Love and hate of a (perpetual) life online

While we may not yet face the Hamletic dilemma, it is clear that in the digital age, the question has shifted from embracing online living to questioning the feasibility of offline existence. The boundaries of digital interconnection are expanding, raising the question of whether and how we can still be "not connected" or at least spend a large part of our lives offline.

Setting aside the potential adverse effects of digitalisation on our social lives and thought processes (which exist and are the object of research) and those that could potentially bring about improvements for the development of humanity, it is undeniable that the digital age has significantly influenced our lives in the post-industrialised West. Whether these effects are positive or negative, it's nearly impossible to remain completely untouched by the pervasive nature of technology.

The third way

For this reason, scholars have gradually shifted their focus from exploring dualism to seeking a potential integration between opposites. This search includes integrating life online and offline, analysing both the positive aspects and risks. Ultimately, they envision a possible "third way," operating under the assumption that the internet, like any other human-made artefact, has limitations and enhancements depending on how it is used and the underlying reasons for its use. The goal, or perhaps the hope, is that in the long run, the tools produced by the digital world and made available to us may become, like scissors, glasses, or any other mechanical instrument. These tools should be considered physical and/or mental extensions of humans, expanding their capacities and/or making up for any deficiencies.

From this perspective, it matters little whether the internet is a helpful tool that improves our abilities or, conversely, if it can become an obstacle to social relations and everyday life like any other form of addiction. What's important is that we are constantly connected online due to the widespread use of applications (smartphones, smartwatches, smart glasses, etc.), and we must adapt to this reality.

Concrete proposals born of a need

Interesting in this regard, and at the same time paradoxical given who the author of the proposal is, is the fact that the Zurich branch of the Swiss Pirate Party recently filed a cantonal initiative "for digital integrity". In addition to safeguarding users' data protection, the aim is to grant those who wish to do so the opportunity to live without smartphones and the like, i.e. offline. It is also interesting to note that a similar proposal was presented and voted on in the canton of Geneva in 2023: the result was overwhelming, with 94% of voters in favour; the practical consequences are currently unknown.

It is also interesting and paradoxical, given the result of the Geneva vote, that in psychiatry, the term nomophobia ('no mobile phobia') has been coined to describe the fear of forgetting or losing one's mobile phone or being disconnected from the internet for any reason. This fear seems to stem from feeling out of touch with the world, an experience that most of us have had at least once.

An attraction-repulsion impulse between digital and analogue that highlights not only how closely intertwined online and offline life is now but also how much the integration between what we are and do in the former and what we are and do in the latter still needs a process of adaptation. How long and whether definitive is yet to be discovered. Not least because we must not forget that "our electronic devices are so psychologically powerful that they don't only change what we do, they change who we are." (Sherry Turkle, MIT), so it may not be far-fetched that this evolution will also depend on that of the machines. And vice versa.

THE INTERVIEW - Digital, "a very powerful prosthesis"

According to Professor Lorenzo Cantoni, director of the Institute of Digital Technologies for Communication at Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), the digital evolution of the last thirty years in the Western world is clear. "In the mid-1990s," he explains, "to access the Internet, people used the expression "I'm going online", as if there was a frontier between these worlds, and to access it, you had to make a journey, even a real one, given that you often had to move to the Internet station to connect". The turning point came in 2007 with smartphones. "Since then, we have a tool that allows us to be always connected. This has completely flipped our perspective, as we now need to make a conscious effort to disconnect rather than actively choose to go online." Not the easiest act, as we all know, so much so that many try to practice periods of "digital detox".

And there are even people "who travel to non-digitalised places to unplug. Because, contemporary paradox, "vacation" originates from the Latin verb "vacare", meaning to be free or to be absent... from my daily life, of course, from which I want to escape for a more or less brief period. But if I have my mobile phone with me, I have, in fact, taken my entire life with me: contacts, friends, relatives, work..." so much for the coveted rest.

So if we used to live in two distinct worlds (constantly offline with possible and more or less frequent online trips), today we live "in a hybrid world", continues the vice-dean of the Faculty of Communication, Culture and Society, "in which we maintain an offline experience that is still important but increasingly mixed with the digital one". There are even "space-time gateways such as QR codes" found in museums, for example, allowing us to visit other places virtually.

The goal: a solid balance

It is practically impossible to be completely offline, unlike the tools invented so far, which are only used when needed. Finding a balance is necessary: every prosthesis helps us, but we still have to learn how to use it. Digital is similar: it is a very powerful prosthesis we must learn to use. As we previously had to do with television to avoid spending hours in front of a screen".

The smartphone, however, is much more pervasive. "This technology, universally accessible, deserves credit for transforming our relationship with information and communication. Today, our devices serve as offices, information sources, coaches, and even social validation tools, far surpassing their original function as simple phones. For example, the mobile phone is simultaneously a newspaper, radio, TV, cinema, sound system... - so why should I feel the need to use other tools? Do I need to physically detach myself to read, listen, watch, or can I do it here, right now, from this small screen that I always carry with me?".

Without forgetting that it is now impossible to live without digital. Not so much for personal contacts but "for the needs of both public and private administrations and the banking system". Indeed, the mobile phone "has become one of the most reliable tools for personal identification (the person using the phone is likely its legitimate owner)". Hence, the security systems involving two-factor authentication.

Exclusion, misinformation and superficiality

Mobile phones are becoming increasingly like a "passport" and a way to access services. However, those who do not have one, whether due to financial reasons or inability to use it, risk exclusion.

Surprisingly, "it is not necessarily true that digital natives manage better than so-called digital migrants. (the generation born before the internet, [EN])." Indeed, in some cases, "the former are much more naive than the latter, precisely because they lack the comparison between the two worlds, between the before and the after. "It is a bit like only knowing one language or knowing two or more: the perception of nuances, the complexity of the world and things are missing, or at risk of being missed. One is satisfied with the initial answers, perhaps those found on the first page of Google, and overlooks everything else."

This opens up the issue of the "training and education" of future generations because "the risk of having people who are technologically very well equipped but with a very low digital literacy is very strong". And that "beyond disinformation (which has always been there) and "alternative truths", parallel worlds are created that are difficult to distinguish from the real one". A question of hierarchy and reliability of sources.

This is "a great and significant challenge" that Cantoni says he is convinced is "possible to overcome", provided that we learn that "even in the digital world not everything has the same value" and that we regain, "somewhat Socratically, the humility of admitting that there are many more things we do not know than those we do know". On the other hand, he believes that "an Orwellian state control over information, to tell us what is true and what is false, can lead to very undemocratic situations"; it would be better to implement dedicated "educational processes", though they are still to be invented.