Lately, I’ve been hearing a mantra about the relative merits of using analog tools versus digital tools, “Use digital for efficiency; use analog for meaningfulness.” It is stated as though it’s an established truth. I’ve read it and heard it repeated on two popular podcasts.
The source of this advice is Chris Bailey, writing In How to Calm Your Mind: “Here’s the trick to this advice: when we want to do an activity efficiently, we should do it digitally, and when we want our actions to be meaningful, we should do things the analog way.” (See my A Review of How To Calm Your Mind, by Chris Bailey.)
I disagree with this mantra. It is an effort to turn an individual subjective experience into a universal truth, and others attempt to use it as an objective argument for the superiority of analog tools.
I have read and recommend several of Chris Bailey’s books. One of their strengths is that their insights and conclusions are typically based on convincing scientific evidence. In the first part of Bailey’s How to Calm Your Mind book, which deals with the nature of stress and burnout, Bailey presents scientific studies and findings as a basis for his conclusions. That part of the book is informative and based on evidence.
However, Bailey’s advice about using analog vs digital tools is not based on scientific studies but solely on the author’s subjective feelings.
“Use Analog Tools For a Meaningful Experience” is a Subjective Preference, Nothing More
Whether an activity is meaningful or not depends not on the nature of the tools used but on the user’s attitude and intention.
Some people subjectively find using a written journal to be a more meaningful practice for them. They find value in putting pen to paper and handwriting their thoughts.
However, others find using a digital journal more meaningful. For instance, some value the ability to dictate into a digital tool and feel like dictation allows them to record their unfiltered and unedited thoughts in a way handwriting does not allow. Others prefer to type their thoughts instead of handwriting them.
There are no right or wrong tools in themselves, no meaningful or calming tools, as opposed to efficient tools. There are tools, and which ones are meaningful or calming is totally dependent on the attitude and feeling of the person using them.
It’s an entirely subjective preference, not subject to objective-sounding mantras.
Using Analog Tools is Not Always More Calming or More Meaningful Than Using Digital Tools
Bailey argues that analog tools cause less stress than digital tools: “Nearly all habits that lead us to calm exist in one place: the analog world. The more time we spend in the analog world, as opposed to the digital one, the calmer we become.”
The fact is that stress and burnout existed long before digital tools were invented. People experienced high levels of stress and burnout when all tools were analog. So clearly, stress cannot be attributed primarily to using digital tools.
Bailey’s advice does not ring true to my own experiences or the experiences of many others. He jumps to the conclusion that digital use results in stress and downplays and dismisses the harmful stress levels generated in purely analog activities.
I can think of several examples where Bailey’s rule is not accurate:
• Reading analog vs. digital books. Bailey indicates that in his experience, he always feels calmer, centered, and less stressed by reading an analog book instead of a digital book.
For me (and many others), the exact opposite is true. I find it more stressful to read an analog book because I have no control over the font size, and I have to find a light source that’s bright enough for me to read.
I have none of these stressful issues reading a Kindle book on my iPad. I can focus, feel centered and calm, and think deeply about the material I am reading in a digital rather than analog format.
I also appreciate the ability to have my highlights automatically saved to Readwise and to periodically review and digitally search these highlights. These abilities, available only in digital tools, make reading even more meaningful for me in digital tools, not analog.
• Social interactions. Bailey also oversimplifies the calming effect of social interactions. Bailey says, “The most bountiful wellspring of calm in the analog world is easily human connection.”
While this is true for some social interactions, it is not valid for all. Some of the most stressful and unpleasant situations I have ever experienced have been negative social interactions at work or home. Just because people are meeting face-to-face does not guarantee it will be a calm, stress-reducing activity.
• Listening to digital music. According to Bailey’s rule, listening to analog live music should be much less stressful than listening to digital music. I find the opposite to be true.
One of the most calming and anxiety-reducing activities I do is sit in my living room and read and think deeply about a digital book I’m reading on my digital iPad while listening to relaxing digital music on my HomePod.
I find listening to digital music while sitting comfortably in my living room to be much more calming than listening to music in public venues, where there are often distractions from other people, the sound is too loud or too soft, and the seating may be uncomfortable. I’d rather listen to my uninterrupted digital music at home, where I can completely relax and let go of all stress.
• Working digitally from home. Following Bailey’s advice, one would assume that working in an analog office would be much less stressful, where many activities might be analog, and there would be social interaction.
However, thousands of people would disagree. They feel much less stress working from home, using primarily digital tools to accomplish their tasks.
I could continue with multiple other examples, but these few are sufficient to illustrate my point — analog is not necessarily more calming than digital and sometimes is more stressful.
Use the Tools That Work Best for You — And Don’t Try to Argue Others Into Adopting Your Subjective Preferences
Whether digital or analog tools are more meaningful is a subjective experience. Tools are not inherently more meaningful or more stressful.
If you prefer to handwrite in journals and buy expensive pens or paper to write with, that’s fine if it works for you. If you find it’s more meaningful to use a digital journal, that’s fine, too. But remember, it’s your personal subjective preference and doesn’t necessarily fit anyone else.
If you prefer analog tools, please don’t try to justify your preference or argue others should use them by repeating untrue universal mantras like “Use digital for efficiency, use analog for meaningfulness.” That states only a personal subjective preference, not an objective truth.
Likewise, if you find digital tools more efficient and meaningful, use them freely without feeling like you need to make an excuse or justify your use. Use what works best for you.
It’s a mistake to try to argue digital vs. analog. It’s a subjective preference, nothing more.
No one can tell another person what is, or should be, meaningful to them.