Dematerialization and the Decline of Sensory Experience
In his forthcoming book, “The Small Stuff: How to Lead a More Gratifying Life,” writer and academic Ian Bogost argues that technology has transformed our experience of the physical world, leading to a decline in sensory experience. This phenomenon, which Bogost calls “dematerialization,” is characterized by the stripping away of the texture of everyday life, leaving us disconnected from the world around us. As Bogost notes, this is not just a result of technology, but also of bureaucracy, efficiency, economics, and regulatory apparatuses. The decline of the stick shift car, for example, is a symbol of this dematerialization, as it represents a loss of physical connection with the world.
This trend is not unique to Silicon Valley, but rather a broader cultural shift. Bogost points out that many aspects of our daily existence, from cars to doors to bathrooms, have become dematerialized. The airport restroom, with its automatic toilet flush, sink, and towel dispenser, is a prime example of this dematerialization. While these technologies may have improved our lives in some ways, they have also led to a loss of sensory experience and a disconnection from the physical world.
Bogost’s book is a call to action, urging us to recognize the value of sensory experience and to find ways to reclaim it in our daily lives. By exploring the concept of dematerialization and its effects on our lives, Bogost provides a framework for understanding the tradeoffs we make when we prioritize convenience and efficiency over sensory experience.
The Tradeoff Between Convenience and Experience
The pursuit of convenience and efficiency has driven the development of many consumer tech products and services. However, this focus on convenience has come at the cost of sensory experience. As Bogost notes, the experience of doing something is just as important as the outcome. By prioritizing convenience, we have de-emphasized the experience of doing things, leading to a loss of sensory experience and a disconnection from the physical world.
This tradeoff is not just a result of technology, but also of cultural values. The Silicon Valley ethos of optimizing for convenience and efficiency has contributed to this trend. However, as Bogost argues, this approach is misguided. The experience of using products and services matters, not just the outcomes they provide. By recognizing the value of sensory experience, we can find ways to balance convenience and friction, creating a more fulfilling and meaningful life.
Bogost’s critique of the tech industry is not just about the products they create, but also about the values they promote. The idea that we can “rise above” our bodies and live forever through efficiency and optimization is a fundamentally flawed one. As Bogost notes, we are embodied beings, and our sensory experiences are essential to our humanity.
Winners and Losers in the Dematerialization of Everyday Life
The dematerialization of everyday life has created winners and losers. On the one hand, companies that prioritize convenience and efficiency have thrived. On the other hand, individuals who value sensory experience and physical connection with the world have lost out. The decline of the stick shift car, for example, has led to a loss of physical connection with the world for car enthusiasts.
However, there are also opportunities for companies to create products and services that prioritize sensory experience. By recognizing the value of sensory experience, companies can create products that are more fulfilling and meaningful. For example, companies that create products that encourage physical activity, such as bicycles or outdoor gear, can help individuals reconnect with the physical world.
Ultimately, the dematerialization of everyday life is a complex issue that requires a nuanced approach. By recognizing the tradeoffs between convenience and sensory experience, we can find ways to balance these competing values and create a more fulfilling and meaningful life.
The Skeptical Case: Is This Just a Call to Nostalgia?
Some might argue that Bogost’s critique of dematerialization is just a call to nostalgia, a romanticization of the past. However, Bogost is clear that we cannot go back to the past, and that nostalgia is not a solution. Instead, he argues that we must find ways to reclaim sensory experience in the present, using new technologies and products that prioritize physical connection with the world.
Moreover, Bogost’s critique is not just about the past, but also about the present and future. He argues that we must recognize the value of sensory experience and find ways to balance convenience and friction in our daily lives. This is not a nostalgic call to arms, but rather a call to action, urging us to rethink our values and priorities.
The Signal to Watch Next: A Shift in Values
The signal to watch next is a shift in values, a recognition that sensory experience is essential to our humanity. As companies and individuals begin to prioritize sensory experience, we can expect to see new products and services that encourage physical connection with the world. This shift in values will require a fundamental rethinking of our approach to technology and innovation, but it has the potential to create a more fulfilling and meaningful life.
Bookmark this one — it will matter to your business decisions this week.
By Priya Nair, AI & Startup Reporter at TrendFlashy
Ready to launch your own asset?
Check out our guide on Building a Profitable Online Business.
