Actually, I Prefer Abstract Painting

Claim: Technology, the internet and Google specifically, are changing out mindset on how to obtain information. It also affects how our society responds to long, traditional readings and books as oppose to skimming, skipping, or choosing generally short works.

Statement of Claim: “What the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.”

Subclaims: Googling is taking the place of actual researching.

Our society is becoming lazier in regards to our steps of gathering and processing information.

Old media is morphing to fit the mold of the new media.

Our "intellectual technologies" take away a sensory feeling.

We are losing the ability to interpret deep readings.

Support: The mechanical clock example -- we're putting more importance on "mathematically measurable sequences" of technology rather than using our own natural reasoning.

Nietzsche's use of the typewriter -- the use of this new instrument caused his "already terse prose [to] become even tighter." With the help of this new technology alone, Nietzsche's form of expression took on a great change.

The British Library's logs -- it is a proven pattern that although these internet readers had saved a few long articles to come back to later, most of their time spent was on browsing. Logs showed that people spent less time on article than usual, suggesting that skimming is at use. People also tended to favor reading shorter articles, and forgetting the long ones they had even saved.

Warrant: Carr is speaking towards an audience of internet users that are familiar with Google and/or other similar search engines. He assumes that his readers are frequent internet users and are somewhat dependent on it on a day-to-day basis.

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?"

In my opinion, Google is not making us stupid. In fact, Google is not making us anything. After all, in the end it is our choice how we use tools such as Google or other search engines. In a world where everything can be outsourced except time, each minute is of crucial importance. If saving time by "googling" any of life's questions can allow you to spend more time working, sleeping, or just living in general, there doesn't seem to be a reason for seeking any alternative. Although I do believe that Carr has a point with his article, I don't necessarily think that the age of Google is an age of any less intelligence than our fathers, and fathers before them.

The word "intelligence" is even loosely defined. Just because as a group we are reading less articles and long books doesn't necessarily make us less intelligence. Dictionary.com defines intelligence as "capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc," and mentions nothing about the ability to sit and engulf yourself in a novel for hours on end. Since in 2010 we, especially noting us Americans, are used to living in a more fast paced and self-satisfying world. By having so much information available to us, we can more easily compare the options in front of us that can be followed for any certain goal. This constant availability teaches us to not waste time; it teaches us to choose the path that will be most beneficial to us. In this sense, I think the use of Google would actually show how intelligent we really are. We learn the options, reason to find the best one for us, understand how to use it to reach our goal (which may be anything from finding a meaning or fact that would once have needed to be researched to help us grasp a truth of life).

Not only does Google serve as a tool for success in several aspects of life, but it also makes so much more information in very easy access. For instance, if I wanted to learn about one of my interests, let's say the history of cats, I could gain a plethora of information in an instant. Just by Googling "Siamese cats" I can instantly connect myself to their origin, the fact I'm interested in. So in just a few seconds I can learn that Siamese cats were first domesticated around 1884 in Asia. If I had to go to the library to research this, it may have taken hours. By checking out several books on Siamese cats and reading them, I sure would have learned a lot more about them, that is true. Yet, how much of that knowledge really stays with me? I would learn about their coats, diet, and personality, and history of course, what I was interested in to begin with. At first it may seem like this style of learning would leave me with more knowledge, I would be forced to learn much more than I expected by searching for the answer to my original inquiry, though I can't say that I would retain it. Let's face it, if we don't care about something, it will not stay in our brain for very long. Google only helps eliminate the time spent reading things you aren't interested in that you will forget in only a few minutes. It may seem sad, but that is how our brain works.

So those were twenty minutes worth of my thoughts and ramblings about Google. Just because it saves time and is a new idea does not make it any worse for us to use. We are not becoming less intelligent, just more efficient. The unintelligent thing would be for us leave it unused, resting at our fingertips.