Or was I Already that way?

“Try reading a book while doing a crossword puzzle; that’s the intellectual environment of the Internet.” – Nicholas Carr

It may be cutting edge to write a novel using only Twitter (it’s being done) but is that how we really want to think and speak? Do parents want their children to listen to them the same way they listen to Google – clicking on whatever catches their attention at the moment? Do we really want our employees speaking to us in staff meetings in tweetspeak?

Technology writer, Nicholas Carr, first began questioning the effects of the Internet on our thought processes with his article on the subject in the July/August 2008 issue of The Atlantic. His main concern in “Is Google making us stupid?“ was the effect relying on the web as his main source of information had on his concentration. Calling upon studies by recognized authorities on the science of the brain he noted:

The Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching effects on cognition…The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.

When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is recreated in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.

Carr continued this conversation in his book, The Shallows. The author is not suggesting we all ditch the Internet but rather that we recognize its advantages and disadvantages. He admits that the seduction of technology is hard to resist but still needs to be understood for what it is. His primary point is that every major leap in technology ultimately changes the way people process information and make decisions.

It is easy to perceive innovations like Facebook, Google, and the myriad of information portals available on the web as proof of the imminent demise of civilization. The truth, however, is that every leap in communication over the last 3000 years has been met with both enthusiasm and fear.

Plato and the Written Word

In The Republic, Plato has Socrates declaring that poetry has no place in the perfect state. Those who hate poetry might agree but not for the reasons argued in ancient Greece. In that era, oral tradition was the accepted method of transmitting information while poetic epics like The Iliad were new comers. Poetry was the Google Docs of Plato’s generation and he was a champion of it. His argument for written transmission of ideas was that it encouraged the orderly and logical diffusion of knowledge.

Grammar and the Gutenberg Press

Before the introduction of printing in the late 15th century, there was no system of punctuation and more often than not was simply non –existent. Chaucer, for example, included almost no punctuation in his manuscripts. The new fangled printing press was often railed against much like some people today warn how Amazon and eBooks are ruining our minds. So in fairness, every new technology in history has changed the way people think.

The Real Problem

It isn’t new technologies that are the problem but rather our failure to recognize how they can affect how we think, or in some cases don’t think. Nicholas Carr sees some unique dangers in this digital age that must be addressed. In his words, “Multitasking erodes cognitive control. We lose our ability to say that this is important, this is unimportant. All we want is new information.” In contrast, when a reader opens a book, “there’s nothing else going on except words on a page.”

Carr admits he has not had great success in limiting the time he spends online but has still made some important changes. When he finds information on the Web he then tries to find the source material in print or by way of compromise, his eReader: “I’d make an effort to actually read those things in print. I did find that made a big difference in my ability to be attentive and a thorough reader and hopefully a deeper thinker.”

Neither Carr nor I am asking people to give up the Internet. In fact, quite the opposite. We simply need to become masters of whatever tool of information we have at hand. I love movies and some TV shows but 24 consecutive hours of Hell’s Kitchen, Jersey Shore or even Masterpiece Theater is bound to rewire one’s brain on some primal level.

Someone once asked me why I didn’t want an eReader that can be read in direct sunlight, like at the beach for example. My reasons are simple and personal: I generally don’t read novels in direct sunlight and I don’t go to the beach to learn what others have to say.

I have a favorite spot just minutes from my house that, in the off season at least, offers nothing but water, sky and sand. No communication devices allowed, period. I don’t go there to read or write. I go there to disconnect from all artificial sensory input. God has put quite enough there for me to consider, keeping my mind and soul busy for hours on end.

Related Topics

eBooks: Fight the Future
A Reality Check about Change
The Digital Natives are Restless