Richtel does a great job of using Kairos and Stasis theory to convince me that the com-
munity as a whole is paying the price for our addiction to technology. Its effects on people is evi-
dent in his essay 'Hooked on Technology, and Paying a Price.' Richtel believes technology to
be a danger to society and he points this outs using many examples throughout his essay.
Because the topic of technology is so timely and so prevalent today it was worth while to read it.

The topic of technology is very timely it is used all around the world today and effects so
many people's lives. The twenty first century has had a huge growth spurt of technology and
there couldn't be a better time to talk about it. Richtel chose a topic that he knew people would
want to read. Richtel shows that he is aware of the timeliness of this article by identifying issues
within our society today. Richtel points out peoples social skills are crippling their relationships
and instead f ixing the problem and getting off the phone, people use them even more. The au-
thor shows awareness of his audience by using a relevant story of the Campbell family, a family
that just moved to California to start a software company, and how they function with technology
to show the detrimental causes on people, brains, and their relationships. The Campbells are a
family that is frequently impacted by technology and they shared their experiences with Richtel.

Richtel points out that gadgets and technology destroy the relationships between people
by distracting them from things that are important in life. In the Campbell family, technology dis-
tracts the kids from homework and education, negatively impacting their grades. Mr. Campbell
often forgets important things like dinner plans and has trouble focusing on the family because
he is too distracted by his gadgets. 'He has burned hamburgers on the grill, forgotten to pick up
the children and lingered in the bathroom playing video games on an iPhone,' says his worried
wife. Grades, family, friends, brain function, happiness, social skills, and relationships are
all impacted by technology.

The scientist and research communities are looking at the effects of technology on soci-
ety and Richtel utilizes this in his essay to back up his argument. Scientists are arguing that it
has both positive and negative effects on the brain and in people's relationships. People every-
where use their devices and the gadgets for many things. They are always on and it's distract-
ing. Richtel uses the son's grades in the family for example, to show that grades suffer because
of this. 'He (Conner) could not focus on homework.. on his bedroom desk sit two
monitors' '. All of the time that kids used to spend studying is now spent on using their
phones. Families are making arguments about technology as a whole. Parents, spouses, broth-
ers, and sisters want quality time with their loved ones. 'I would love for him to totally unplug, to
be totally engaged,' says Richtel's wife (89). Richtel uses the lives of the Campbell family to
show these effects. He uses these specif ic examples to show the consequences behind too
much use of electronics and how serious they can be.

Richtel draws from scientific fact when stating that people need their fix for a dopamine
squirt that technology provides them with. Technology 'cuts on creativity and deep thought'.
It causes heavy multi-taskers to have trouble focusing and shutting out irrelevant information.
They experience more stress and stress hormones reduce shore term memory. 'Technology is
rewiring our brains'. Less than 3% of the population can handle multiple info streams and
information overload causes distraction. People who multi-task have a harder time sorting out
irrelevant information and focusing on one topic for a long period of time. Richtel uses the stasis
theory in def ining what this technology does to people and tries to identify how serious it is by
explaining the consequences that follow. 'As when cellphone-weilding drivers and train engi-
neers cause wrecks'. He points out that technological distractions have deadly con-
sequences, and people need to change their habits in order to stay safe. All of these facts are
Richtel draws from scientif ic fact when stating that people need their f ix for a dopamine
put to use to show how technology negative impacts the brain, trying to get us to lay back on
our use of these gadgets.

Richtel is very aware of disagreements with his argument. He realizes there is a whole
other side to his argument and he points them out and discusses them. This adds to his good
sense because he makes himself a reliable source by addressing the other side and their con-
cerns. Richtel compares the positive effect of technology of the brain to the negative in two of
the sections of his essay. He uses scientif ic fact and the real life effects to make it clear that the
negative impacts are greater and outweigh the positive.

Richtel includes that the brains of internet users become more eff icient in finding infor-
mation, show greater brain activity, and continue to grow their neural circulatory sensors. He
uses these facts to show that he realizes the advantages of the other side and what they could
argue against him. Scientists are trying to turn these positive effects on the brain into real world
benef its like safer driving by creating driving games. This is very smart of Richtel because it
would be dumb not to look to see if there was a positive scientific impact on the brain to counter
his argument with. Instead of ignoring this, he points it out, therefore showing that he is smart
and realizes that there is a playing field for the people who argue technology is positive.

Technology exists and so do the problems that come along with it. Richtel describes the
issues that come along with technology and shows us the effects of these issues. He def ines
the truth. The opponent might evaluate the story of the family as an extreme case of technology
use and may not take it seriously, but Richtel uses scientif ic information and other reliable
sources to show that the impacts are real and truthful. 'The lower-brain functions alert humans
to danger, like a nearby lion, overriding goals like building a hut'. Richtel knows that people
can't ignore facts so he uses them to get to people's attention to show them how powerful tech-
nology can be.

The six sections in Richtel's argument are used to analyze different viewpoints and facts.
It gives the reader an idea of where Richtel is going. For instance, the section the toll on chil-
dren hones in on what effects technology has on children and how it impacts their lives. All of
these sections hone in on something specif ic that Richtel wants to make a point about. He
wants the reader to know that we are paying a price when we are always on our devices. We
can't multitask effectively because we are always interrupted. This has detrimental effects and
vacation with the people around us will end up being more time that we spend on our phones.

The Campbell family is what Richtel uses to show us that technology can be a really bad
thing. In this he tries to point out what will happen if we don't do anything about our use of tech-
nology. Richtel ends with a nice quote saying 'The way we become more human is by paying
attention to each other' it shows how much you care.' This quote reenforces Richtel's argu-
ment that people need to communicate the old fashioned way.

Richtel uses Kairos and Stasis theory to show to us that technology is happening right
now and prove to us how people are abusing it and the effects of that. His methods of Kairos
and Stasis is strictly used to get us to open our eyes. Richtel describes what technology means
for society and how serious this might be. He follows up with a call to action to persuade people
to get off their devices. He uses solid examples, situations, and research to show these effects.
The topic is timely, the research is timely, and so are the examples he provides with the Camp-
bell family. Richtel rolls out his plan of action in his six sections and organizes it well. Richtel
counter argues with himself and only to point out more so that the positive effects could not
compete with the negative. The argument is very strategic and Richtel did a great job.

