In this article Nicholas Carr brings up some very valid points and stories. Using the internet for gathering information, reading, and communicating has changed how we think about and process information. The internet has become so fast, efficient, and accessible that people prefer it to traditional means of obtaining information. Carr states that he used to find reading a lengthy book or article easy, but since immersing himself into internet his mind wanders and he cannot seem to concentrate on the text before him. This does seem like a problem, especially if one still values a traditional printed work. Someone who grew up in the age before the internet or at least more recent internet applications, and are sentimental about what they grew up with and how they used to think would find some issue with the world’s current dependency on the internet.
Certainly there are people who see the value of having such an effective and speedy tool more than the lost past time of reading printing books at a slower, methodical pace. These points are to two sides of this topic. While inte...
Books today are everywhere. We find them in many households, libraries and schools all around the globe. We find many different types of books; from stories to educational textbooks, we regard them today as sources of knowledge and amusement. But it wasn’t the case before 1455. That year, one of the greatest inventions in human history was revealed to the world; Gutenberg’s printing press. This press allowed printing in massive quantity, spreading books all around Europe and the rest of the world at a fast rate. The printing press had many positive consequences on society. At first, it standardized grammar and spelling, and then introduced the mass production of books. It finally inspired future printing technologies around the world.
In the New York Times article “Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading?”, the author, Motoko Rich, brings up a series of points, many of which seem to be making the argument that reading online is not as good as reading from a physical book. I disagree with Rich. I believe that the article, written in 2008, is now somewhat outdated. The internet has developed to be one of the best resources for information. Whether you want to read about the characters in a novel, study scholarly articles for your upcoming midterms, or read about what’s happening in your favorite celebrity’s life, the internet will have it. In high school, I was given an assignment in which we were to write a 5 page research paper on a topic we felt strongly about, and
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.
The internet is our conduit for accessing a wide variety of information. In his article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid,” Nicholas Carr discusses how the use of the internet affects our thought process in being unable to focus on books or longer pieces of writing. The author feels that “someone, or something, has been tinkering with [his] brain” over the past few years (Carr 731). While he was easily able to delve into books and longer articles, Carr noticed a change in his research techniques after starting to use the internet. He found that his “concentration often [started] to drift after two or three pages” and it was a struggle to go back to the text (Carr 732). His assertion is that the neural circuits in his brain have changed as a result of surfing endlessly on the internet doing research. He supports this statement by explaining how his fellow writers have had similar experiences in being unable to maintain their concentrations. In analyzing Carr’s argument, I disagree that the internet is slowly degrading our capacity for deep reading and thinking, thereby making us dumber. The Web and Google, indeed, are making us smarter by allowing us access to information through a rapid exchange of ideas and promoting the creativity and individualization of learning.
Moreover, Carr’s article mentions that by using technology of any kind, users tend to embody the characteristics stimulated by that technology. He says that given that the Internet processes information almost immediately, users will tend to value immediacy. To explain, Carr gives the example of a friend of his named Scott Karp who was a literary major on college and who used to be an avid book reader. However, since the arrival of the Internet, Karp skim articles online because he could no longer read as much as he used too. He cannot pay attention and absorb long texts ever since he read online articles. Internet...
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 have the capacity to sit down and read a book, as well as his own personal experiences with this issue. The internet presents tons of data at once, and it is Carr’s assumption that our brains will slowly become wired to better receive this information.
In Is Google Making Us Stupid, Nicholas Carr disputes that due to new digital tools, peoples’ ability to retain and acquire information has been negatively altered. Even though, we have information at our fingertips, we often don’t take the time to soak in all the information. Carr mentions Bruce Friedman, a blogger, who finds it extremely difficult to read a “longish article on the web” and to try to focus on the importance of the text holistically (Carr 316). This is an issue that many can relate even Carr knows that, “ the deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle (Carr 314). Additionally, media theorist Mcluhan describes the net as “chipping away [mental] capacity for concentration and contemplation” (Carr 315). In essences, Carr states that we are having less of an attention span and consequently, less patience for longer articles (Carr 314). Therefore, this affects media outlets such as magazines, newspapers, and other articles, because they must conform and shorten their texts to fit the status quo that people safely enjoy (Carr 321). In addition, the net forces people to be efficient, and so, causes people to “weaken [their] capacity for deep reading” (Carr 317). People are becoming more driven on how quick he or she has to do something rather than think why this text is important. As a consequence, Carr believes that we are starting to lose our ability to be critical readers and
Carr explains how the internet can distract us making it harder to focus on tasks. He explains how processing information has become harder. Notifications, ads, popups can make it difficult if you are trying to read an article or book (Carr 57). The internet has become the center of our attention (Carr 57). Carr is explaining how this is the reason why we are struggling to comprehend a certain piece of information. He adds in his article that scientists, researchers and educators have also noticed the difference in concentration. And in further detail, he explains that we fail to see the important information, thus affecting cognition. He says that the information we gather is not valuable unless we know the meaning behind it. Carr concludes with explaining that the more the internet evolves the less valuable information is to
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;
Andrea Schlesinger’s, “In Google We Trust” a chapter in her book The Death of Why? The issue is that the internet has changed people and that it may not be a good thing. Google has changed the way that people think greatly, especially in our ability to analyze, understand and know the source of the information we receive from google.
He claimed that before internet journals were so widespread that he immerse himself lengthy articles and book with no issues of his attention span shortening and drifting away. “My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and i’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose.” It is a little daring to say that the internet is essentially rewiring the human brain cognitive function. It’s fair to say that it is prohibiting the mind to think as complexly as it needs to because the information is so readily available now, but attaining information is not as lengthy as it used to be like having to go to the library for
Millions out of the population world wide, has let the internet dominate over them in abrogating forms. The internet can be useful in several ways, such as academic, researching, gaining more knowledge out of a topic, a person has found interesting. On the other hand, it can also be used in negative ways, by drowning the person to surf the web more than 3 hours. Not acknowledging the situation that can lead them too. Such as excluding them, from the outside world. Several may discover the beauty of the internet, as others are pulled aside into the dark route, by themselves. William Gibson, author of the article, “The Net Is a Waste of Time” demonstrates the differences on how technology has involved more than a decade, and the influences being
In Nicholas Carr’s novel The Shallows, Carr believes that technology is taking over the way we should think. Anytime a person researches and reads online there is potentially significant damage to the way the human brain processes and retains information. When a person think about looking up information or just looking for something to do, they make a beeline for the Internet. Very few people are willing to pick up a book and start reading it these days, they would rather use digital media or other Network. The Network is very powerful and is getting more powerful each day. Andrew Brown once said “The internet is so big, so powerful, and pointless that for some people it is a complete substitute for life.” (Brown Brainyquotes). Although the Internet easily catches the reader’s eye and has become more common in schools in recent years, the Internet is responsible for decrease of social skills.
Book-In-Time solution provided by Xerox is one of the most efficient solutions for publishing companies running on demand for short-run books. The advantage gained by larger publishing and printing companies that may have achieved economies of scale with large print runs would be evenly compensated with the significant cost saving short run Book-In-Time technology.
Now it seems like as if people do not even know how many or how far a library is. “We used to go the library whenever we were curious about something”, he says, “but now, you can just computer things.” He also emphasizes that it’s good to have resources nearby you, and learn from them, but he also feels like people are getting dumber because of the computer. The Internet really surprises him the most. Along with that, sometimes he wonders why people are accepting the computer as