out lin dosnt lik it. T two dvic colum-

nists sid bsiclly tht h is thr to b yourchck-out prson, his job is to chck you out, so

you should l r to txt s much s you wnt.

I ws third in th linup, nd Im not n dvic

columnist t llIm crtinly not n xprt on

tiquttbut I sid, w know tht chckin

out is somthin computr cn do by scnnin

th br cod, but until computr is doin this

job, why trt this mn lik computr? Tr

is prson hr who clrly dos not wnt to btrtd lik computr.

anrhsrnnyhsctingik

hun?

Ys, tht ws rlly my tk-hom rom this

intrchn. h two dvic columnists wr

lovly poplthy wrnt scinc ictionpopl whos li commitmnt is to t rid o

popl nd rplc thm with mchins. Ts

wr two tiqutt popl who wr syin, this

is th wy thins r now, nd thy hd lrdy

turnd wht hppns t th chck-out into n

instrumntl trnsction. Bcus th chck-out

prson ws doin job tht could b don by

mchin, h ws s i mchin. Onc you

instrumntliz, onc you s job nd think computr could do it, you strt to s th popl

who r still doin thos jobs s lrdy on thir

wy to bin mchins. Tos r th wys in

which I think wr chnin, whr w xpct

mor rom tchnoloy nd lss rom ch othr;

wr trtin ch othr s lss humn.

A conversation with Sherry Turkle

Documents

Transcript of A conversation with Sherry Turkle