Lawrence Besong
Professor Christopher Werry
RWS 100
11 November 2014
Examining the Tactics
of Nicholas Carr's Google Argument
Nicholas
Carr's assertion that Google ( and actually the Internet as a whole) is making
us stupid could be accurate for some people. The point of quick, complete
access to a wide variety of information without having to 'dig' is a valid
point, because everything from restaurants, to books, to movies, and beyond are
all being found through the Internet now. Even our personal lives can be
participated in (to a great degree) through the Internet, and Carr believes
that this new mode of behavior is impacting the way people process information.
One of the first direct examples pointed to by Carr is an inability for many to
concentrate on reading books, and losing patience after reading only a few
pages.
Carr's argument appears to have merit, because there is quite a bit of data available with regard to attention spans growing shorter and shorter. It would appear as if many people are no longer concerned with 'enjoying the moment', but instead are looking for ways to make every moment count as much as possible. The incredible popularity of Twitter and the subsequent introduction of ever shorter 'short speak' created on there is growing in popularity. Efficiency and 'compact meaning' are being compressed to ever smaller sizes in order to 'get the gist' of a given event, idea, or other piece of information to readers.
One of the major problems with this is that the details attached to many of these instances can be 'lost in translation', since they are altogether omitted much of the time. Evaluating the potential for the negative impacts of the Internet on people's minds, and them balancing against the negative impacts presented by Carr will be the goal of this paper. To assume that the incredible bounties of information and growth presented by the Internet would not have some draw backs or 'growing pains' would be foolhardy. Exploring both sides of this issue is vital in understanding what humanity stands to gain by continuing to jump into the Internet 'head first', and what might be revealed through patience and further research.
When examining the pathos of Carr's rhetorical argument, it becomes clear that he wishes to convey the potential for loss on the part of those who might not heed his warnings. One of the ways in which he does this comes by way of giving his mind and those of his friends up as an example of the potential pitfalls of the Internet. By volunteering his own experience with memory, patience, and the Internet, Carr has attempted to elicit sympathy from his readership. He is attempting to convey his argument as one that is being presented for the 'public good', and hoping that this will lend it more credence as a result. The argument goes a long way in furthering his argument against using the Internet, because it suggests that the problem in question is global in nature.
Carr's use of metaphor (a scuba diver vs. a jet ski) makes for a very clear picture insofar as people having a much more 'shallow' perception of the information they are consuming. This example is an appeal to pathos based on their fear of becoming less intelligent, being unable to see as much as they once did, and this could be an inference to no longer having as rich of a life after using the Internet for a long period of time. This argument furthers the author's overall claim of the Internet causing problems the memory of Internet users by way of creating urgent concern with regard to people being able to understand as much as they used to. One of the greatest fears of many people is losing their mental prowess or memory as they grow older, and presenting the argument that much of the world is expediting this process is an alarming concept for many people.
Another assertion made by Carr is that the outside world is beginning to change in order to provide supposed advantages seen on the Internet in more traditional media. Newspapers, television shows, and other sources of entertainment and information have begun to offer shortened snippets of information. Packing as much content as possible into as small of a space as possible goes back to the idea that people who use the Internet are more prone to attempt to 'maximize' their time. Being thorough is still an option for many people who choose to read beyond a headline, but this behavior is becoming less and less common according to Carr. The effect on the Audience with regard to Carr's assertion in this case is a change in the way that readers view the outside world.
Details becoming extinct could lead to apathy with regard to what is occurring in the world around us, and this could eventually lead to apathy being directed at what a given reader might find to be important. The central point of Carr is furthered greatly by this idea, because it creates a sense of fear with regard to how the world will treat upcoming crises and other news. Sensationalism in the media is often quite short lived, and most people are no longer shocked, scared, or excited in the slightest when they view what is occurring in the world by way of the news.
The points brought up by Carr are incredibly poignant and applicable to the entire world currently, especially in light of our ever-quickening technological process. The fact that 3D printing especially is now bringing downloaded ideas into the physical world automatically brings up even more questions. A home can be 3D printed with concrete, a kidney can be 3D printed as well, and all the while no one is bothering to contemplate the consequences of these developments. All anyone knows is that they want to read the next snippet, have their life made more convenient, and the hastening degree to which new information is introduced is lessening our patience in the extreme.
Still, there is a degree of hope though, and it lays in the fact that when someone is exceptionally passionate about a given subject or concept, they will still consume an entire article, book, or film therein. Human beings are certainly expediting the rate at which new information is being introduced into their lives, but at the same time they are also able to avoid useless information or 'chatter.' Discovering this fact could simply be driving many people to over-specialize, and to only seek out (passionately, at least) information which is applicable towards their own goals. Bearing in mind that many people are unable to determine what their own wants, desires, and/or goals are, it stands to reason that the Internet is not going to do their work for them in this context; but, the Internet can make it easier for people to expose themselves to as much information as possible, and hope that something appeals to them.
Carr's argument with regard to creating a world in which attention spans are shorter, and information is presented only in a way that is ever more succinct does bring into question whether or not what humanity is currently undergoing is progress. It is possible to have 'too much of a good thing', and currently there are no guidelines with regard to 'over consumption' of the Internet, and in fact many are calling for Internet access to become a basic human right. With smart phones becoming more affordable every day, and many businesses abandoning their physical offices for digital alternatives, one has to wonder what can be done to combat the problems Carr has observed.
