Is Google Making Us Stupid

Birkerts provides three effects that will occur as a result of moving away from the printed word to the electronic media. The first effect is the language erosion. He explains the reader that transition from books will lead to the “complexity and distinctiveness of verbal and written communication, which are deeply bound to transaction of print literacy, will gradually be replaced by a more telegraphic sort of plainspeak” (9). In the future our language will start to become more simple and dumb. Whereas, by reading books and printed materials people are able to dig more depth and understand and imagine the contents. But, soon this will start to disappear as people will no longer be able to understand the complex language of the literature and intelligence level of people will start to decrease. The second effect of electronic media is the flattening of historical perspectives. This means that due to the electronic media the history will start to recede because the “printed page itself is a link” and when this link is broken the past will gradually diminish (10). Birkerts explains the audience that the past is best represented in the books and libraries. Therefore, moving away from the printed word means moving away from the past and its history. The last effect is the waning of the private self. Birkerts worries that in the future people will forget how to live because of the electronic

With the rise of technology and the staggering availability of information, the digital age has come about in full force, and will only grow from here. Any individual with an internet connection has a vast amount of knowledge at his fingertips. As long as one is online, he is mere clicks away from Wikipedia or Google, which allows him to find what he needs to know. Despite this, Nicholas Carr questions whether Google has a positive impact on the way people take in information. In his article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Carr explores the internet’s impact on the way people read. He argues that the availability of so much information has diminished the ability to concentrate on reading, referencing stories of literary types who no longer

Carr mentions his personal experience with technology and how it has affected him. He points out his “concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages” (961). Carr isn’t the only one who has been affected by technology; he tells us that even his “acquaintances” have had similar experiences. His acquaintances say, “The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing” (962). What once used to come natural to us has become difficult. People used to rely on books for multiple reasons when it came to research but now that technology has been used more frequently books are not that common. Carr says “Research that once required days . . . can be done in minutes” (962). Carr is mentioning the benefits of the Internet, for his argument he is using both sides so that the reader can relate to his article and understand where he is coming from. Carr quotes Marshall McLuhan when he points out that “the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation” (962). Although fast research is great and easy to access it has its flaws. Carr mentions that

In “Is Google Making us stupid”, Carr explains how the brain is malleable and how the internet might be shaping it by literally rewiring the brains network. Carr gives a brief example of how neurons can be made and broke depending on what things shape the way things are done. By being used to instant searching and internet preferences, the brain reprograms itself in being used that certain way. He thinks by using the internet so much, we will become more and more objective and quick thinkers, and ultimately emotionless computers. He also gives examples of how the clock and typewriter changed our way of thinking in the past. Adapting this way will rewire thought processes and continue to dictate how we act. Carr’s theory may be more obvious as we continue to be reliant on technology. (Carr)

Although its intention was to nourish our minds with an instant unlimited source of valuable information, the internet has caused some people to lose their appreciation for long texts and their ability to concentrate. Within the essay, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, the author feels that someone has been tinkering with his brain and that he can no longer enjoy reading a book of any length because he cannot sustain concentration on the book (Carr 1). This is a result of the fact that when people use the internet to find information, they habituate themselves to skim along the lines to quickly allocate their answers and once they have gotten what they needed, they close the browser without any further analysis of the information.

The author 's tone changes in paragraph 4 when Carr talks about how the Internet has altered his mind by crumbling away at how much he can concrete. When Carr states “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium” in paragraph four the author provides his counter argument which is to warn the incoming generations the dangers of the Internet before his main argument. Which is that the Internet is making us stupid and is altering how we think, by doing this it allows Carr to spend the rest of the article refuting his main argument.

The internet, in short, is our everyday savior when in distress. Technology is our main source of communication in the 21st century. However, according to Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, published in the July/August 2008 issue of the Atlantic, the internet is reprogramming his memory, and remapping his neural circuitry. Carr accuses the internet of taking away his focus and concentration.Even though Carr uses logos intensely and multiple rhetorical approaches in convincing the reader of his point of view, he fails to make a logical, persuading argument for multiple reasons.

He mentions that others he has talked to that are the literary type, have noticed some of the same situations going on (5). He also makes mention of a pathologist who blogs about computer use and medicine, who states, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print... Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it” (6). What this tells us is that we use the internet too much and that we no longer retain knowledge because it is readily available at our fingertips. This has not been proven to be the

Bruce Friedman, a blogger, has mentioned how the Net had changed his mental habits. Friedman has lost the ability to read and absorb long articles, now he just quickly scans short passages. Anything, even blog posts longer than three paragraphs are too much for him he just skims the articles. A study conducted by University College London suggests that we could be in the middle of a change, the way we are now thinking and reading. This study consisted of two popular research websites, one operated by the British Library and the other by a UK Educational Consortium. The individuals using this website only skimmed, hopping from one source to another, rarely returning to a previous source or reading more than two

From his own experience, Carr said “My mind isn’t going - so far I can tell”, “I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle”. As a writer but it feels like he cannot read thoroughly a whole piece of paper, keep “skimming” and “bounce” from pages to pages, from this site to another. “I can’t read War and Peace anymore”, said Bruce Friedman “I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four pages is too much to absorb. I skim it.”. Another example from Friedrich Nietzsche while his friend noticed that his writing style has changed since he bought a typewriter, Nietzsche give an idea that the writing tools we use can effect our thoughts. I think it does, I like the scent and the feeling of touching pages, flipping over to read carefully, but now I just rolling the mouse on and on.as a result, traditional media have to changed to catching up with the new trend “Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, magazines and newspaper shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse

In Carr’s description of the Internet, he explains why it is affecting humans. He leaves the technology as a virus that absorbs our commands, injects information into us, and then scatters and spreads our concentration. However, before labeling the Internet as a human made pest that has gone wild, Carr makes one last appeal to ethos by stating possible benefits of this rapidly capable means of statement as well as his own faults of being a worrywart.

Carr’s premise is that the Web is interfering with our ability to focus on lengthy material. On the contrary, the internet is actually aiding our ability to focus on reading. This holds true for younger children, who are known as the digital natives in our generation. In a research conducted by The National Center for Education shows that “by altering the mode of reading material from traditional paper-based reading to online reading,” the interest of elementary school children increased (Wright 367). Because children of the 21st century are surrounded by technology, they are more likely to gear towards digital media for their mode of learning. Contrary to Carr’s view that the internet “is chipping away [the] capacity for concentration and contemplation,” these children are more likely to read and focus as a result of

Carr discusses the effects that the Internet has on our minds and the way we think, as well as the way media has changed. Our minds no longer focus. When in conversation with people we are constantly distracted by the technological advances our era has brought. Text messages, emails, pop culture drama has all taken

Online reading has given rise to a new style of perusing, called “F-shaped pattern”, wherein the eye scans an F-shape on a page to absorb the few main ideas of the article without fully engaging with any of them. Sven Birkerts, in his essay, “The Owl Has Flown”, echoes Nicholas Carr’s sentiments in Is Google Making Us Stupid? that internet browsing leads not only to a lack of depth in what is read, but a lack of depth of thinking as well. The parody on the Onion, may not be a parody after

Although the characteristics listed above may not represent how reading has been conventionally defined by our society, Sosnoski believes that our transition to "hyper-readers" make them necessary. "I subscribe to the notion that we live in a postmodern era and that we cannot operate on the conventions that governed the reading practices of previous generations," (403).