Analytical Paper

ANALYTICAL PAPER 5

AnalyticalPaper

NicholasCarr- Is Google Making Us Stupid’s

StevenPinkerin his article argues about the impacts of technology on the lives ofpeople living in this era. Notably, he makes a claim that generalizesthe effects of technology on the human intellectual processpurporting that new skills contemporarily act as the tool for logicalsustenance in humans. Various articles, as well as books with almostsimilar contexts, have been advanced with different agendas aspresented by their authors. The work presented here bases on theviews of Nicholas Carr’s articles, “Mindover mass media”.Notably, the work runs in contrast with the thoughts of Pinker(2014), who demonstrates a differencein opinionin his article, “IsGoogle making us stupid”.Technology is a vital tool and tends to aid humans in theirintellectual activities. However, this might leadto hibernation of the natural thinking process that is essential forcreativity and innovation.

“Bowman,having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioningmachine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits thatcontrol its artificial ‘brain’” (Carr, 2011). The illustrationsends a clear signal in regards to the writer’s intention whilewriting the article citing that such a supercomputer isdesignedfor assistance, but a simple malfunction was capable of leading greatcatastrophe. Arguably, an AI such as HAL is given complete control ofsystems within a ship or context where it ishousedas people tend to trust them.However,their malfunctions equalto greatcomplications. The same case is true when analyzing Pinker’s (2014)claim, if people indeedneglect other mechanisms for remaining smart, it is probable that afailure in the technologies will mean complete loss of this ability,for everyone.

Classicmechanisms of intellectual nourishments such as studying books or anyother form of publication have beenreplacedby the increased ease of using tools such as those on the internet.Carr (2011) cites that for a while his concentration has reduced andhis tolerance to challenges presented in texts such as books iswaning. Carr (2011) clearly describes fatigue and boredom that he nowassociates with performing a task or hobby he previously enjoyed. Itis, therefore, appropriate to connote that the influence oftechnology on Carr is harmfuland should berectified.“…I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose.That’s rarely the case anymore” (Carr, 2011). Carr (2011), notesthat a workload previously consuming hours-days takes minutes tocomplete with spare time to skim through other articles. It isevident that this author seeks to point to the fact that specificityof information online reduces the investigative niche forresearchers. Further, manual research requires going through eachelement within a context to retrieve accurateinformation which adds to the database of information the researcherhas.

TheInternetas anessentialtool for the world given its numerous and impressive use oftechnology to simplify activities otherwise tiresome and expensive(Carr, 2011). He notes that the Internetiscommonly observedas a medium of exchange, a filter that sieves all informationaccepted through sight or hearing. Despite the simplistic nature ofthe Net, Carr (2011) posits that its impacts go beyond feeding theprocess of thought and relates this to rewiring the circuitry in thebrain. Therefore, by shaping the said processes, it is possible thatindividuals will learn to integrate the Net into their thoughtprocess as essential tools rather than assistive tools in mentalprocesses. Notably, yahoos are the claim laid out by Pinker (2014) inhis article as he claims technology to be the sole tools formaintenance of intellectual superiority.

Readinghas evolved with the development of technology and relates thechanges to more that the apparentslackness of going through physical texts, but to psychologicalconcepts (Carr, 2011). Notably, the essence of learning andunderstanding can be used to describe fundamentalfactors that describe the processes of self-identification.Therefore, factors that change with the evolution of reading habitseventually impact lives as they change though process as noted byCarr (2011). Describing an incident where one sense is completelylost or ignored after an intervention of technology, Carr (2011)describes how Friedrich Nietzsche could type endlessly with eyesshut. “Once he had mastered touch-typing, he was able to write withhis eyes closed, using only the tips of his fingers” (Carr, 2011).The illustration relates to new technology meant to enhance somecommonly stressful activities like research, however, just like,Nietzsche, people will eventually close those previous chapters oflife. Carr (2011) notes that after the change, Nietzsche’s worksignificantly modifiedin style due to a simple modification meant to help him. The case issimilar to Carr’ s (2011) previous observation that more factorsarechangedby a simple changesuch as in the manner of reading as presented in online publications.

Afteran evaluation of the article, it is accurate to relate that theinformation presented by Carr (2011) would be sufficient tocontradict Pinker’s (2014) claim regardingintellect and impacts brought on by new technology. Therefore, theauthor would strongly disagree with Pinker (2014) regardinghis complaintproving that new technology has some adverseeffects on the users and can significantly lead to unprecedentedchanges.

References

Carr,N. (2011). Is Google making us stupid?&nbspYearbookof the National Society for the Study of Education,&nbsp107(2),89-94.

Pinker,S. (2014). Mind over mass media.&nbspNewYork Times,&nbsp10.