Awareness of this must be raised. It needs to become shameful, just like gaming addiction is.

So you want to shame people for doing something which they enjoy and is hurting no one?

You sir, are a dick.

Awareness of this must be raised. It needs to become shameful, just like gaming addiction is.

So you want to shame people for doing something which they enjoy and is hurting no one?You sir, are a dick.

Glad it isn't just me that thought that. I've spent enough of my life feeling that the way I'm built is somehow morally wrong due to attitudes like this.

So you want to shame people for doing something which they enjoy and is hurting no one?

I disagree that addiction to the cellphone is not harmful. If it becomes too widespread, it can have unforeseen consequences for us all.

Let's take addiction to porn as an example. On the surface it seems harmless enough, but it is already having consequences that could lead to a disaster and soon.

Changes in the rules of the sexual market dynamic that I won't go into detail about have caused particularly younger men to get a raw deal. The short version is that it's harder than ever for young men to find a partner. The tail end of these changes coincided with the free availability of high-quality internet porn. A lot of young men, when faced with the option of playing with the new, more difficult, hand or just going online for instant gratification with the help of women more beautiful than he will ever meet in real life will choose the easy way.

This further lowers marriage rates and more importantly already record low birth rates. The potential end of this is a nation with few younger people who must support an elderly population. Unsustainable.

You sir, are a dick.

I respect your honest opinion.

Claiming that it is rude that others do not continue to engage in an endless stream of useless small talk no one gives a damn about is simply saying "I'm too boring to keep myself entertained, and demand that everyone else around me make me happy!"

Is no one saying anything at all? Check your phone, skim Facebook, and in my experience before long you'll have a new topic that will come up as you share some random bit of info you've just read.

Are other people around you diving into a conversation which you have no interest or opinion on? Why should they expect you to sit there and pretend to care? I don't know about everyone else, but I find it fairly easy to still listen to the general content of a conversation even if I'm checking my email or doing some other minor task at the same time.

So tell me, which option sounds like it is actually rude?

1. I loudly declare that I'm not interested in the conversation, and that the group should change for my benefit.

2. That the group force me to continue being involved in a conversation I don't want to be part of.

3. The group continues their conversation while I quietly avoid distracting them or derailing their conversation.

Everyone wins with one of those options. Except those who are so self centred as to think they're entitled to everyone else giving them their complete and undivided attention all the time.

Claiming that it is rude that others do not continue to engage in an endless stream of useless small talk no one gives a damn about is simply saying "I'm too boring to keep myself entertained, and demand that everyone else around me make me happy!"

Is no one saying anything at all? Check your phone, skim Facebook, and in my experience before long you'll have a new topic that will come up as you share some random bit of info you've just read.

Are other people around you diving into a conversation which you have no interest or opinion on? Why should they expect you to sit there and pretend to care? I don't know about everyone else, but I find it fairly easy to still listen to the general content of a conversation even if I'm checking my email or doing some other minor task at the same time.

So tell me, which option sounds like it is actually rude?

1. I loudly declare that I'm not interested in the conversation, and that the group should change for my benefit.

2. That the group force me to continue being involved in a conversation I don't want to be part of.

3. The group continues their conversation while I quietly avoid distracting them or derailing their conversation.

Everyone wins with one of those options. Except those who are so self centred as to think they're entitled to everyone else giving them their complete and undivided attention all the time.

None of those options is the correct one. If you don't like the conversation you at least pretend to listen. However, seeing that you do not even understand the point of small talk I doubt you can understand why even if I tried to explain.

I disagree that addiction to the cellphone is not harmful.

Take a step back though - you didn't actually start this conversation explicitly about addiction (and so naturally that isn't necessarily what everyone else is discussing), nor have you established that the so-called problem you are identifying is actually addiction.


Playing devil's advocate, who says it isn't actually better to spend the majority of time on social networks rather than socialising face-to-face?

What makes your preferred social norm superior to that which apparently actually exists?


Also, you never responded to suggestions to correct the situation or multiple mentions that the "problem" doesn't occur if in-person conversation is sufficiently interesting. What evidence can you offer to suggest that you personally and/our your social circle aren't at fault?

I've never been one to subscribe to antiquated notions of manners. When I was a kid, if the landline phone rang while we were at the dinner table, someone picked it up. Why wouldn't they? Because it's "rude"? Nobody at my household got offended, and the food/conversation isn't exactly going anywhere in the interim. The phone conversation is.

If I get a call or text while I'm conversing with someone, I'm probably going to take it. It's a matter of priorities. Unless my conversation with you is important, my phone call very well could be more important.

If someone just starts looking at Facebook during a conversation, think of it like the equivalent of nodding and saying "uh-huh" over and over again -- it's a strategy of ending a conversation. Somebody has to do it, and it's not at the whims of the guy who shuts up last.

Take a step back though - you didn't actually start this conversation explicitly about addiction (and so naturally that isn't necessarily what everyone else is discussing), nor have you established that the so-called problem you are identifying is actually addiction.

Right, I only hinted at it with "I guess that somewhere along the line it became more important to let the world know you are at a restaurant than actually being there." I didn't really plan on discussing it this far on this forum, but sometimes things just happen.

There are two problems as I see it, one is the annoying stage where people do it without being addicted. But for those who are susceptible the dopamine rush of getting yet another Like on Facebook is addictive. Social media addiction is a real thing, as easily verified with Google. And now you can carry the syringe wherever you go.

Playing devil's advocate, who says it isn't actually better to spend the majority of time on social networks rather than socialising face-to-face?

What makes your preferred social norm superior to that which apparently actually exists?

We're not built to handle it. We need body language and facial cues to fully understand and appreciate what's going on.

Also, you never responded to suggestions to correct the situation or multiple mentions that the "problem" doesn't occur if in-person conversation is sufficiently interesting

There is nothing to add there that I noticed. If I don't reply it's because I either agree or think it was either discussed by others already or just not interesting. The fact that it doesn't occur when the conversation is interesting doesn't really change that it does occur, you know.

What evidence can you offer to suggest that you personally and/our your social circle aren't at fault?

I'm going to offer no such thing, I'll deal with them and myself as I see appropriate outside the confines of this thread.

If someone just starts looking at Facebook during a conversation, think of it like the equivalent of nodding and saying "uh-huh" over and over again -- it's a strategy of ending a conversation. Somebody has to do it, and it's not at the whims of the guy who shuts up last.

So why not do the nodding instead? Surely it's more trouble to whip out the phone and start browsing?

The nodding thing means "yeah we're done" and suddenly browsing Facebook is more like "I don't give a shit, go away", which is definitely more rude.

*gets out his phone and starts to browse farcebook*

Uh huh... Uh huh... Carry on....

:)