Summary Of Digital Humanism By Dave Parry

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

Wolf states that, reading on the internet promotes a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.

If a person wishes to be up to date on what is going on the world around them, in all facets and walks of life, then they must spend a considerable portion of time merely skimming the water of each pool of knowledge, never having the time to truly sink their feet in. This correlates directly back to the massively increased availability of information and writings, whose shoulders Birkerts puts the blame of our loss upon. Nicholas Carr cites a study done on the “behavior of visitors to two popular research sites” which gives its users an even larger degree of online texts.

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

The mishandling and contamination of evidence poses serious threats to the achievement of justice within the court. In October of 2009, Wyong Local Court was forced to overturn a burgular’s conviction after samples were mishandled in the laboratory, leading to a false match. Victoria has also experienced problems with DNA contamination, leading to a

Compare the views of these two scholars by answering the following questions. Be sure to find specific examples in the selections to support your answers.

Summarize both thinkers view and how they are similar and different. Three quotes from each.

To begin the comparison between these two authors, I will first examine Moore’s ideology. As it is obviously stated in the title of his book, Moore is not exactly subtle person.

Carr said “What if I do all my readings on the web not so much because the way I read has changed. i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?” (Carr, pg 7). Since the internet has come into play people have stooped reading books because is easier to just google what they are wanting to know. The internet can change the way someone can process the information on a screen than in a book and how much is actually being consumed by the person. Not only is it changing the way we understand but every technology is an expression of the human will. This allows us to reshape nature to better serve our needs and desires. The internet has the greatest power over how and what we think

One example that they both agree on is, that they both don’t think that we need to get rid of all types of technology, but they disagree on how much it should be relied on and used. They both used computes to do research and write their own articles for different well known news companies in the technology world. These articles are both new within the last few months and are written when technology is still growing and it will always be growing. They both think that using computers and the internet for good is acceptable, but when people start using it to look at different social network or watch TV; this is when they start to disagree. Greg thinks this is when people start to improve their multitasking ability, but Carr believes that it is now when the face to face conversation is starting to degrade and will soon be forgotten. Disagreement is something that can be view in the title of these articles. Carr’s article title is “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” and Greg is “How Computers Change the Way We Learn.” Greg’s article is about how technology is making us smarter and it changes how easy it is to learn something new. On the other hand, Carr’s article is about how technology is making us stupid by taking away humans ability to commute and stay focused when we are doing something like reading a book. Lastly they both believe that technology is going

When analyzing these articles, one must first consider the dates of publication. In relation to the present, Postman was writing pre-internet and Chaffee and Metzger were worried about what high-speed would do to dial-up. Both articles had keen insight into the future, but failed to anticipate the birth and widespread nature of smartphones and artificial intelligence technologies. Their criticisms might address deindividuation, the digital divide, or tailored information based on Big Data rather than entertainment versus enlightenment. The setting of

The article, “Digital Literacy Is the Key to the Future, But We Still Don’t Know What It Means,” is written by Marcus Wohlsen. He writes his article, to explain to the public what digital literacy is. Wohlsen knows that the increasing there is an increasing usage of technology in the public life, and to adapt to this they are going to need to be literate is using it. In his article, he explains to the public what this literacy is, and how much one needs to be literate in technology. Wohlsen effectively uses multiple viewpoints of experts and relatability to engage the reader and explain to them what digital literacy is all about.

Encarta Dictionary says that Humanism is a system of thought that centers on human beings and their values, capacities and worth. Encarta also goes on the say that, in philosophy, humanism is an attitude that emphasizes the dignity and worth of an individual. A basic premise of humanism is that people are rational beings who possess within themselves the capacity for truth and goodness. I see myself as a being a humanist through everyday life. I always try to see the good in a person when he/she makes me angry or sad, and say I to myself that maybe that person has had a bad day and living life is difficult at the moment. Socrates was even an early humanist of sorts. He can be quoted as saying, "to know the good is to do the

“Societies have always been shaped by media for communication, it is impossible to understand social and cultural change without knowledge of the workings of media even the alphabet is a technology that is absorbed by young children to learn to speak through communication. The digital age is changing the way we use our brains. Rather than store important facts, today we are more likely to store information about how to find those facts where a particular file is located on the computer, how to find an important webpage again.

Where would we be without technology? The number of things that we are now capable of doing is infinite because of the technology we have access to. This technology is also changing the way we think, write and concentrate. Cell/ smart phones along with texting and being able to Google practically everything have all played a role in the way we think and do things in today’s society.