Essay 4

Brett Stinson
Professor Werry
RWS 100
11/20/14

Essay 4 

The evolution of the internet has brought so many new revolutionary aspects into what we think of writing and reading. It has opened up so many new forms of writing, such as social media and instant messaging, and even advance previous forms or writing to make them more appealing by allowing easy access to a larger audience.  Ever since the creation of the first web page there has been such a large leap for the evolution of the internet. Although the internet has become such a revolution in technology, there has been a debate as to whether the Internet has brought more good or more bad. Clive Thompson and Nicholas Carr wrote the articles “Public Thinking” and “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” respectively, where the both discuss the argument of whether the internet has had an impact on our brains ability to function correctly. Both authors take very different sides in this argument as one discusses how the internet is an overall beneficial resource for reading and writing, while the other takes the side that the internet is an overall harmful resource for reading and writing. Despite both authors presenting very strong cases for the argument, I believe that the internet has become harmful to the way humans read and write. I came into the world as the massive internet landslide was reaching its peak and I have been immersed in the world of technology ever since. From this perspective I will present my own ideas on why the internet is so harmful to the way humans read and write and I will support my ideas with other texts and evidence.

Although the Internet has brought along a massive surge of new technology with it, many negative side effects have started to be noticed by many and have stirred up a very large debate. In 2008 an article was published onto The Atlantic webpage by writer Nicholas Carr entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, Carr examines how the internet has created a decline in our everyday cognitive functions and has damaged our skills in reading and writing. He discusses mainly how the internet has deteriorated our mind and our level of concentration, this is a side effect from the constant jumping from page to page on the internet. While discussing this side effect of prolonged internet use, he brings up this comparison to the past and how media has retained the same negative side effects even before the internet has come into existence,

As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles (Carr 2).

By comparing how the deteriorated concentration has been a side effect long before the internet became a large everyday tool, Carr has developed a case that even though media has always had this effect on the mind, the new constant role of the internet in our everyday lives has intensified the effects on the brain. Carr has experienced these very effects first hand in his anecdote at the beginning of his article where he makes a comparison of how the internet is “tinkering with [his] brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory”(Carr 1), he compares this the the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, where the supercomputer HAL is having his brain destroyed by the main character David Bowman. Carr is supported by a British writer by the name of Sarah Harris in her article “Too much internet use 'can damage teenagers' brains”, where she analyzes how prolonged use of the internet has created an increase in the amount of grey matter in our brains and how this “could affect their concentration and memory, as well as their ability to make decisions and set goals. It could also reduce their inhibitions and lead to ‘inappropriate’ behaviour”(Harris 1). She supports this claim with a study conducted by neuroscientists where they MRI’s to look at the difference in brain matter between those who use the internet very frequently compared to those who rarely use the internet. The teenagers that use the internet less had a substantial drop in the amount of grey matter evident in the brain while those who use it frequently have a large amount that could be the cause of the deteriorated level of concentration found by many avid internet users.

Although the internet has created a decline in our ability to concentrate, the internet also has some positive contributions to our sense of focus and concentration. In the chapter “Public Thinking” by Clive Thompson in his book Smarter Than You Think, he discusses how the internet has brought along more good than bad and the internet has provoked many to partake in actively writing in a community and discussing everyday topics over writing. One main topic he discusses in his text is what is known as the “Audience Effect”, this is the effect where the presentation of a larger audience will drive the writer to produce a more quality piece of work than if they had not had an audience at all, and this large audience is easily established in the forms of blogs and forums on web pages. Later on in his article he goes on to discuss how increased writing can improve the quality of memory with a early cognitive study,

“Early evidence came in 1978, when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words that they’d written down compared to words they’d merely read. Writing won out. The people who wrote words remembered them better than those who’d only read them- probably because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading and effort increases memorability.”(Thompson 57)

With this study, you can conclude that from Thompsons text the positive effects of writing on memory and the increased amount of writing in our everyday lives due to the internet, the internet proves to have a positive impact on our memory. Despite the fact that the internet has such a large negative effect on our sense of concentration and focus, it has the potential to have a positive effect on our sense of memory through the deeper writing found in blogs and forums. In an article written by Howard Rheingold titled “Attention Literacy”, he addresses how the internet has had a negative correlation on the brain, but he states how our attention is something that can always be improved and with the correct discipline, the internet could potentially be a vital resource. He discusses how “Multitasking, or "continuous partial attention"... are not necessarily bad alternatives to focused attention”(Rheingold 1), this is the case as long as our attention is in the right place and not distracted by social media sites.

