Google and the Internet have made major impacts on our lives. Humans as a whole have all become heavily attached and dependent on this advanced technology. The Internet has evolved tremendously in the short amount of time that it has been around, and people are so drawn to it because of the many things that it provides, from entertainment to informative knowledge. Have you ever thought about what role the Internet and Google have played in your life and how it has shaped your learning habits and thinking patterns? In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr argues that Google and the Internet cause negative effects on human cognition and is detrimental to human concentration and contemplation. I agree with Carr’s claim that the Internet and Google have negatively affected human thinking and cognition skills. Humans heavily rely on the Internet for information instead of finding out answers on their own. His argument proves to be persuasive to his audience due to his analysis of his personal experiences and the experiences of others and his theories about how the internet has weakened human thinking processes. Carr uses the rhetorical strategies of logos, narration, and exemplification to argue his claims.
Exemplification is one to the rhetorical strategies that Carr uses. Exemplification uses examples and cases to point out his claim. This strategy tends to be beneficial to people making an argument because it gives others real life accounts and experiences with the problem at hand. Carr introduces multiple examples of how the Internet has become a major part in shaping how the human brain works. He uses is own person experiences to back up his claim by stating what part the Internet plays on his own life. He says how “the Net is becoming a universal medium,” and is “the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind.” Just like most people these days, Carr shows how most of the information that he analyses and receives comes directly from things displayed on the Internet. Carr also states how when he brings up these accounts with his friends that they too are experiencing the same effects. He uses the strategy of introducing his own personal experiences as examples of his claim to take his argument to a more personal level. He wants to show his audience and readers that this issue is not just affecting others but himself too. By using this strategy, Carr wants his audience to relate to his own accounts with how the Internet has played a part in his life and realize how the Internet is affecting their lives as well. This example furthers his previous claim by providing person experiences with the Internet and taking his writing to a more personal level. Carr also introduces Bruce Friedman into his writing. Bruce Friedman is a blogger who regularly talks about the use of computers in medicine. He describes how the Internet has altered his mental habits. He states that, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” Due to his heavy reliance and constant usage of the Internet, Friedman states, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more that three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” Friedman accurately exemplifies how even a matured adult has lost touch with his ability to focus and comprehend long pieces of writing. This strategy of introducing an experienced blogger gives readers another perspective on the issue. Bruce Friedman’s account shows that even if a person was once a connoisseur of reading and writing that after becoming heavily reliant on the Internet those habits can change dramatically. Carr wants his audience to realize that even if they are experienced readers and writers that the Internet has the strong effect of diminishing those abilities if used too often. This helps to further his claim by showing readers another perspective of how the Internet is negatively affecting human cognition. The strategy of using examples to get his argument across to his audience proves to be effective. The use of exemplification strengthens Carr’s argument because he takes his writing to a more personal level and gives another perspective to this audience by introducing Bruce Friedman.
Carr uses the rhetorical strategy of logos to help persuade his audience into believing his claims on the issue of how the Internet and Google negatively effect human thinking. Logos is one of the three Aristotelian Appeals, which are ethos, pathos, and logos. Logos refers to the use of logic, reason, facts, statistics, data, and numbers. Carr presents how the research was conducted by scholars from the University College London on the topic of online research habits. Their research suggested that “we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think.” These scholars have been examining computer logs and are documenting the behavior of visitors of two specific websites, one that is operated by the British Library and another that by a U.K. educational consortium, that allow access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They have come to the conclusion that the users of these sites use “a form of skimming activity”, otherwise meaning that they move from one source to another at fast paces without ever returning to the previous sites. Users tend to only read a few pages of an article or book then they move to a new site. Carr’s strategy of introducing scientific research works with his persuasive writing because it shows his audience that professionals are highly interested in the topic and that they want to get answers for themselves on how the Internet is affecting human activity and why. Readers can now see that this is a major issue and that researchers are interested in coming up with answers. Carr uses this particular strategy of introducing scientific research to show readers that this is an important issue and that there are people studying the topic to come up with answers to this unsolved phenomenon. This strategy furthers his central claim by showing readers from another perspective how people are invested in this topic of how the Internet affects human thinking.
Narration is another rhetorical strategy that Carr uses to persuade his audience. This strategy involves recounting an event. Carr introduces Friedrich Nietzsche’s story about him and the typewriter. Nietzsche’s vision was diminishing and he could barely keep focus on a page of reading. He was forced to put a hold on his writing and was scared that he would soon have to give it up. The typewriter ended the idea of Nietzsche having to give up writing. Once he got used to using the typewriter, he was able to use it with his eyes closed. He was once again able to transfer his thoughts onto paper. Carr states how the mind is “almost infinitely malleable.” Most people believed that our brains were fixed at a certain point by a certain time in our adulthood, but researchers have discovered reasons to believe otherwise. James Olds was a professor of neuroscience at the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason University, and he stated that “the mind is very plastic” and that “The brain has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.” Carr uses this account to his advantage of showing how the brain works in order to present another reason of how the brain can change at any moment. Since the brain can change at any time, it can surely start to diminish in certain qualities due to the lack of practice in that area of work. By using the Internet and Google for long periods of time, the brain can surely start to loose practice in certain areas because those parts are not being used as often. The use of narration helps the audience to realize the brain works in ways that are still unclear to human research, and by bring up this account, it shows readers that it is scientifically possible that human brain qualities can be diminished from the frequent use of the Internet and Google.
No comments:
Post a Comment