This makes me want to work even harder on our goal of sponsoring conversation on Is that paradoxical? Turkle's essay reminds me of how important this work is on Youth Voices and how it will only get more difficult as students get comfortalbe with the "sips."
Connecting in sips may work for gathering discrete bits of information or for saying, “I am thinking about you.” Or even for saying, “I love you.” But connecting in sips doesn’t work as well when it comes to understanding and knowing one another. In conversation we tend to one another. (The word itself is kinetic; it’s derived from words that mean to move, together.) We can attend to tone and nuance. In conversation, we are called upon to see things from another’s point of view.
And where does this fit? I still love these descriptions of conversation:
Shared publicly