Beginning in the early 1990’s the Internet has been making constant improvements to fix glitches, bugs and to overall improve its performance, with this came social media and a wide variety of websites for our own amusement and entertainment. In recent years many people debate whether or not the Internet has more positive or negative effects on human cognitive functions. As a student living in the golden age of technology and the Internet, I find myself using the Internet more often as I have to do homework, write papers and research online. Although I do the majority of my schoolwork online, it is not the primary use of my computer. Since the 7th grade I have been a semi-active user of the internet and have always had the social media accounts for the newest websites. For the majority of my life I have been using the internet for both business and pleasure and with this I feel as though I am not at the top of my mental capacity. Just as the Internet has ads and popups, my brain constantly has new ideas and thoughts coming up that it is nearly impossible to focus on one thing sometimes. This can make doing homework challenging when I am one tab away from seeing what parties are going or go and watch funny videos on Youtube.

Although  the Internet has brought so many forms of distractions it has also brought with it more knowledge than any one human can retain. The age of the internet has brought an idea of constant knowledge of what is going on around the world, you can now open up your phone and find out what your friends are doing or even learn about what is going on in any country around the world via news websites and even on social media. There is one tool that has proven to be most useful part of the internet, the power of everlasting knowledge. Despite one of the main forms of pleasure on the internet is social media, websites such as Wikipedia has introduced the ability to nearly instantly find out information about essentially anything you want to know. I find myself going on wikipedia for elongated periods of time just reading about people, places and events in history. This has mainly only shown benefits in normal conversation as I have the ability to recall odd facts that happen to relate to the topic of the conversation.

With my own observations of how the Internet has impacted my life and how it is connected to my skills in reading and writing, I have come to believe that the internet has more negatives than it has positives. Despite the Internet providing the tools to learn about practically anything, with this great power comes great responsibility. Responsibility being the ability to retain your sense of focus and not fall to the depths of social media. Social Media has brought misuse to the internet by plaguing the good intentions that Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf had in mind when birthing the internet.
Just by observing how I manage my time while on the internet doing schoolwork compared to my time management while doing work on paper. Although the Internet is predominantly composed of informative sites, online shopping to save time in your everyday life and educational sites to help users of all ages in assisting them comprehend practically any task, the power of social media blankets the shine of the useful resources of the internet.

Through analyzing the works of both Clive Thompson and Nicholas Carr in great depth and with my own personal experiences, the internet has had a large unfavorable effect on the way we read and write. This unfavorable effect is due to the internet being filled with distractions and it presents the information in a new way that is much different than the traditional way of learning as the internet gives information as fast as you can process it. While information is being presented in this way it causes the brain to work in that way while reading and this causes complications and leads to attention deficiency. Despite the internet bringing up many negative aspects, the internet shows much promise and with the precise discipline and attention the internet could potentially be a very valuable resource as it is basically the largest book of information in the world.



Works Cited:

Harris, Sarah. "Too Much Internet Use 'Can Damage Teenagers' Brains'" Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2014.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2015196/Too-internet-use-damage-teenagers-brains.html

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 July 2008. Web. 02 Dec. 2014.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/

Thompson, Clive. "Public Thinking." Smarter than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. N.p.: Penguin Group, 2013. 45-69. Print.

