After completing the book Alone Together by Sherry Turkle, I greatly enjoyed learning about the new challenges that arise with technology and worries about how we are becoming more and more dependent on them. I agree that it seems like at the core of all human beings is the desire to be together and the commitment to some sort of intimate relationship with others. At the same time, however, we are in the constant struggle to be involved in an intimate relationship due to the lack of control we have over it. After seeing Prof. Turkle's position towards technology and what we ask of it in terms of comfort and intimacy, I would say that I obviously agree on some aspects, but not on all. As I begin my critique of the book, I would like to say that I know many of Professor Turkle's points, but I consider them a little extreme in relation to my life and growing up with these same technologies that she talks about. of.Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay One of the most interesting parts of the book I found was in the “Caring for a Life” section, where social robots were introduced into nursing homes to help the elderly with loneliness when caregivers could not always be at their flank. AIBO, my real baby, introduced to some elderly people at the nursing home, really caught my attention. This is because I didn't believe that older people would really open up to these forms of robot companionship since they hadn't grown up with them. In fact, when things got worse, there were many cases of older adults opening up and sharing deep, intimate secrets with this technology. As in the case of Jonathan and Andy, we are able to see that extreme isolation can lead to "putting up with" new technology, which can ultimately lead to adopting the technology and finding comfort in it. Now I agree with Prof. Turkle about the problems that could arise from this newfound comfort within technology and not actual human interaction, but I disagree when he states that this new technology will make it easier for children stop visiting their parents or feel less guilty about missing meetings with parents in nursing homes. I feel like it's simply a However, I would say that putting up with these technologies is simply a way to remove cognitive dissonance. As we know, people are motivated to remove dissonance and most start by ignoring opposing viewpoints, changing beliefs to fit their actions, and seeking reassurance from others during difficult decisions. Ultimately, this was seen in Jonathan and Andy's case when they introduced "my real baby." They both initially had the views of many adults and would not have been caught playing with the doll, but as time went on they rationalized to themselves that they were in fact not crazy and therefore changed their initial beliefs to make playing or playing ok. talk to the doll. Therefore, by changing their beliefs, they brought consonance and removed the psychological inconsistency of how they were judged for interacting with “my real baby.” Therefore, as I said before, I believe Prof. Turkle's statements are a bit drastic, however I will admit that in both Jonathan and Andy's cases cognitive dissonance was not the only issue at hand. As their cases continued, it's easy to see that my real baby was only a temporary solution to their loneliness problem. This is where I agree with Professor Turkle in the sense that human interaction is mandatory to a certain extent.