Ahlers1

CarlAhlers
Dr.Serviss
CTW1
October28,2015
CarrwassCarredbytechnology
NicholasCarr's
IsGoogleMakingUsStupid
isawebarticlewrittentochallengethe
notionthattheinternetisonlypositiveforourminds.Itmainlydiscernstheeffectsofthe
internetonhumancognition.Carrsarguingagainstthosewhobelievethebrainislikea
computerandexplaininghowourmindsadapttothetechnologyweusethemost.
InIsGoogleMakingUsStupid?Carrarguesthattheinternetmaynotbeentirely
helpfultous.Hestatesitishavingnegativeeffectsonthehumanmind.Throughhisexperience
Carrexplainshislackofconcentrationandlossoftheabilitytostayontask.Hebeginshisrant
withaquotefrom
2001:ASpaceOdyssey
,afilminwhichthehumanmindhasbecomealmost
symbiotictorobots,yetthehumanprevailsbydisconnectingthebrainofthemachine.This
aidsCarrsargumentthattheinternetischangingtheveryfunctionofourminds.Manypeople
wouldcallthisascaretactic.Heistryingtogetustoreactusingaveryrelatablepieceofpop
culture.Carrexplainsthathehaslosthopesofusashumansdisconnectingfromtechnology.
ThisisthefirstofmanyinstancesinwhichCarrseemstobegettingemotional.IagreewithCarr
becauseatthispointintimeourappliancesareseenasextensionsofourselves.Theinternetisa
databankofalltheinformationwewouldeverneed.Itsoundsgreatbutitmightnotbeas
positiveasitseems.ManyothersandIhavenoticedthatcellphoneandlaptopuseisreshaping
ourhabitsandaffectingourneurologicalpathways.Whenweconsumehoursonendofmedia

Ahlers5

contentonadailybasiswearechangingourbrains.Ourbrainchangesitselftobeabletodoour
mostcommontaskeffectivelyandefficiently.Tofurtherprovehispoint,usinghimselfasan
example,Carrexplainssomeoftheconsequencesthattheinternethasbeenhavingonhismind.
Focusingonreadingsomelengthyworkhasbecomeincreasinglydifficult.Theinternetisto
blame.Tohim,theinternetistheperfectrecallofsiliconememory(Carr2).Accordingto
Carrreadingisthemainvictimsincewecannolongerfocusduetothenegativeeffectsofthe
internet.CarrpointsoutaLondonstudy,hereiteratesthatinternetreadersarenotreadingina
traditionalway.Withoutgoingintomuchdetailaboutthefindingsofthestudy.Hebasically
saysthatinternetreadersnolongertakeinwhattheyreadbecausetheygothroughthereadings
toquickly.Carrknowswelikefactsandstatisticsandusesthestudytokeepourattention.
Carrexplainsthatspeechisanaturalthingforushumans.Wedoitwithoutlearning,itis
instinctual.Reading,ontheotherhand,isaskillthatislearnedandmustbepracticed.During
thispartofthearticleCarrbeginstouserelatabilityashismainployofconvincingusthe
internetisbad.Webegintorememberlearninghowtoreadandhowmuchwehaveimproved
overtime.Heexplainsthatsincereadingisaskillthismeansthatwecandevelopbadhabits
andithasbeenproventhatthiscanhappenevenatolderages.AnEnglishmajormentionedin
thearticleasks,WhatifIdoallmyreadingonthewebnotsomuchbecausethewayIreadhas
changed,i.e.Imjustseekingconvenience,butbecausethewayITHINKhaschanged?(3).
Ourbrainsgetrestructuredwiththeimplementationofnewtechnology.Theclockforexample
changedthewayhumanbeingsthink.Ourmindsbecamemathematicalfollowersofthetick
tockoftheclock.
eat,work,sleep,rise,westoppedlisteningtooursensesandstarted
obeyingtheclock(4).Carrisusingthisexamplebecauseheknowsweallliveourlivesonthe

Ahlers5

clocksschedule,butnotmanypeopleeventhinkaboutit.Wedon'trealizeitbutwearetruly
dominatedbythesesmallintervalsoftime.Carrtriestobringthisintoourperspectivewithhis
cunninguseofwords.Heisnowstartingtogetintoourheadsandwantstocauseustorealize
howtechnologiesshapeusandwedon'tshapetechnology.Carrexplainsthatthroughouthistory
thesedifferenttechnologieschangedourminds,andnowtheyareallinoneplace,theinternet.

