For gourmands there is the infinitely useful \u201csmart belt<\/a>\u201d (which loosens or tightens with your waistline), for concerned parents there is the \u201csmart pacifier\u201d, Pacif-I<\/a>, which allows you to monitor your baby\u2019s temperature remotely with an app. And there is the Melomind<\/a>, a headset that scans your brainwaves to select tunes customised to your mood.<\/p>\n In addition to making our lives easier, wearables provide us with a means to get to know ourselves in greater detail. At least, that is the key message of the \u201cquantified self movement<\/a>\u201d. According to one of the founders, Gary Wolf, self-quantification promises \u201cself-knowledge through numbers\u201d.<\/p>\n This might sound nice, but we should not fool ourselves. This has nothing to do with the philosophical self-examination once proposed by Socrates<\/a>. It is much more fatalistic.<\/p>\n Take Chris Dancy<\/a>, a quantified-self guru known as \u201cthe most connected human on earth\u201d. In an interview<\/a> he recalled how in 2008 he had been laid off with bleak prospects of finding a new job. To \u201crebuild himself for the future,\u201d he turned to self-logging<\/a> his data. According to Dancy, everyone has to go down the same path \u2013 he is just ahead of the curve.<\/p>\n Should we regard life-logging as an attempt to better ourselves, adapted to market conditions? Perhaps wearables, personal data sharing, and a constant drive to improve ourselves is less about expressing our own individuality than meeting the expectations placed on us: to be connected, sociable, creative, hard-working. Precisely the things a job coach would recommend.<\/p>\n This is the point we develop in our new book, The Wellness Syndrome<\/a>. Self-actualisation \u2013 turning against imposed demands to find your true inner self \u2013 and the opposite, complying with those demands, have come together almost seamlessly. But this is strange.<\/p>\n We can draw a historical parallel between today\u2019s tech culture around San Francisco and the generation of spiritual self-actualisers that came to prominence in the region during the 1960s. With a dislike of authority, these people rebelled against the prevailing cultural norms of their time. At places such as the Esalen Institute<\/a> they could learn how to get rid of paternal figures<\/a> by taking the \u201chot-seat\u201d. Typically this meant placing an imagined father figure on the chair, verbally abusing him for a while, then experiencing a sense of relief from having pushed the father aside. The purpose of the workshop was to liberate yourself by taking ownership of your life.<\/p>\n Today\u2019s wearable enthusiasts don\u2019t put an imaginary father figure on the hot seat, they sit on it themselves. The exercise doesn\u2019t last for only a few hours; instead it goes on every single hour of the day with constant monitoring using wearable devices.<\/p>\n Constantly on the go. Jocey K, CC BY-SA<\/p><\/div>\n In this work context, where wearables are becoming increasingly popular, it evokes a return to the productivity theory and Scientific Management<\/a> of Fredrick Winslow Taylor \u2013 but with a twist. The writer Nikil Saval<\/a> has claimed that the rise of self-quantification has revived \u201cTaylor\u2019s dream of pure efficiency\u201d. This time, however, the stop-watch is not confined to the factory floor, but keeps ticking at all moments of life, even during our sleep. Even when \u201cliberated from threats or coercion\u201d, Saval says, \u201cwe scientifically manage ourselves\u201d.<\/p>\n This trend can have devastating consequences. Wearable users can become obsessed with checking on themselves \u2013 we already know that the average smartphone user checks their device an average of 150 times a day<\/a>. Once a user has information about their own bodily functions, this compulsive checking is likely to intensify.<\/p>\n In the film Modern Times<\/a>, Charlie Chaplin\u2019s hands continue to twitch after he leaves work in the factory. Today, heavy users of smartwatches have been found to develop a \u201cphantom watch<\/a>\u201d effect, constantly checking their bare wrists even when not wearing the gadget.<\/p>\n What sets wearables apart from other forms of social media is that, instead of reaching out to the world through messaging, emails, and social networks, we start to turn inwards, self-reflexively checking our steps, calorie intake, heart rate, or moods. As we become more obsessed with our own personal \u201cdashboard\u201d, we are not necessarily gaining more insights about ourselves. Constantly seeking to improve our data might have unfortunate social consequences.<\/p>\n What would happen if we started to spend time exclusively with those who could help us juice up our happiness rating? Is what\u2019s good for our happiness index good for our social life? Rather than gaining self-knowledge, we run the risk of becoming self-delusional. Perhaps it\u2019s too early to tell, but there\u2019s reason to fear that wearables will make people even more isolated.<\/p>\n By Andre Spicer<\/strong>, Professor of Organisational Behaviour, Cass Business School at City University London; <\/span>and Carl Cederstr\u00f6m<\/strong>, Lecturer, Stockholm Business School at Stockholm University<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n If it\u2019s connected, it\u2019s vulnerable to hacking<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n How to spot fake photos online<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n What commercial aircraft will look like in 2050<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\nData is not enlightenment<\/h2>\n
![\"Constantly](\"http:\/\/businesstech.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/01\/Always-on-the-go.jpg\")
<\/a>Unsocial media<\/h2>\n
\n
More from The Conversation<\/h3>\n