Is Google making us stupid?

| 2 Comments

After reading Carr and Shirky's articles, Carr's perspective does not contain adequate reasons to persuade me, but Shirky's point of view helped a lot to supplement Carr's idea.
In Carr's article, he shows how the internet causes us trouble through authorities' inferences and private experiences. I have to agree with him in some cases. In fact, I rely on the internet for my studying, but my amount of reading in a year has been reduced since using internet. However, these examples do not include any reasons which were proven by scientific methods, so we can also consider those experiences could be caused from other external or internal factors like age.
On the other hand, Shirky points out that Carr's real anxiety behind his essay is that people will stop reading long literature. When I got this idea, it reminded me of activists who work to ban books. Many books were claimed to be banned because their contents had potential to influence some people's culture, like "Lord of the Flies" and "Catcher in the Rye." Usually, book banning is held for strict religious views and part of child discipline. What activists are afraid of is bad influences to their family from these types of books; bad influence in this case is explained as changing their tradition. In my home country Japan, my parents' generation frequently said "comic magazines are bad for children, they make us lose the skill of reading long paragraphs and imagination." But this type of protest is not new. History indicates these incidents happened frequently when people faced objects which had power to change their life style.
What we really need to think about from both articles is whether sacrificing a culture is really worth it for us or not. It may cause problems in our culture and economic market, but have the chance to make a new market like e-books. Intellectual innovation brings tools that make our life more useful, like printing and the internet, but we also need to be conscious of what we are losing from the innovations.

2 Comments

I really liked how you mentioned the component of imagination. That was another argument that Carr posed that really stood out to me. The idea of reading physical literature that is in a book, in my opinion, evokes our mind to paint a mental picture of the setting of the story. I feel that reading a text document off of a computer screen is just web browsing and lack meaningfulness that books have been able to provide for us. Also, book banning should be looked at as a sin. All you are doing by banning books is limiting an individual's perspective on controversial topics. In a way, it's like censoring real life.

I really liked how you mentioned the component of imagination. That was another argument that Carr posed that really stood out to me. The idea of reading physical literature that is in a book, in my opinion, evokes our mind to paint a mental picture of the setting of the story. I feel that reading a text document off of a computer screen is just web browsing and lack meaningfulness that books have been able to provide for us. Also, book banning should be looked at as a sin. All you are doing by banning books is limiting an individual's perspective on controversial topics. In a way, it's like censoring real life.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by teras002 published on September 13, 2012 4:01 PM.

Internet effects on thought processes was the previous entry in this blog.

Decoding Advertisements is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.