These three articles definitely bring up valid points on each side of the argument but I completely agree with Nicholas Carr's viewpoint. I'm all for advancing technology, mostly because it makes my life easier and a lot of fun. And seeing the advances in the medical field because of technology is amazing. However, if we're progressing to the point where we're so saturated with the internet that we have a computer search engine part of our brain, count me out.
I think a big part of being human is to wonder, not to know everything. Religious beliefs aside, I think everyone can agree that each human is unique and to be cherished. And I'm not about to debate the importance of reading "War and Peace" but I do believe that humans need to have times of quiet, the space to contemplate, just to be. And in my personal life, I've experienced what Carr describes about having less patience with reading and it kind of scares me. Not so much how it affects me, but how it will affect the next generation. Will the internet take over our lives so completely that reading books become too difficult? Call me a skeptic like Carr, but I don't want a future like that.