homework 11/24

Claim from Thompson in which I am responding:

“We know that reading changes the way we think. Among other things, it helps us formulate thoughts that are more abstract, categorical, and logical.” (Pub. Thinking 51)

Sub-claim concerning sub-topic:

Clarifying thinking: we can search for information on the Internet by categories so we are more mentally organized which opens more doors for us in our cognitive abilities which begins with retaining more information.

I think the Internet has ultimately aided in our overall cognitive strength because the average person is reading at least double of what they were reading prior to its existence.

MLA citation:

1) "Students Reading E-Books Are Losing Out, Study Suggests." Motherlode Students Reading EBooks Are Losing Out Study Suggests Comments. N.p., 10 Apr. 2014. Web. 23 Nov. 2014.

2) Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” RWS Course Reader. Ed. Department of Rhetoric and Writing Studies. San Diego: Montezuma Publishing, 2014. 58-64. Print.

 3) Thompson, Clive. “Public Thinking”. RWS Course Reader. Ed. Department of Rhetoric and Writing Studies. San Diego: Montezuma Publishing. 2014.42-52. Print.

Explanation of souces:

Ebooks source: complicates/extends

Carr: challenges

anecdote homework 11/21

I can’t help but applaud Thompson for his accurate and open-minded research brought together in his writing. When I think about my personal experiences with the Internet and am able to extend Thompson with it, it makes sense that Thompson is ten years younger than Carr. Thompson is naturally more open to the change that the Internet has brought the world being that he has ten years less than Carr of being exposed to the original way of doing things. Some people are just naturally scared of change because it pushes them out of their comfort zone. However, I have embraced the constant changes and it has brought me nothing but convenience.  I often find myself lost in Facebook at times spending hours on end reading and analyzing how people present themselves on social media which has made me appreciate reading and writing more. Facebook is a form of reading and writing in which I enjoy and I am able to find myself “escaping from time” in my quest to read more statuses. The Internet has been an increased benefit to me as a student and a more analytical person all around. I am now constantly surrounded by reading and writing unlike before when my teachers were forcing me to read books for class I wasn’t able to understand and would take me forever to get through. Now that I am reading and writing more than ever because of the convenience of the Internet, I am able to get through a book faster and understand complex texts easier.

            On the other hand, my personal anecdote both qualifies and complicates Carr’s ideas in his text. He mentions, “The web has been a godsend to [him] as a writer” (Course Reader 58). This is qualified by my anecdote in that I do spend more time reading other people’s work on the Internet including articles and blogs. I know my friends feel the same way, especially when I refer them to articles that I particularly enjoyed. Not only does it help my friend receive insight on certain topics, but it also further gets the name of the author out there which encourages them to keep publishing their ideas. However, my experience with the Internet complicates the overall message in Carr’s work. “…what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation” (Course Reader 59).  The connotation Carr gives the reader through his work communicates that he doesn’t like the way the Internet is changing us because we are becoming less intellectual in the way we think and analyze information. For me as an individual, I have noticed my concentration heighten due to the Internet because now I am used to reading for extensive amounts of time.  

A Review of Forum Posts

After reading Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid” and analyzing his rhetorical strategies in my essay, I found it very interesting to read some reviews people said about Clay Shirky and his writing. 3 reviews in particular by Nicolas Carr himself as a response to someone’s post, Matthew Battles, and Michael Gorman are all noteworthy in such a way that I will be discussing them in my paper.

            The first review I read by Nicolas Carr, I was able to undoubtedly relate and agree to. He claims that Shirky even admits that the use of the Internet is not the first time in history that our technologies have changed the way we think. So why is this the breaking point that makes us all worry about our brains being recomputed? Carr continues by saying that the human mind was made through evolution to adapt to anything, even if it may be for the worse. He says Shirky is just an optimist, which is clear through the use of his religious terms describing the net. The use of religion makes Shirky less credible, which I agree with. We should continue to be skeptical. What I found most persuasive with this post is that he took the risk to challenge the way Shirky analyzes the document he uses from Maryanne Wolf. He does so in such a way that allows the reader to understand the deeper meaning of the quote that Shirky neglects to understand. Carr says, “Wolf was not saying that deep thinking is indistinguishable from deep reading.” He furthermore explains that “deep thinking can take other forms than deep reading, and one of these other forms of deep thinking are, I fear, also at risk because what they share is a requirement for sustained, undistracted concentration.”

