Reference no: EM13567139

Advances in technology are commonly viewed as beneficial to mankind. However, as Nicholas Carr points out, new technologies are not just neutral, passive tools that aid people; they have a profound effect on the way humans actually think. Therefore, since our thoughts and perceptions have been altered, we may no longer be in the position to think critically about these technologies and be able to judge just how beneficial they actually are.

Carr's essay focuses on the Internet, but he uses some historical examples to show how new inventions have changed the way people think. For example, the invention of the clock led to the perception that time was a separate, measurable entity, set apart from human activity. Where once people lived their lives according to their senses, the clock started to dictate when people should work, eat and sleep. Everything became much more regimented and rigid. And when Nietzsche started using a typewriter, his style of writing changed, becoming much shorter and more "telegraphic." Nietzsche himself recognized that the typewriter effected the way he wrote. By describing how both the clock and the typewriter changed our perceptions and ways of thinking, Carr exposes the misconception that people hold regarding technology; we may think that we are in control, but technology changes the way we think, making it unlikely that we can be objective about its place in our lives.

The Internet has an even more profound effect on the human mind than the clock or typewriter. Carr discusses the way the Internet changes the way we read. People "skim" and "bounce" from item to item, essentially "browsing" through articles and gathering information in a rapid fashion. Carr contrasts the "skimming" we engage in when we use the Internet to "deep reading...that is, sustained, undistracted reading." That kind of focused reading enables people to draw connections and make associations in their minds; it helps people to think critically and to come up with their own ideas. The Internet discourages this type of reading and thinking.

I believe that Carr is saying that the very nature of the Internet - massive amounts of "nuggets" of information that can be accessed instantaneously, and hyperlinks that lead the user on to to never ending distractions - has changed and shaped our way of reading and therefore thinking. It has hindered our ability to concentrate, to contemplate and to think critically. Without this ability to read and think deeply, how can we properly judge if the Internet is the positive force for change that we think it is or if it presents some hidden dangers to human progress?