The Arguments In Nicholas Carr's How Smartphones Hijack Our Minds

Imagine a world where smartphones took over our lives. A world where we would be unable to think for ourselves or function properly. In Nicholas Carr’s “How Smartphones Hijack Our Minds” article, he argues that smartphones’ “extraordinary usefulness gives them an unprecedented hold on our attention and a vast influence over our thinking and behavior” (Carr 1). Carr cleverly incorporates studies, emotion, and strong word choice in order to support his argument. One way Carr builds an argument that smartphones maintain a hold on our attention and an influence over our thinking and behavior is through his use of studies. According to a 2015 study in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, it “showed that when people hear their phone ring

In the study previously discussed which stated that students’ examination scores went up substantially when smartphones were banned from schools, Carr asserts that “the weakest students” (3) benefited the most from the ban. By stating how the weakest students benefited from smartphones being banned, Carr is able to sway the emotions of the reader in favor of his argument. Through his use of a study that took place in secondary school, Carr is able to take the reader back to a time when they themselves were in secondary school trying to pass their exams. With such an easy and simple solution to getting these students scores up by banning smartphones, it makes the reader side with the author in his belief that smartphones influence our thinking and some distance and separation from our phones is necessary. Carr also incorporates emotion to support his argument by discussing about how the mere presence of smartphones can mess up our social skills and relationships. For readers who struggle with trying to get to know someone, this discussion can trigger a memory of a time when the reader was trying to communicate with someone but the person’s attention was not fully focused on the reader due to their smartphone. The reader most likely wished that the person's smartphone did not exist for the time

“Your new phone, like your old one, will become your constant companion and trusty factotum,” (1) states Carr. By using words such as “constant companion” and “trusty factotum”, Carr is able to show the type of relationship or bond the reader shares with their phone. Normally when you have such a bond with a person, this bond is regarded as wonderful because that means you have someone to trust and rely on but to have such a bond with a device such as a smartphone can come off as obsessive and unhealthy. Using these words empathize how unnatural it is to have such an attachment to our smartphones and alerts the reader that some separation is possibly needed from our smartphones. Another form of strong word choice used in the article is when Carr states “It isn't just our reasoning that takes a hit when phones are around” (3). Using such a simple but blunt word such as “hit” emphasizes to the readers how dangerous smartphones are to their being which sways the reader over the author’s side that smartphones have an influence over thinking and behavior. Lastly another example of strong word choice the author uses is when he discusses about how a smartphone “can hijack attention whenever it is a part of our surroundings” (4). Normally when the word hijack is used it is usually associated with an object being