            The second post I read was from Matthew Battles. Battles uses the posts of others to push him to feeling like he needs to “throw some deep history at all of this”. He believes that humans are so developed as a species that reading is only a small part of what makes us who we are and successful. The media shouldn’t be counted as a threat for our species because printed books as well as the alphabet change the way we think as well. This post was really convincing to me because it is true that we can just adapt to this change like we have done all the rest. It was a really easy post to connect to because when I grew up I was constantly being changed by the things I was learning which all took a role in forming me into the person I am today.  

            The last post I analyzed was by Michael Gorman. He takes a different approach to the matter, which I like. He feels offended that Carr is taking the joy away from technophiles who are excited with the way the Internet has progressed us. He uses the Webster’s definition of “learn” to provide to Carr that the Internet can be apart of our learning lives without a problem. Additionally, advertisements have never been more productive because the Internet is the perfect place to ensure the company is getting their money’s worth paying the Internet for them to put their name and services out there. I found this very persuasive because in fact, the Internet does provide a richness of information to our lives. When I need to know something or look something up, the Internet provides me with thousands of links in just seconds that can provide me with the information I want to know which is far more efficient than books could ever provide because of time purposes.  

The Internet: For Better or for Worse?

One of the biggest revolutions that carried our society to be a more efficient and technologically friendly era is the invention of the Internet. Furthermore, Google is one of the largest of Internet companies and is sometimes described as the “Internet” itself being that it is so popular. Google is a multi-billion dollar “American multinational corporation specializing in Internet- related services and products. These include online advertising technologies, search, cloud computing, and software” (Google). The invention of this revolutionary entity has made the lives of most people much more convenient and simple in many aspects. Far fewer students will have to spend countless hours in the library searching through an endless supply of books to find the one that they will be able to use for a paper. Or even those who just want to find a quick and easy recipe to bake cookies but don’t have a cookbook. These are just two ways that Google and the Internet can benefit anyone who has access to a computer. Because this drastic change in society has a very large effect on the way lives are lived, there are many different views, both positive and negative. Although it is clear that Google is a very useful search engine, some think of it as an evil, changing the way humans think and perceive information due to the fact that the Internet was so easily adopted as the primary source of information we receive. Our source of information is now technologically based rather than through original writings and documents and that is a huge step we so undoubtedly took. It is natural that this change of relying more on technology is frightening to conceive. Among those who see Google having a very concerning impact to us and the way we think is Nicholas Carr. In order to educate people regarding the effects the Internet has on him and many others, he argues his side in “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”. He is noticing a change in the way he now thinks with Google being a part of his life. However, Google is just a small part of the problem. Carr actually believes that the Internet itself is “becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Course Reader 59).

In this essay I will be examining three specific rhetorical strategies that Carr uses in his writing. First, I will open my paper with my examination regarding his use of ethos and how it contributes to his article. Then, I will analyze how he uses authority and other “big names” and incorporates it to aid his credibility in the reader’s eyes. Lastly, I will examine the use of analogies he provides the reader in order to help him explain to what extent he believes Google and the Internet has changed us.

Carr’s main strategy in his text is his implementation of ethos. Through this strategy, Carr introduces the effects the Internet has on our cognitive development. Since he started increasingly using the Internet, he has found that, “Over the past few years, [he] had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with [his] brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory”(Course Reader 58).  Through ethos, Carr uses his quote to provide a sense of knowledge of the subject as well as first hand experience. He cultivates this by using additional experiences of both his friends and higher-up officials. However, it is foolish to think that an inanimate object like “Google” can force itself into one’s brain and change the way people think. Carr can simply just limit his use of the software in order to reverse what he claims to be happening inside his head. Nonetheless, his purpose is evident and he wishes to encourage the reader to look at the situation from a different perspective. He also generates a sense of credibility, goodwill, expertise, and good character; all of which are key components of ethos. With the use of ethos, it is easier to see the bird’s eye view on each individual situation. We can better understanding where we stand as individuals and the importance Google has on our lives. It furthers his central claim by understanding the opinions of others. “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Course Reader 59). The way he words this quote is so safe that it does leave it open for discussion.  Carr leaves the discussion open when he chooses to say “For me, as for others” instead of telling the reader that everyone is being affected by this new invention. Although, the use of these words still portrays to the reader that this is still a widespread phenomenon that is happening and we need to be more aware of what it is actually doing to us. His being able to relate to the audience in this way provides him a deeper sense of credibility and feeling, putting himself out there as just another one of us (the readers) instead of holding himself up to a standard where everything he says is true and should be taken seriously.