Rheingold, Howard. "Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies (EDUCAUSE Review) | EDUCAUSE.edu." Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies. Educause Review Online, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2014.

http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/attention-and-other-21st-century-social-media-literacies&gt

Final Paper Rough Draft

Brett Stinson
Professor Werry
RWS 100
12/4/14

Final Paper

The evolution of the internet has brought so many new revolutionary aspects into what we think of writing and reading. It has opened up so many new forms of writing, such as social media and instant messaging, and even advance previous forms or writing to make them more appealing by allowing easy access to a larger audience.  Ever since the creation of the first web page there has been such a large leap for the evolution of the internet. Although the internet has become such a revolution in technology, there has been a debate as to whether the Internet has brought more good or more bad. Clive Thompson and Nicholas Carr wrote the articles “Public Thinking” and “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” respectively, where the both discuss the argument of whether the internet has had an impact on our brains ability to function correctly. Both authors take very different sides in this argument as one discusses how the internet is an overall beneficial resource for reading and writing, while the other takes the side that the internet is an overall harmful resource for reading and writing. Despite both authors presenting very strong cases for the argument, I believe that the internet has become harmful to the way humans read and write. I came into the world as the massive internet landslide was reaching its peak and I have been immersed in the world of technology ever since. From this perspective I will present my own ideas on why the internet is so harmful to the way humans read and write and I will support my ideas with other texts and evidence.
Although the Internet has brought along a massive surge of new technology with it, many negative side effects have started to be noticed by many and have stirred up a very large debate. In 2008 an article was published onto The Atlantic webpage by writer Nicholas Carr entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, Carr examines how the internet has created a decline in our everyday cognitive functions and has damaged our skills in reading and writing. He discusses mainly how the internet has deteriorated our mind and our level of concentration, this is a side effect from the constant jumping from page to page on the internet. While discussing this side effect of prolonged internet use, he brings up this comparison to the past and how media has retained the same negative side effects even before the internet has come into existence,
As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles (Carr 2).
By comparing how the deteriorated concentration has been a side effect long before the internet became a large everyday tool, Carr has developed a case that even though media has always had this effect on the mind, the new constant role of the internet in our everyday lives has intensified the effects on the brain. Carr has experienced these very effects first hand in his anecdote at the beginning of his article where he makes a comparison of how the internet is “tinkering with [his] brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory”(Carr 1), he compares this the the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, where the supercomputer HAL is having his brain destroyed by the main character David Bowman. Carr is supported by a British writer by the name of Sarah Harris in her article “Too much internet use 'can damage teenagers' brains”, where she analyzes how prolonged use of the internet has created an increase in the amount of grey matter in our brains and how this “could affect their concentration and memory, as well as their ability to make decisions and set goals. It could also reduce their inhibitions and lead to ‘inappropriate’ behaviour”(Harris 1). She supports this claim with a study conducted by neuroscientists where they MRI’s to look at the difference in brain matter between those who use the internet very frequently compared to those who rarely use the internet. The teenagers that use the internet less had a substantial drop in the amount of grey matter evident in the brain while those who use it frequently have a large amount that could be the cause of the deteriorated level of concentration found by many avid internet users.
Although the internet has created a decline in our ability to concentrate, the internet also has some positive contributions to our sense of focus and concentration. In the chapter “Public Thinking” by Clive Thompson in his book Smarter Than You Think, he discusses how the internet has brought along more good than bad and the internet has provoked many to partake in actively writing in a community and discussing everyday topics over writing. One main topic he discusses in his text is what is known as the “Audience Effect”, this is the effect where the presentation of a larger audience will drive the writer to produce a more quality piece of work than if they had not had an audience at all, and this large audience is easily established in the forms of blogs and forums on web pages. Later on in his article he goes on to discuss how increased writing can improve the quality of memory with a early cognitive study,
