Analysis Of Tristan Harris 's ' How Technology Has People 's Minds- From A Magician And Google 's Design Ethicist

The website my group choose to do our rhetorical analysis on is CNN. CNN stands for Cable News Network. CNN was founded by Ted Turner and 25 other members in 1980. CNN was originally a tv channel. CNN lasted from 1980-2003 on tv. In 9995 CNN was made into a website. The website attracted growing interest and is now one of the most popular news websites in the world. The widespread growth of blogs, social media and user-generated content have influenced the site.The website CNN helped us find the observations “(what)”, examples “(how)”, analysis “(why)” to rhetorical concepts. We figured out how to use the concepts and how not to use the concepts. The rhetorical concepts are audience, purpose, Ethos, Logos, and Pathos.

For instance, Gladstone mentions how facial recognition features in our phones are actually helpful because it recognizes anyone and “no one ever has to be a stranger”. She also says how there is contact lenses that can block out anything you do not want to see. With this being said she convinces the reader that not only should we not be scared of technology but also inform us on how it can be helpful. This was a good decision to provide examples because it gives the reader knowledge on how technology is not supposed to be scary but actually helpful. This is one of the best choices she made to convey her argument because it makes her article be more focused on why she believes modern technology is not something we should fear to the

Technology nowadays always use to have so much information at our fingertips, but is this a good thing? That is what Jamais Cascio’s “Get Smarter” and Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stoopid?” both discuss; they specifically address the effects that new technology, such as the internet, has on the way humans think. The difference is that Carr argues that this new technology is making us stupid while Cascio argues that it is making us smarter. Nicholas Carr’s article discusses the negative effects of the internet and technology like it. It specifically mentions slight changes in the way people do things because of the influence of technology and gives many historical and anecdotal examples. Jamais Cascio’s article is about the advancements of technology and how it is makes people smarter. Cascio talks about Twitter, mental enhancement drugs and AIs, focusing a lot on the benefits of the advancements.

Anything but non-existent, the parallel suggests that technology is having a definite change on our “plastic” brains. New technologies mold us to their likings whether we adhere to them or not. And as “mechanical clocks were not manufactured to spur the adoption of a more scientific mode of thinking”, the internet is not intended to create more adverted, shallow thinking humans. But all behaviors prevailing show that it is. Acknowledging this fact, readers can either begin to challenge that their life is being changed or affirm the conclusion. This parallel is exactly the strategy needed to convince readers that it’s an “invention’s intellectual ethic that has the most profound effect on us.”

The first chapter introduced the reader to the art of rhetoric. He describes how rhetoric works through real life examples. He demonstrates ways that rhetoric persuades us like, argument from strength, and seduction. He tells the reader that the sole purpose of arguing is to persuade the audience. He showed that the chief purpose of arguing is to also achieve consensus, a shared faith in a choice.

Persuasion is a key focus in many essays, stories, commercials, and other forms of media. There are many methods to this, one of which is rhetorical devices. Bell hooks, the author of Feminism is for Everybody, writes to persuade the reader to her own cause: feminism. She uses rhetorical devices, which can be used to persuade—or dissuade—readers in comparison to the writer’s own point of view.

Nicholas Carr is an American author who writes the majority of books and articles about the continuously evolving world of technology and how it is effecting our society. Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains, was a 2011 Pulitzer Prize finalist and a New York Times bestseller. In this essay I will be rhetorically analyzing Carr’s essay “Is Google Making Us Stupid” published in 2008. The purpose of Carr’s essay was to bring light to an issue that many of us face but only a meniscal few have come to terms with; and that is that technology is mentally incapacitating our society and simultaneously making us lazy. This essay was intended for anyone was has been consumed in today’s culture by new technological advances to the extent of not being able to function without some sort of device, IE cellphone, laptop or tablet on a daily basis.

In addition from the two previews rhetorical strategies, the article “How Social Media Is Having a Positive Impact on Our Culture” have a good example of rhetorical strategy when it comes to ethos. One example is when “he elaborates how the internet and social media makes society to act upon actions that are never seen before. Also, that the internet is very difficult yet entertaining and we often do not appreciate it as much as we should” (613). By this time, the author is preparing himself to establish his trustworthiness by adding, “consider peer-to-peer networking as just one example, where the tasks are distributed among the group to form a whole” (613). The audience can conclude that he has the knowledge necessary in order to build his

The internet has made an immense impact on every generation since its existence as it continues to grow throughout time. Its effectiveness is prodigious; the internet allows people to gain information that once took days to retrieve it in a few minutes (Carr 1). Writer Nicholas Carr, in his article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, explains that the use of internet and technology causes harm to people and their brains. Carr’s purpose is to address to internet users that Google (or any electronic helpers) is making them “stupid” and lazy because it minimizes their concentration and willingness to think. He attempts to adapt to his audience, dedicated internet users, as he uses the rhetorical appeals to try to convince them of his purpose. However, this was not enough. Nicholas Carr’s article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” is ineffective because of his poor use of ethos and logos despite his good use of pathos.