Another way Carr strategizes to prove credibility and instill his main claim to his audience is his abundant use of authorities or “big names”. He strategically builds credibility by beginning with accounts and observations of his friends who blog and are also professors. Being that these are the people he surrounds himself with is a true indictor that what he says is reliable. Then, he continues in his writing by implementing big studies done by higher-up officials like Nietzsche and university studies from places like University College London; all having similar data to Carr’s.  With the help of Maryanne Wolf, a developmental psychologist at Tufts University, he claims, “we may be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind, it lies a different kind of thinking” (Course Reader 60). He validates this by expanding his point through Wolf who “worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace” (Course Reader 60). This is the bulk of his article: experiences and studies from other authorities. He doesn’t put as much of his personal opinion as he should in his work because it seems he is merely sponging the ideas of others. This is truly ironic because he claims he is having a harder time thinking for himself since Google. But here he is, using the ideas and experiences of others in his work to help him complete his thoughts. Although he does use this strategy to build trust within the reader for his argument, however he does overuse this strategy, which plays as a devil’s advocate and makes his argument a little less effective.

The third rhetorical strategy I will be observing in Carr’s work is his use of analogies. In this particular strategy, Carr enhances the overall message he strives to instill in the reader. This is the main strategy he uses that allows the reader to fully understand to what extent Carr describes his feelings toward the effect the Internet has had on him. “When the mechanical clock arrived, people began thinking of their brains as operating like “clockwork.” Today, in the age of software, we have come to think of them as operating “like computers” (Course Reader 61). Relating the increasing use of the Internet with an invention that happened in the past helps the reader form parallels to how drastic of a change this is. The invention of the digital clock was revolutionary, and because it is connected to the Internet through this analogy, it too, is a revolution. This element in Carr’s writing works to persuade that we have no choice but to continue down the path that we are going down because of the impact the Internet has already had on our lives. It is reprogramming us and the way we think. And this is exactly the message Carr wishes to get across through the use of his analogy. Some may just be blinded because this era is all about change and the Internet is just another one that will make our lives easier. However, this strategy truly forces his audience to understand that our lives are permanently different. And the reason for this is the Internet.

As I read Carr’s work I noticed that I wasn’t very convinced with what he was trying to convey. Although my view is different than his anyway, his overuse of authorities and other “big names” takes away from his credibility in my opinion. It makes him sound like he is just taking the ideas of others and using them in his studies because he is relatively naïve on the subject to make his own accusations without the help of noteworthy people. I do still believe even after reading Carr’s article that Google has very much so progressed us as a society. We now have more access to things we wish to know. I think this is very important to us because we can only retain so much knowledge, and having such a large amount of information available to us at any time is a very useful thing that we can apply to what we already know. The Internet was never intended as an alternative to thinking, rather an aid to help us be more successful human beings.

References

"Google." Google. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Nov. 2014.

4.         Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” RWS Course Reader. Ed. Department of Rhetoric and Writing Studies. San Diego: Montezuma Publishing, 2014. 58-64. Print.

final draft for Carr essay

One of the biggest revolutions that carried our society to be a more efficient and technologically friendly era is the invention of Google. Google is a multi trillion-dollar search engine that allows anyone in the world access to any type of information they wish to know. Because this drastic change in present-day society has a very large effect on the way lives are lived, there are many different views, both positive and negative, regarding the large role it has on people now. Among those who see Google as an increasing danger to us and the way we think is Nicholas Carr. In order to educate people concerning the negativity he sees behind Google, he argues his side in “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”. He claims that Google is changing the way we used to think for the worse. He believes this is evident due to him noticing a change in the way he now thinks with Google being a part of his life.

