Friday, November 14, 2014

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.




No comments:

Post a Comment