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the rhetorical appeals(ethos, etc.) of an argument presented by two different authors who have written about the subject of how technology is affecting our lives. In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, he describes how over the years, using technology has evolved his way of thinking in a negative way. On the other hand, in the article “How technology has changed our parenting lives” by Christine Organ, she promotes the use of technology, for it has improved her as a parent. This paper is to examine the rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos, and logos found within each of the two articles. While each author had a different viewpoint, their rhetorical appeals show both similarities and differences.

istraction. Did that get your attention? While technology is the very thing that provides us with answers, it is also the cause of our distractions. Alina Tugend essay “Multitasking Can Make You Lose… Um… Focus” and Nicholas Carr’s essay “Is Google Making Us Stupid” reflects on the purpose of how technology can cause delusional reactions upon our brain. Tugend is a columnist for the New York Times and also an author who appeared in the Los Angeles Times on many occasions. As for Carr, he has written widely on technology, business, and culture while observing the latest technologies and related issue. Together they seem like vastly different individuals, but Tugend and Carr’s essay essentially serve the same purpose to their audience. Authors Carr and Tugend reveal the purpose of harmful technology and the limitations cast upon the human brain through individual implementations of pathos, examples, and the voice of their tone.

In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid”, the main argument the author, Nicholas Carr is trying to make is to explain how the Internet becomes our only source of information. Carr is also trying to warn oncoming generations in how the Internet has affected our ability to read long pieces or to be able to retain information for a long period of time. Carr provides personal experience, imagery, and a professional analysis that is backed by research to hook the audience in and persuade them that in today’s society, the Internet is only causing problems rather than any solutions.Throughout the article Carr provides an abundant amount of rhetorical modes by giving examples and studies from different organizations . Carr gives an insight on the positive ways the Internet had influenced his life.

Journalist, Clive Thompson in his book, “Smarter Than You Think”, specifically in the chapter titled, “Public Thinking”, published on September 12, 2013, addresses the topic of technology and argues that because of the internet, we are doing more writing now than ever. Therefore technology is helping us think publicly in new and improved ways. He supports this claim by asserting that there is an improvement in our writing, which is happening because of the “audience effect”, he then goes on to say that anything we write changes the way we think, and finally he talks about how the internet builds connections, which is essential to the spread of new ideas. Thompson’s purpose is to inform readers about how the internet is a tool being used to advance our society in order to encourage more people to partake in online, public thinking. He adopts a contemplative tone for his audience, the readers of The New York Times, and others interested in the topic of technology. It is my intention in this paper to analyze the author’s subclaims and use of rhetorical strategies.

In the articles “Alone in the Crowd” and “As technology Gets Better, Will Society Get Worse?,” Michael Price and Tim Wu, respectively acknowledge the effects of technological advances. While both Price and Wu use effective rhetorical strategies in their articles, one presents their argument in a more persuasive manner. Wu effectively convinces his audience that as a society we continue to advance technologically, but for the wrong reasons. Price references an interview with Sherry Turkle, to convey his opinion that the social media frenzy consumes our society. Price and Wu both present their point of view, but Wu has more factual information to justify his argument. The appeal to emotion is stronger in Price’s article; however, in this situation Wu’s logos appeal is more rhetorically effective. Beyond Ethos, Pathos, and

Rhetoric is a course in which students are taught the values of persuasion. And yet, behind this course is the utmost power to corrupt the world, changing it into a world of our own policies. This power, even though seldom discussed, has lead to many intriguing discoveries. One such discovery is how people are able to shape the world they live in simply by choosing the right words. Therefore those who would want the world to be a better place must protect this power. If in the wrong hands this power could cause serious damage. Several authors have striven to protect rhetoric and its power. Few agree on the matter of defining rhetoric, but they know that they must protect rhetoric from dark souls. A single definition of rhetoric must maintain a simplistic nature while incorporating every aspect of rhetoric. However, I argue that rhetoric is a means of persuading audiences of a situation and a particular reality through language and personal appeal. In order to prove this definition I will discuss how rhetoric creates a situation, the shaping of a different reality, the audience, the use of language, and the personal appeal. Finally, I will demonstrate the absolute need for rhetoric.