Saturday, September 11, 2010
I somewhat agree with what Carr is trying to say. He is saying that google is brainwashing us to think in a different way and to acquire information more efficiently. He sort of describes it in a way that google is a perfect example of how our society will become much more systematic, just like the example he used. I also agree with the statement he makes about how google and the internet in general makes it harder for us to focus on longer articles and reads. Google makes getting information so easy and thoughtless, but not only does it give us the information we need, but it also gives us many more things to click on, or be distracted by such as advertisements, irrelevant links, and of course many sources that we were not looking for but appear in the search results. When we are on the internet, we can take any direction we choose when it comes to these search results. And everything is right there for us to see. This makes it a lot harder for us to focus on longer readings because when we spend so much time on the internet, we are so used to clicking on links and refreshing the page. With even so much a hint of boredom, we can click on a different link or site, relevant to the one we're reading right now or not. However, for some reason I feel like Carr's opening example of the 2001 Space Odyssey movie is a little irrelevant. I was unable to make the connection between the HAL thing and the internet brainwashing the human race. He later references this example again, but I am still unable to make the connection he is trying to describe. Other than this, Carr conveys his insight on the subject of internet brainwashing and a gradual ascend towards a system-based society rather than a human-based one very well. In my opinion, him using such old sources dating back to the printing press, were very strategetic, but not only that, they make perfect sense in context to what he is trying to say. He uses such strong examples that lead us to believe that the internet is, in some way, manipulating our minds and changing the way we think and gather information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks Nick, this is fairly straightforward, but I agree with your analysis. First of all, I have read about 40 of these posts, and you are the first person to question the opening “hook” about HAL. I couldn’t agree more with your assessment. The introduction has always been my least favorite part of the article. I am intrigued that you interpret Carr as proposing that the internet “brainwashes” us. Although he cites neurological evidence that the internet changes our thinking, I sense that he wants to accuse the internet of “brainwashing” us, as you suggest. Lastly, I’m glad that you agree with Carr’s use of historical examples. Unlike his introduction, I find those to be particularly effective.
ReplyDelete