Introduction
Is the internet changing the way you think? Brockman the editor of edge organization posted this question to 150 different kinds of writers to have a variety of opinions about the subject matter. When I think about the question, I found it very personal, how the internet changes the way YOU think not WE think. I believe that he proposes this question to150 different writers to get very objective and convenient answers. However, it is really hard to summarize all the 150 responses in my book report, but I will write and comment about the most interesting opinions I have noticed in the book. Finally, although not all of the writers technically qualified and some of them (actors, architects, artist, etc. It is still interesting to boost your mind and expose to different perspectives. Starting with the introduction of the book: The dawn of entanglement by Daniel Hillis. He answers the edge question by posting Tom wolf essay title “Hooking up”. He agrees with the wolf’s opinion about the internet when he said the internet is Digi babble. Wolf thinks the internet or the online world is nothing more than a way or tool people use to communicate with each other. Daniel Hillis thinks that the internet or the web not only gives people a new way to talk to each other, he goes beyond the human to human communication. Moreover, he said in
…show more content…
Their answer of the edge question is coming from a social perspective. They start by saying that the social changes of the internet change the way they think about madness. Moreover, they said that the change in the way of thinking appears in the term internet friends. Having hundreds of virtual friends through Facebook or twitter collapse the previous constraints of friendship. Also, they support this point by mentioning their opinions about some patients’ experiences. They emphasize that the internet has a massive impact on human brains and it does change the structure of our
In 1776, David McCullough gives a vivid portrayal of the Continental Army from October 1775 through January 1777, with sharp focus on the leadership of America’s greatest hero, George Washington. McCullough’s thesis is that had not the right man (George Washington) been leading the Continental Army in 1776, the American Revolution would have resulted in a vastly different outcome. He supports his argument with a critical analysis of Washington’s leadership during the period from the Siege of Boston, through the disastrous defense of New York City, the desperate yet, well ordered retreat through New Jersey against overwhelming odds, and concludes with the inspiring victories of Trenton and Princeton. By keeping his army intact and persevering through 1776, Washington demonstrated to the British Army that the Continental Army was not simply a gang of rabble, but a viable fighting force. Additionally, Mr. McCullough supports his premise that the key to the survival of the American Revolution was not in the defense of Boston, New York City, or any other vital terrain, but rather the survival of the Continental Army itself. A masterful piece of history, 1776 is not a dry retelling of the Revolutionary War, but a compelling character study of George Washington, as well as his key lieutenants, and his British adversaries, the most powerful Army in the 18th Century world. When I read this book, I went from a casual understanding of the hero George Washington to a more specific understanding of why Washington was quite literally the exact right man at the exact right place and time to enable the birth of the United States.
She recalls a disagreement that took place on Facebook between her and a close friend over a few comments placed on her timeline. Wortham describes how she felt embarrassed over the pointless argument. She discloses “I’m the first one to confess my undying love of the Web’s rich culture and community, which is deeply embedded in my life. But that feud with a friend forced me to consider that the lens of the Web might be warping my perspective and damaging some important relationships” (171). Introducing her personal feelings and perspective of how she feels Facebook is taking over her own emotional response online weakens her argument. Wortham reasons that others feel the same as she does. She says, “This has alarmed some people, convincing them that it’s time to pull the plug and forgo the service altogether” (171). Wortham does not bring in other testimonies of those who feel the same as she does, therefore the readers are only introduced to her personal
People are uncomfortable with internet technology. In his essay, Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, Malcolm Gladwell states the rise of technology and social media use in our society leads to less effort being expended on important causes. Nicholas Carr continues Gladwell’s opinion of the deterioration that the internet causes. In his essay Is Google Making Us Stupid he quotes Richard Foreman saying “we risk becoming ‘pancake people’ spread wide and thin,” and implies the internet is an unnecessary crutch that weakens us. Though not everyone is under the impression that the internet causes an intellectual deterioration, some are concerned it helps dangerous causes. In the article, “Terror on Twitter,”
Every day there is some new technological advancement making its way into the world in an attempt to make life easier for people. In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, author Nicholas Carr explains his thoughts on how he believes the internet is running the risk of making people full of artificial knowledge. Carr begins by explaining how he feels that the web is causing his focus issues, how he can no longer be completely immersed in a book, and the reason why he gets fidgety while reading. He then goes on to talk about how his life is surrounded by the internet and how that is the blame for the issues he has towards not being able to stay connected to a text; but at the same time says how and why the web has been a ‘godsend’ because he is a writer. In an attempt to draw the reader in, Carr uses a great deal of rhetorical appeals. He compares the differences of the past and the present and how he feels how it has changed not only himself, but others as well and how they are able to comprehend and focus due to the growing nature of the web. While comparing this, he accumulated research from several credited writers who feel the same way he does about the effects of the web.