In this essay I will be examining three specific rhetorical strategies that Carr uses in his writing. First, I will open my paper with my examination regarding his use of ethos and how it contributes to his article. Then, I will analyze how he uses authority and other “big names” and incorporates it to aid his credibility in the reader’s eyes. Lastly, I will examine his use of a motive he instills within the reader in order to help him fully understand the topic because he is still uncertain with just how Google has changed us and to what extent.

Carr’s main strategy in his text is his implementation of ethos. He understands that due to the nature of our society, it was evident that something like Google was bound to exist. However, he didn’t know just to what extent it would change his pattern of thinking. “Over the past few years, I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory”(Course Reader 58). Truly this is a subjective happening. It is foolish to think that an inanimate object like “Google” can force itself into one’s brain and change the way people think. Carr can simply just limit his use of the software in order to reverse what he claims to be happening inside his head. His purpose is evident, however, that he wishes to encourage the reader to look at the situation from a different perspective. With the use of ethos, it is easier to see the bird’s eye view on each individual situation. We can better understanding where we stand as individuals and the importance Google has on our lives. The use of ethos furthers his central claim by understanding that the opinions of others are subjective. “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Course Reader 59). Although the use of his colorful and persuasive diction in order to accurately illustrate where he stands in order to grab the reader and make him seem more credible, he does leave is open for discussion. This is apparent through the first few words in his quote when he specifies that his feelings may be the same for others rather than telling his audience that this is what is happening to everyone as a result from Google.

Another way Carr strategizes to prove credibility to his audience is his abundant use of authorities or “big names”. With the help of Maryanne Wolf, a developmental psychologist at Tufts University, he claims, “we may be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind, it lies a different kind of thinking” (Course Reader 60). He validates this by expanding his point through Wolf who “worries that the style of reading promoted by the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace” (Course Reader 60). This is the bulk of his article: fluff from other authorities. He doesn’t put as much of his personal opinion as he should in his work because it ends up drowning in the other information others provide. This is truly ironic because he claims he is having a harder time thinking for himself since Google. But here he is, using the ideas and experiences of others in his work to help him complete his thoughts. Although he does use this strategy to build trust within the reader for his argument, however he does overuse this strategy, which plays as a devil’s advocate and makes his argument a little less effective.

The third rhetorical strategy I will be observing in Carr’s work is his use of a motive. In this particular strategy, Carr does an excellent job letting the reader know what he wishes to instill in the reader with the use of his motive. Although he doesn’t use this a large amount of this strategy in the body of his writing, he does conclude with it, leaving the reader with a more “open-ended” idea of everything he said prior to his conclusion. “So yes, you should be skeptical of my skepticism. Perhaps those who dismiss critics of the Internet as Luddites or nostalgists will be proven correct, and from our hyperactive, data-stoked minds will spring a golden age of intellectual discovery and universal wisdom” (Course Reader 63). His quote allows the reader to understand that he is not completely sure if his accusations are correct, he is just skeptical of the way Google has altered our lives and how quickly we allowed it to change our lifestyles. This leaves the reader with a sense of uncertainty and the desire to continue to look for more evidence regarding Google and its affect on people, which is what Carr is looking for because he is truly interested and passionate about this and will openly take any other information that may make him more knowledgeable.

As I read Carr’s work I noticed that I wasn’t very convinced with what he was trying to convey. Although my view is different than his anyway, his overuse of authorities and other “big names” takes away from his credibility in my opinion. It makes him sound like he is just taking the ideas of others and using them in his studies because he is too naïve on the subject to make his own accusations. I do still believe even after reading Carr’s article that Google has very much so progressed us as a society. We now have more access to things we wish to know. I think this is very important to us because we can only retain so much knowledge, and having such a large amount of information available to us at any time is a very useful thing that we can apply to what we already know. Google was never intended as an alternative to thinking, rather an aid to help us be more successful in life.