{"id":133281,"date":"2024-11-25T16:24:12","date_gmt":"2024-11-25T20:24:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/?p=133281"},"modified":"2024-11-29T16:33:11","modified_gmt":"2024-11-29T20:33:11","slug":"double-edged-sword-of-technology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/double-edged-sword-of-technology\/","title":{"rendered":"The Double-Edged Sword of Technology: Toxic Self-Improvement"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Is technology good or bad? What’s the double-edged sword of technology?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adam Alter argues that some forms of technology are designed to encourage the doggedly relentless pursuit of personal growth<\/a>, which can be a good and bad thing. This comes in two forms: skill mastery<\/a> and all-around perfectionism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Find out how the benefits of technology can also be a disadvantage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Skill Mastery<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Alter says that the double-edged sword of technology is that it’s designed to give users the feeling of accomplishment that comes when you\u2019ve overcome a challenge or sharpened your skills\u2014but this makes it easier for people to keep using the tech. This is especially common in video games\u2014for example, in Minecraft, <\/em>you might feel proud of the elaborate structures you\u2019ve built. One way that game developers promote this feeling is by gradually increasing the complexity of the task so that you learn as you play and enjoy the process<\/a> of becoming progressively better at the game. This can induce what psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (Flow<\/em><\/a>) describes as flow<\/em>\u2014a period of blissfully intense engrossment that makes you lose all sense of time.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Shortform note: Accomplishing video game objectives may make you feel <\/em>good, but is it truly good for you? You might assume so, since the process induces flow, which is typically associated with happiness<\/a> and progress toward constructive goals<\/a>. However, Csikszentmihalyi explains that you can also experience negative<\/em> flow during destructive activities<\/a>, like war and crime, since those can be equally challenging and engrossing. Studies suggest that many problematic gamers cite the feeling of achievement<\/a> they gain by playing as a motivation for their behavior\u2014but since their gameplay hurts them more than it helps them, they may be responding only to the illusion <\/em>of accomplishment. Thus, they may experience negative flow.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Game developers proactively prolong this state of flow<\/strong> by making it easy for players to stay in the game. A game might automatically restart when you lose or, more subtly, might show you how close you were to winning\u2014feeling like you almost <\/em>won is a powerful motivator to keep playing, since it suggests that victory is within reach. Alter says that other technology designers use this strategy, too, by overriding or distracting you from your natural cues to stop engaging. For example, on X (formerly known as Twitter), you can easily swipe to see a new batch of tweets. You might find yourself obsessively refreshing your feed as a major news event unfolds, hoping to achieve mastery<\/a> (in the form of comprehensive knowledge) of the topic du jour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Shortform note: By proactively prolonging your experience of flow, video game and social media designers incentivize you to make their platforms more profitable. For example, the developers of Candy Crush<\/a> offer you chances to pay (or watch ads, which also generates revenue) to continue levels you\u2019ve failed, which can be enticing if you felt you were \u201cin the zone\u201d and want to maintain your sense of progress. Using this model, the makers of Candy Crush have brought in over $20 billion<\/a>. Social media apps are designed to be \u201cfrictionless<\/a>\u201d\u2014 that is, easy to use endlessly\u2014and this generates profits by increasing the chance that you\u2019ll view and interact with paid advertisements, for which social media companies are handsomely rewarded<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All-Around Perfectionism<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Some technology, like fitness tracking apps, helps you identify, quantify, and measure your progress<\/a> toward goals in various areas of your life. Trying to reach goals isn\u2019t inherently harmful, but Alter argues that the culture <\/em>around goal-setting is toxic for three reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It demands perpetual <\/em>personal growth. <\/strong>Reaching a goal won\u2019t satisfy you because until you reach a state of all-around perfection, there\u2019s always more work to be done. When you reach your goal, you\u2019ll just set another\u2014and this means that you\u2019ll never be satisfied with what you\u2019ve achieved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s numeric. <\/strong>Assigning numeric values to your goals can help you measure your progress, but these numbers are compelling, and it\u2019s easy to hyperfixate on them to an unhealthy degree (for example, by pushing through an injury to beat a swim record).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s outcome-oriented. <\/strong>You\u2019re more concerned with the achievement than the process of getting there, so you might not take time to enjoy the process. Furthermore, the joy you derive from the outcome itself is fleeting: Outcomes are short-lived compared to processes because they represent a single point in time. Once achieved, the positive feelings they evoke fade rapidly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alter says technology facilitates and amplifies the toxicity associated with perfectionistic goal-setting <\/strong>in three ways: <\/p>\n\n\n\n