Knowing that a most of his audience spends a majority of their time on the web; Carr concedes by admitting to his audience that, “ For more than a decade now, [he has] been spending a lot of time online” (Carr 92) and that the internet has been, “ [G]odsend to him as a writer ” (Carr 92) as he can now complete, “ Research that once required day in the stacks of periodicals rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes”(Carr 92). By conceding that the internet is amazing, he is not alienating a large part of his audience who believe the internet is a “Godsend”(Carr 92). Furthermore, Jay Heinrichs ( an author of THANK YOU FOR ARGUING) states, “ In rhetoric, a sterling reputation is more than just good; it’s persuasive (Heinrichs 44). It is important for Carr to come off as a trustworthy individual, and by conceding to the internet being amazing, he has done that. Throughout the article, Carr refers to the research that has found the same finding as Carr’s beliefs; that being the internet is affecting our cognitive ability. He cites, “[L]ong-term neurological and physiological experiments that will provide a definite picture of how the internet use is affecting our cognition”(Carr 93). He goes on to cite international studies from the U.K educational consortium who have observed, “ a form of skimming activity”(Carr 93) and the users are “ [H]opping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited” (Carr 93) and to Carr, this type of activity is changing they way our brains function. Carr’s appeal to ethos is done through him conceding, and the vast research he cites. By him conceding his trustworthiness is established as he shows the reader he shares the same view; forcing the reader to take Carr's argument to heart. By Carr citing ongoing multinational research, his credibility is established as he has done the work necessary to validate his argument;
Carr supports his claims by including personal experiences with the Internet of others. Scott Karp who was literature major in college, admitted to Carr that he has stopped reading books altogether (732). Karp now prefers to read everything online. Karp also questions whether the Internet has changed his course of thinking (Carr, 732). Bruce Friedman explained how he barely has the tolerance for reading long pieces, and skimming is now how he reads (Carr, 732). By Carr discussing changes brought by other technologies, he strengthens the support of his claims. He proves that technology does have a way of affecting us cognitively whether the effect is negative or positive. Carr also proves that as technology advances our mind is modified to according to those advances. “As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies” (Carr, 737).
Both Nicholas Carr and Malcolm Gladwell debated how the Internet has affected humankind in both positive and negative ways. Malcolm Gladwell is a staff writer for the New Yorker and the author of Small Change:Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted. Nicholas Carr is a writer who has formerly written for the New York Times, The Guardian etc, he also wrote Is Google Making Us Stupid? Gladwell’s and Carr’s essays identifies how the internet has a damaging effect on people.
Beato stresses out the idea that “American psychiatric Association (APA) should add internet addiction to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)” by bringing up its consequences, he is extremely right. In its first conception, internet addiction disorder may appear as a negligible issue in our society since some of its effects are the promotion of the stupidity and the increase of the unconsciousness. An example of how ignorant and insensate we have become, Greg writes an anecdote about “the 18-year-old who choose homelessness over gamelessness” (para. 7). However, when in paragraph 8 he presents the tragic brief history of the young man who killed his mother and injured his father because they wanted to take his Xbox one, this leads us to question ourselves on how the internet can seriously affect our behavior like drugs. In addition, internet addiction has a negative impact on our mind. In other words, it may conduct to a depression. In his article Beato backs up this evidence with an example of students who qualify themselves “jittery”, “anxious”, “miserable”, and “crazy” (para.3) when they were deprived of their connections to the Internet. Finally, many young people have prefer their virtual life at the expense of their social life. They do not know what it means to communicate with other methods like a letter or a face to face communication. Greg support this idea by using a statistic graph. According to that graph, “more than 1
In a day and age of a social media dominance, we have never been as densely connected and networked as we ever have. Through studies and researchers, it has been shown that we never have been as lonelier, or even narcissistic. As a result all this loneliness has not only made us mentally ill, but physically ill as well. Published in The Atlantic on April 2, 2012, Stephen Marche addresses this argument in his article entitled “Is Facebook Making Us Lonely”.
Trying to reflect the fears instilled in himself through comparison to an unrealistic movie. I believe that the internet hasn’t changed everyone’s the way the he says its changed his. I think that people who were born into the world of technology have the ability to analyze into a deeper thought what is needed and skim for instant answer when it’s not needed. On the other side those whom have been forced to adapt to it, such as Carr, find themselves losing abilities they once relied on because they were taught growing up to do both things. Now that the internet has forced them to adapt to it, they can’t focus of doing both types of thinking. The complexity of our minds is deep and that can’t be made shallow by the ability to get instant gratification of information. We simply begin to rule out unimportant things, once the important thing is found then it can be analyzed. Although Carr says his mind isn’t going as far as it used to, clearly that’s exactly what he did in this essay. He used the older “traditional way” of over-analyzing unnecessary things to reach a point that ends up being moot. Clearly, his use of logos, ethos and pathos, although present were not enough to prove his opinion to be
The internet is ever changing, and so our minds, but can the internet mold our minds? Nicholas Carr and Michael Rosenwald support the idea that the reading we do online is making it harder to be able to sit down with a good book. In their papers they discuss the downfalls of using the web. While on the other hand author Clay Shirky challenges that thought in his piece. Shirky directly battles the idea that the internet is damaging our brains by suggesting that internet use can be insightful. In this essay I will evaluate all three articles and expose their strengths and weaknesses then add my own take on the situation.
Tyler, Tom R. “Is the Internet Changing Social Life? It Seems the More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same.” Journal of Social Issues 58.1 (2002): 200-201. Web. 29 Nov. 2013.
Technology nowadays has an influence on our lives, it has affected everything in it. When this technological revolution started, we didn't expect that it would affect our emotions, and our feelings. All we expected is that technology would develop our ability to have easier life and control nature. But what really happened is that the technology started to be part of us that we can't live without. The Internet is one of the technologies that appeared in our lives, and now it is dominating our lives.
Johnson, William D. "Internet and Modern Society." Dept. of Medicine. 24 Jan. 2006. University of Wyoming. 2 June 2008 .
Ford, Matt. Is the Internet changing How We Think? Cnn. 17 Sept. 2010. Web. 9 Jan. 2014.