you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] [S] -59 points 1 month ago (9 children)
  • [–] 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

    it’s not excuses, just (informed) theories about material conditions that could lead to this

    what’s your explanation for this? genuinely curious

    i’m kinda doubtful that the blanket "technology = bad" thesis in the article is true, honestly. i’m obviously not a neuroscientist but it seems super reductive and simplistic to me, and altho i believe that yes reliance on short-form content and ai summaries isn’t good for your attention span, that’s 1. not the same thing as intelligence and 2. faaaaar from being exclusive to gen z (or gen alpha for that matter). look at any older person with a phone and you’ll see it. my parents waste a ton of time on the glowing rectangle too and they treat the google summary like the gospel

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] [S] -33 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Check the other comments. Someone posted links from better sources that cite the actual studies. You may not like the results, but that doesn’t make them less true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    The idea that there's no reason, and they're less intelligent inherently with no causes is an entirely new kind of magical thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] [S] -23 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Yeah. Go ahead and disregard proof. And in doing so, you’re just proving them right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    You haven't provided any proof to disregard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 month ago

    This has a ring of "it's not racist if it's true". The people aren't different, they were dealt a different hand. Nobody is disputing that the studies, which probably just measure test scores, are incorrect.

  • source
  • parent