“Early evidence came in 1978, when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words that they’d written down compared to words they’d merely read. Writing won out. The people who wrote words remembered them better than those who’d only read them- probably because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading and effort increases memorability.”(Thompson 57)
With this study, you can conclude that from Thompsons text the positive effects of writing on memory and the increased amount of writing in our everyday lives due to the internet, the internet proves to have a positive impact on our memory. Despite the fact that the internet has such a large negative effect on our sense of concentration and focus, it has the potential to have a positive effect on our sense of memory through the deeper writing found in blogs and forums. In an article written by Howard Rheingold titled “Attention Literacy”, he addresses how the internet has had a negative correlation on the brain, but he states how our attention is something that can always be improved and with the correct discipline, the internet could potentially be a vital resource. He discusses how “Multitasking, or "continuous partial attention"... are not necessarily bad alternatives to focused attention”(Rheingold 1), this is the case as long as our attention is in the right place and not distracted by social media sites.
Beginning in the early 1990’s the Internet has been making constant improvements to fix glitches, bugs and to overall improve its performance, with this came social media and a wide variety of websites for our own amusement and entertainment. In recent years many people debate whether or not the Internet has more positive or negative effects on human cognitive functions. As a student living in the golden age of technology and the Internet, I find myself using the Internet more often as I have to do homework, write papers and research online. Although I do the majority of my schoolwork online, it is not the primary use of my computer. Since the 7th grade I have been a semi-active user of the internet and have always had the social media accounts for the newest websites. For the majority of my life I have been using the internet for both business and pleasure and with this I feel as though I am not at the top of my mental capacity. Just as the Internet has ads and popups, my brain constantly has new ideas and thoughts coming up that it is nearly impossible to focus on one thing sometimes. This can make doing homework challenging when I am one tab away from seeing what parties are going or go and watch funny videos on Youtube.
Although  the Internet has brought so many forms of distractions it has also brought with it more knowledge than any one human can retain. The age of the internet has brought an idea of constant knowledge of what is going on around the world, you can now open up your phone and find out what your friends are doing or even learn about what is going on in any country around the world via news websites and even on social media. There is one tool that has proven to be most useful part of the internet, the power of everlasting knowledge. Despite one of the main forms of pleasure on the internet is social media, websites such as Wikipedia has introduced the ability to nearly instantly find out information about essentially anything you want to know. I find myself going on wikipedia for elongated periods of time just reading about people, places and events in history. This has mainly only shown benefits in normal conversation as I have the ability to recall odd facts that happen to relate to the topic of the conversation.
With my own observations of how the Internet has impacted my life and how it is connected to my skills in reading and writing, I have come to believe that the internet has more negatives than it has positives. Despite the Internet providing the tools to learn about practically anything, with this great power comes great responsibility. Responsibility being the ability to retain your sense of focus and not fall to the depths of social media. Social Media has brought misuse to the internet by plaguing the good intentions that Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf had in mind when birthing the internet. Just by observing how I manage my time while on the internet doing schoolwork compared to my time management while doing work on paper. Although the Internet is predominantly composed of informative sites, online shopping to save time in your everyday life and educational sites to help users of all ages in assisting them comprehend practically any task, the power of social media blankets the shine of the useful resources of the internet.
Through analyzing the works of both Clive Thompson and Nicholas Carr in great depth and with my own personal experiences, the internet has had a large unfavorable effect on the way we read and write. This unfavorable effect is due to the internet being filled with distractions and it presents the information in a new way that is much different than the traditional way of learning as the internet gives information as fast as you can process it. While information is being presented in this way it causes the brain to work in that way while reading and this causes complications and leads to attention deficiency. Despite the internet bringing up many negative aspects, the internet shows much promise and with the precise discipline and attention the internet could potentially be a very valuable resource as it is basically the largest book of information in the world.

