In recent discussions of the benefits and disadvantages of the Internet and its search engines, a controversial issue has been whether search engines such as Google are of any good to our society. On one hand some argue that Google is a great addition to have because it allows for anyone to find large amounts of information on a certain topic within seconds. From this perspective, the Internet’s existence is valued. On the other hand, however, others argue that the constant use of search engines is making us less intelligent. Nicholas Carr is an American writer and author of “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” which goes into detail about how the Internet might be affecting us as humans. Carr is one of this views main proponents, he believes that because the Internet is so accessible the human race is being affected in ways such as our way of thinking, reading, and even our concentration. My own view is that, although the Internet might be making us lazier I do not believe that it is making us “stupid”, my intuitive thought is that the Internet can actually improve the way we think because accessibility to knowledge is just a click away. Therefore, in this paper I will examine Carr’s claims and strategies he uses to support his argument, and determine whether or not his argument as a whole is persuasive.
With all of this debating going on about whether or not the Internet is beneficial to us as humans, the real question is, how exactly is the constant use of the Internet affecting us? Carr answers this question by providing studies to support his claim, establishing logos. In a recent study done by scholars from University College London they tracked the computer logs of two popular research sites, that provide access to things such a journals articles and other types of written information, and documented the activity of its visitors. Carr states, “They found that people using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity”…They typically read no more than one or two pages of an article or book before they “bounce” out to another site” (Carr). In other words the Internet is starting to not only change the way we read but also the way we think. We no longer read in the traditional way, we now look for key words in a title or text until we find what we need and then we stop reading. Not only have they found that it affects other people, but Carr also uses himself as an example. Carr says, “I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading” (Carr). He uses this strategy to advance his claim because it establishes a strong sense of logos. By using the study done by University College London, Carr’s claim suddenly becomes stronger because he is using sources that can be trusted. The reader can then relate to it because he himself has found that he sometimes has trouble concentrating on one topic for long periods of time. With that Carr hopes that the audience will be persuaded easier because he uses an example that is more than just “true”, it is real. Logos in this case does a good job at furthering his central claim because the way that it is used shows a plausible example of his claim in real life.
Continuous use of the Internet, in Carr’s point of view, can be seen as very dangerous because distracts us and affects us in the long run. In “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Carr introduces Scott Karp, an avid blogger. Karp states, “I was a lit major in college, and used to be [a] voracious book reader” (Carr). Due to his constant use of the Internet Karp has had trouble staying focused on long texts, and because of this he has stopped reading books. He believes this happened not because the way he reads has changed but the way he thinks has changed. A story similar to Karp’s is that of Bruce Friedman. Friedman, a faculty member of the University of Michigan Medical School and blogger about the use of computers in medicine, also believes that the Internet has changed his mental habits. Things like reading a blog post longer than three or four paragraphs and reading War and Peace have become a true struggle for him. Friedman has adapted to skimming through large texts and no longer reads the whole thing. Carr uses Karp and Friedman as examples in order to appeal to the readers emotions by the use of pathos. Using pathos in this case works because it shows a true life example of two very intelligent men who now, due to the Internet, can no longer read large texts and have trouble concentrating on one topic. Carr used the strategy of pathos in order to be able to appeal to the reader in a more emotional way in hopes that they will feel some sort of emotional empathy towards these two men. Therefore his audience tends to be persuaded much easier by Carr’s argument since they are emotionally hooked. Including pathos as a strategy in his text does a really good job at extending his central claim because it grabs the readers attention and shows them how the use of the Internet has affected these two scholarly men and in that case can affect anyone.
Along with using pathos and logos to try and persuade his audience Carr also uses exemplification. Exemplification is simply just providing several examples to the reader that have to do with the topic. One of the many examples given is when Carr talks about a man by the name of Friedrich Nietzsche who bought a type writer in 1882 because his vision was weakening. This man learned and memorized which key corresponded to each letter of the alphabet and was able to write once again but his work was never the same. Carr states, “One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a change in his style of writing. His terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic” (Carr). Nietzsche was no longer writing as much because he obtained a type writer which was supposed to help him but instead did the opposite. Another example Carr gives is the mechanical clock. The clock began to be used more in the 14th century and that when this happened “we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies” (Carr). Before the clock ever existed people ate, slept, and worked when they had to but since the invention of the clock it mentally controlled the times when these activities were to be done.The effect that Carr wanted to have on his audience was, I believe, to show how not only the Internet but other inventions have affected certain cognitive areas. By using exemplification this strategy can work to persuade his audience but the fact that he tends to sway away from how the Internet affects our mental abilities, he goes on to talk about type writers and mechanical clocks can be seen as weakness in his text.
Overall, Carr believes that due to the use of the Internet humans are being cognitively affected and therefore the Internet should be seen as a bad addition to our world. What I believe is that having the Internet as a tool can actually help us learn a lot because when I for example need help on a math problem can look it up on Google and millions of links will come up on how to solve similar problems. Carr’s strategies can be seen as effective because he has evidence to support them but overall I think they could have been stronger. His argument from what I have read in his text is very one sided, he does not look at all of the good the invention of the Internet had brought to us he just focuses on the bad. If he would have included views from people who disagree with his argument and showed them how and why they were wrong his paper as a whole could have been much stronger.
Works Cited
Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 July 2008. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/>
No comments:
Post a Comment