WhentheNetabsorbsamedium,thatmediumisrecreatedintheNetsimage.(5)Praisefor
thewebiseverywhereandyetnoonereallywantstogointohowitisreprogrammingus(5).
WebegintonoticehowemotionalCarr'sargumentisbecoming.Hewouldmuchrather
convinceususingouremotionsthanourminds.
CarrbeginstorantonGoogle'sowners.Hereallyhatesthosetwo.Carrwantsusto
understandthatSergeyBrinandLarryPagearetryingtosystemizeeverythingandmake
technologythenorm.Ibelievethatmanyofthethingsthatthegoogleguysaredoingisgoodbut
Carristryingtotellustoatleastbeskepticalofthem.Googlebelieveseveryonewouldbe
betteroff.Carrstronglydisagrees.Googleinsiststhatknowledgecanbebrokendownintoa
seriesofverysmallstepsthatcanbeoptimized.CarrsaysthatInGooglesworld,theworldwe
enterwhenwegoonline,thereslittleplaceforthefuzzinessofcontemplation(7).Iagreewith
Carr,becauseontheinternettherereallyisn'tanyuncertainty.Weeitherfindwhatweare
lookingfororwedon't.Thereisorthereisn't,butthereisnoplaceinbetweenontheinternet.
Ambiguity,incomputertermsisabug.Carrisopposedtothebeliefthatthehumanmindislike
anoutdatedcomputer.IncompliancewithCarr'sidea,wecannothopetoanalyzeabrain
thinkingitisacomputer.Althoughtheyarecomparable,brainsandcomputersarenotthesame.
Atleastnotyet,whichisoneofCarrsbiggestfears.Althoughheisveryworriedaboutcurrent

Ahlers5

technology,Carrexplainsthatistobeexpectedfromafewpeoplewhoalwaysexpecttheworst
fromnewthingssuchastechnology.Carr,withoutadoubt,embracesthefactthatheisoneof
theseskeptics.Bybeingsuchanextremistheisabletopullsomepeoplenottothepointwhere
heisbutfarenoughthattheybegintoquestionthings.Notonlyisheanextremist,Carrisan
emotionalone,usingourheartstringstobringusovertohisside.HerelatesthistoPlatos
Phaedrus
Socrateswasveryagainstwritingbecausehefeltasthoughitwouldtakeoverhuman
memoryandeveryonewouldjustkeepeverythingwrittendowninstead.AndyetSocrates
couldntforeseethemanywaysthatwritingandreadingwouldservetospreadinformation,
spurfreshideas,andexpandhumanknowledge(8).Yetanotheradvanceintechnologythat
sparkedasimilarbacklashwastheprintingpress.HieronimoSquarciaficorespondedtothe
printingpressjustlikeCarrdoestocomputers.Squarciaficoworriedthattheeasyavailability
ofbookswouldleadtointellectuallaziness,makingmenlessstudiousandweakeningtheir
minds(8).Thisassumptionwascorrectaswellasmanyothersthatweremadeagainstthe
printingpress.
BasicallyCarristryingtosaythathistoryrepeatsitself.Andheisanexample
thattheskepticswillneverceasetoexist.Butskepticsarenotabadthing,asCarristryingto
explain.Heisnttryingtobancomputersorcompletelyalterourwayofinteractingwith
technology,heismainlytryingtogetsocietytoviewtechnologywithakeenereye.Carreven
arguesagainsthimselfthroughtheexampleofClayShirky,anNYUprofessor,whoexplainsthat
thedoomsayerscouldnotcomprehendtheamountofgoodthattheprintingpress(oranyofthe
aforementionedtechnologies)eventuallycreated.Carrremindsustobeskepticalof(his)
skepticism(6).
Carrreturnstohisanalogyof
2001:aspaceodyssey.
Heishauntedbythefact
thatthemoviemayendupbeingmoretruththanfiction.Themosthumanpersoninthemovie

Ahlers5

wasactuallyarobotandyetallthehumansseemedrobotic.Onceagainfeartacticsandtheuse
ofrelatablemediaareimplicatedintoCarrsarticle.
Carrunderstandsthattechnologyisapartofoursocietyanditisheretostay.Tothat
extenthehaslosthope.ButCarrstillbelievesthathecanmakeusmoreadeptatseeingthe
consequencesofourtechnology.Heisafraidofthefuture,afutureinwhichtechnologyshapes
usandwedon'tshapetechnologies.Eachtimeanewtechnologyhaschangedsocietytherehave
alwaysbeenskeptics.Justasinthepast,thereisalwaysafewnegativeopinionsaboutnew
technology.Inanattempttogethispointacrossthatweshouldbeskepticaloftheinternet,Carr
playstoouremotions.Heusesthingswecanrelatetosuchasourdevicesandpopculture.
Throughtheuseofrhetoricinthemostpathossenseofthewordheisabletopresenthis
argumentwithoutenoughfactualevidence.Explainingconsequencesofinternetusagewith
himselfasanexampleCarrisexposinghimselfwhichallowshisreaderstorelatetohimmore.
Carrisanextremistandheknowsit.Carrisnottryingtochangeourentiresociety,orget
peopletobeasskepticalashimself.Allhewantstodoismakepeopleseetechnologywitha
keenereye.Carrisafraidoftechnologyandwhathewantsustounderstandisthatweshouldbe
afraidofitaswell.