Assignment #6

Distraction/Attention worksheet

Describe your overall ability to pay attention when it comes to school work (<100 words)
On a scale of 1 – 10, indicate how addicted you are to you phones 
When it comes to school work, my ability to pay attention is basically almost none. I can’t focus on the work I do and I tend to always procrastinate. I would wait until the very last day and last few hours to start working on the school work. Normally, I would have my school work in front of me then after staring at the work for a few minutes, I would pull out my phone and play. After playing for a few minutes, I would tell myself I have homework to do and then go stare at it again. This process repeats until it gets closer to the due date of the work or when I start feeling tired. This is when I would start to actually focus because I want to sleep, or there is not much time left to work on it. On a scale of 1-10, I am a 7 to how addicted I am to my phone. I am very addicted but when there is other things I like doing in front of me other than my phone, I would do that instead. 
While reading “My Distraction Sickness” please note how long it takes you to get through the piece (Google says it’s a 45 min read); also, count the number of times you get distracted (for whatever reason) and tally them at the end.
While reading “My Distraction Sickness”, It took me one hour and 23 minutes to get through the piece of writing. When reading, I was distracted 12 times.
Describe the tone of all three articles, how do they differ? (<100 words)
Andrew Sullivan’s piece, “My Distraction Sickness,” is written with a confessional and contemplative tone. It’s a mixture of personal revelation and cultural critique as he reflects on the consequences that non-stop engagement with technology has had on his psychological and social well-being. His approach is more emotional and urgent. “In Defense of Distraction” by Sam Anderson often carries a thoughtfully playful and open-minded tone. Anderson isn’t trying to instruct so much as to explore the ways in which distraction might be woven into a modern lifestyle in a positive, or at least neutral, manner. For Larry D. Rosen’s work,”The Distracted Mind: Enhancing Its Focus and Attention,” the tone is expected to be analytical and practical. Rosen comes from an academic background that focuses on the psychology of technology’s impact on individuals, specifically students in this case. His writing tends to distill research insights into actionable advice, and he addresses the problem of distraction with concrete strategies to overcome it.
What are Sam Anderson’s primary arguments in defense of distraction? (see part III of In Defense of Distraction) Do you find them convincing? Why or why not (<150 words)
Sam Anderson’s primary arguments in part III of “In Defense of Distraction” center on the idea that distraction, contrary to popular criticism, can be quite beneficial. He suggests that distraction can be essential to creativity, as it allows the mind to wander and make unique connections. Also that focus and distraction are not necessarily at odds, which they can coexist and balance each other. He implies that distraction aids in multitasking, helping people juggle various tasks and responsibilities. And, distraction can lead to serendipitous discoveries and amazing creations, as unintended insights or stimuli can lead to innovation. While I don’t have much personal opinions, but these arguments are persuasive. Anderson supports his claims with empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and relevant anecdotes. His view is nuanced since he doesn’t argue that all distraction is good, but rather that there are scenarios where distraction can play a positive role in human mental functioning. This perspective resonates with the complex nature of the human mind, which is not binary but capable of thriving under various conditions, including some level of distraction. His argument is from another perspective that I didn’t really think about but now thinking about it, it sound reasonable.
After reading all three articles, what are your thoughts on this “epidemic of distraction”? (<50 words)
After reading all three articles, my thoughts on the “epidemic of distraction” is that distractions is not completely a bad thing. At first, distraction seem like something that is bad. It would take my attention away from what I am doing and need to complete. But after reading the articles, I saw distraction in another different perspective, a perspective where distraction can have a positive side. Now my thoughts on “epidemic of distraction” is that distraction can play a positive role in our mental functioning and have other benefits.
Please annotate “My Distraction Sickness” – highlight at least three instances for each of the following rhetoric concepts:  Invention, Style  Memory, Pathos, Ethos
Invention: 1. His personal narrative of addiction to information and technology. 2. The introduction of the term “distraction sickness” to encapsulate the cultural phenomenon. 3. Reference to historical figures, like Thoreau, to contrast past and present attention spans

Style: 1. Poetic language describing how technology has altered his mind and nature of his work. 2. Metaphors such as equating his phone to a demanding child, illustrating his dependence. 3. Use of short, fragmented sentences to mimic the nature of distracted thought.

Memory: 1.  Recounting the digital transformation of his work as a blogger.  2. Remembering a time before smartphones to illustrate the change over time.  3. Citing the evolution of media consumption available through technology. 

Pathos: 1. His description of anxiety and despair when trying to confront his own distraction. 2. The sense of nostalgia for a simpler, less connected life. 3. Expressions of guilt for time lost to mindless scrolling and the craving for digital connection.

Ethos: 1. He writes from the position of a victim and observer of “distraction sickness”. 2. Sullivan frequently references his career as a writer and blogger, influenced by the digital world. 3. His honesty about personal struggles with technology provides him the ethical appeal to discuss the phenomena.