It seems like the only way to avoid the perils of Internet usage is to 'buck the trend', and possibly appear to be abnormal. Humanity is not a species that makes it easy for an individual to 'go against the grain', and since everyone has to make their way with regard to other people in one way or another, one is left to wonder what solution might exist.
Carr's argument appears to have merit, because there is quite a bit of data available with regard to attention spans growing shorter and shorter. It would appear as if many people are no longer concerned with 'enjoying the moment', but instead are looking for ways to make every moment count as much as possible. The incredible popularity of Twitter and the subsequent introduction of ever shorter 'short speak' created on there is growing in popularity. Efficiency and 'compact meaning' are being compressed to ever smaller sizes in order to 'get the gist' of a given event, idea, or other piece of information to readers.
One of the major problems with this is that the details attached to many of these instances can be 'lost in translation', since they are altogether omitted much of the time. Evaluating the potential for the negative impacts of the Internet on people's minds, and them balancing against the negative impacts presented by Carr will be the goal of this paper. To assume that the incredible bounties of information and growth presented by the Internet would not have some draw backs or 'growing pains' would be foolhardy. Exploring both sides of this issue is vital in understanding what humanity stands to gain by continuing to jump into the Internet 'head first', and what might be revealed through patience and further research.
When examining the pathos of Carr's rhetorical argument, it becomes clear that he wishes to convey the potential for loss on the part of those who might not heed his warnings. One of the ways in which he does this comes by way of giving his mind and those of his friends up as an example of the potential pitfalls of the Internet. By volunteering his own experience with memory, patience, and the Internet, Carr has attempted to elicit sympathy from his readership. He is attempting to convey his argument as one that is being presented for the 'public good', and hoping that this will lend it more credence as a result. The argument goes a long way in furthering his argument against using the Internet, because it suggests that the problem in question is global in nature.
Carr's use of metaphor (a scuba diver vs. a jet ski) makes for a very clear picture insofar as people having a much more 'shallow' perception of the information they are consuming. This example is an appeal to pathos based on their fear of becoming less intelligent, being unable to see as much as they once did, and this could be an inference to no longer having as rich of a life after using the Internet for a long period of time. This argument furthers the author's overall claim of the Internet causing problems the memory of Internet users by way of creating urgent concern with regard to people being able to understand as much as they used to. One of the greatest fears of many people is losing their mental prowess or memory as they grow older, and presenting the argument that much of the world is expediting this process is an alarming concept for many people.
Another assertion made by Carr is that the outside world is beginning to change in order to provide supposed advantages seen on the Internet in more traditional media. Newspapers, television shows, and other sources of entertainment and information have begun to offer shortened snippets of information. Packing as much content as possible into as small of a space as possible goes back to the idea that people who use the Internet are more prone to attempt to 'maximize' their time. Being thorough is still an option for many people who choose to read beyond a headline, but this behavior is becoming less and less common according to Carr. The effect on the Audience with regard to Carr's assertion in this case is a change in the way that readers view the outside world.
Details becoming extinct could lead to apathy with regard to what is occurring in the world around us, and this could eventually lead to apathy being directed at what a given reader might find to be important. The central point of Carr is furthered greatly by this idea, because it creates a sense of fear with regard to how the world will treat upcoming crises and other news. Sensationalism in the media is often quite short lived, and most people are no longer shocked, scared, or excited in the slightest when they view what is occurring in the world by way of the news.
The points brought up by Carr are incredibly poignant and applicable to the entire world currently, especially in light of our ever-quickening technological process. The fact that 3D printing especially is now bringing downloaded ideas into the physical world automatically brings up even more questions. A home can be 3D printed with concrete, a kidney can be 3D printed as well, and all the while no one is bothering to contemplate the consequences of these developments. All anyone knows is that they want to read the next snippet, have their life made more convenient, and the hastening degree to which new information is introduced is lessening our patience in the extreme.
Still, there is a degree of hope though, and it lays in the fact that when someone is exceptionally passionate about a given subject or concept, they will still consume an entire article, book, or film therein. Human beings are certainly expediting the rate at which new information is being introduced into their lives, but at the same time they are also able to avoid useless information or 'chatter.' Discovering this fact could simply be driving many people to over-specialize, and to only seek out (passionately, at least) information which is applicable towards their own goals. Bearing in mind that many people are unable to determine what their own wants, desires, and/or goals are, it stands to reason that the Internet is not going to do their work for them in this context; but, the Internet can make it easier for people to expose themselves to as much information as possible, and hope that something appeals to them.
Carr's argument with regard to creating a world in which attention spans are shorter, and information is presented only in a way that is ever more succinct does bring into question whether or not what humanity is currently undergoing is progress. It is possible to have 'too much of a good thing', and currently there are no guidelines with regard to 'over consumption' of the Internet, and in fact many are calling for Internet access to become a basic human right. With smart phones becoming more affordable every day, and many businesses abandoning their physical offices for digital alternatives, one has to wonder what can be done to combat the problems Carr has observed.
It seems like the only way to avoid the perils of Internet usage is to 'buck the trend', and possibly appear to be abnormal. Humanity is not a species that makes it easy for an individual to 'go against the grain', and since everyone has to make their way with regard to other people in one way or another, one is left to wonder what solution might exist.
Works Cited
Carr, N. "Is Google making us stupid?." The
Atlantic. N.p., 1 July 2008. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us- stupid/306868/3/.
No comments:
Post a Comment