> due to inexperience with dopamine and its effects on dopamine production, being easier to condition, FOMO.
I don't understand the reasoning in performing this type of deep analysis. If the purpose of the device is to enhance education, it can be in the classroom. If it it's not, it's essentially a toy, and it has no place in the classroom. Why even bring dopamine in to it?
Perhaps schools should simply have an extra set of mobile phones that are specifically designed for education only.
That way, every student has access to the device, and every student will have the same device, and there is no risk that the device is used for e.g. watching tiktok.
Mobile phones are cheap enough for this to be a reality.
A device made with the best of intentions and with many helpful features for enhancing education may turn out to have harmful consequences in practice. Those harmful consequences typically include temptations to have fun instead of productivity and learning. And that's where all those concepts you quote come in.
outcomes matter, intentions don't really. if a device leads to bad outcomes, then it's by definition not a good tool for education in the typical classroom setting.
of course it might make sense to then have a very different class that deals with the whole problem of supercharged dependence forming devices and activities.
A program designed to be fun while also being somewhat educational will never outcompete a game designed to be as fun as possible without regard for educational value.
Because they are a bunch of willful ignorants following buzzword-infused neo-puritanism? Not only is anything pleasurable bad for you so is pleasure itself!
I don't understand the reasoning in performing this type of deep analysis. If the purpose of the device is to enhance education, it can be in the classroom. If it it's not, it's essentially a toy, and it has no place in the classroom. Why even bring dopamine in to it?