Final Paper Outline Reviewed

Brett Stinson

Professor Werry

RWS 100

11/20/14

Essay 4 Outline

Intro:

Discusses the debate of whether the internet has more benefits or disadvantages and introduces my own viewpoint on how the internet is a hinderance to humankind. I also give a brief introduction of myself to establish credibility for my anecdote later on.

Body Paragraph 1:

This first body paragraph establishes the claim that the internet has negative side effects on the brain by providing a text from Nicholas Carr and supporting it with a text by Sarah Harris.I organize my text by providing my own side first, then go into the counteragrument so that I leave no error in my argument.

Claim 1:

“As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles”(Carr 2)

Subclaim 1:

Nicholas Carr addresses how even in the 1960s before the internet was in existence, media had the same effect as it does today in spite of the major evolution of media. He states that it deteriorates your concentration and contemplation which is one of the worst side effects of prolonged Internet use.

Sources:

Harris, Sarah. "Too Much Internet Use 'Can Damage Teenagers' Brains'" Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2014.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2015196/Too-internet-use-damage-teenagers-brains.html

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 July 2008. Web. 02 Dec. 2014.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/

How Sources Support:

Using these sources would help support my argument by providing several cases to support the argument that the Internet is deteriorating the brain and its cognitive functions. The article from Daily Mail, which is a United Kingdom online newspaper, provides a medical study showing that patients that use the internet for long periods of time begin to grow more grey matter in the brain. This matter is shown to cause damage to many cognitive functions. Along with the use of Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” where he argues various aspects of how the Internet has many negative effects on the brain.

Body Paragraph 2:

This paragraph will serve as my address to the counterargument and I will provide a claim made by Clive Thompson on the possible benefits, then I will respond with a text by Howard Rheingold in which he responds to the claim with a counter argument and  falsify the claim made by Thompson.

Claim 2:

“Early evidence came in 1978, when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words that they’d written down compared to words they’d merely read. Writing won out. The people who wrote words remembered them better than those who’d only read them- probably because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading and effort increases memorability.”(Thompson 57)

Subclaim:

Clive Thompson uses this study to support his statement that the internet has allowed people to write on the internet where people are subject to what is known as the “Audience Effect”. This brings appeal to all who have access to the internet and aspire to get their ideas out where they could potentially viewed by millions.

Sources:

Thompson, Clive. "Public Thinking." Smarter than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. N.p.: Penguin Group, 2013. 45-69. Print.

Rheingold, Howard. "Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies (EDUCAUSE Review) | EDUCAUSE.edu." Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies. Educause Review Online, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2014.
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/attention-and-other-21st-century-social-media-literacies&gt

How Sources Support:

The source of Clive Thomson provides the main claim that the internet improves cognitive functions as you write more than you would if you had not had access to an audience such as the one the Internet provides. The article written by Rheingold will be able to complicate the main claim that Thompson produces. He does this by stating how the Internet is full of positives but we must be able to resist the strong force of distraction, and if we overcome this then we can harness all of the positives of the Internet while escaping the reach of the negatives.

Body Paragraph 3:

This is where I will place my anecdote after I have discussed both sides with the argument being skewed in favor of the internet being a harmful source.

Conclusion:

Here I will revisit the main argument that I was attempting to validate and I will summarize the main points I made and show that the Internet has become a harmful resource to the human mind.

Essay 4 Outline

Brett Stinson
Professor Werry
RWS 100
11/20/14
Essay 4 Outline

Claim 1:

“As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles”(Carr 2)

Subclaim 1:

Nicholas Carr addresses how even in the 1960s before the internet was in existence, media had the same effect as it does today in spite of the major evolution of media. He states that it deteriorates your concentration and contemplation which is one of the worst side effects of prolonged Internet use.

Sources:

Harris, Sarah. "Too Much Internet Use 'can Damage Teenagers' Brains'" Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2014.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2015196/Too-internet-use-damage-teenagers-brains.html

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 July 2008. Web. 02 Dec. 2014.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/

How Sources Support:

Using these sources would help support my argument by providing several cases to support the argument that the Internet is deteriorating the brain and its cognitive functions. The article from Daily Mail, which is a United Kingdom online newspaper, provides a medical study showing that patients that use the internet for long periods of time begin to grow more grey matter in the brain. This matter is shown to cause damage to many cognitive functions. Along with the use of Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” where he argues various aspects of how the Internet has many negative effects on the brain.



Claim 2:

“Early evidence came in 1978, when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words that they’d written down compared to words they’d merely read. Writing won out. The people who wrote words remembered them better than those who’d only read them- probably because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading and effort increases memorability.”(Thompson 57)

Subclaim:

Clive Thompson uses this study to support his statement that the internet has allowed people to write on the internet where people are subject to what is known as the “Audience Effect”. This brings appeal to all who have access to the internet and aspire to get their ideas out where they could potentially viewed by millions.

Sources:

Thompson, Clive. "Public Thinking." Smarter than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better. N.p.: Penguin Group, 2013. 45-69. Print.

Rheingold, Howard. "Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies (EDUCAUSE Review) | EDUCAUSE.edu." Attention, and Other 21st-Century Social Media Literacies. Educause Review Online, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2014.
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/attention-and-other-21st-century-social-media-literacies&gt

How Sources Support:

The source of Clive Thomson provides the main claim that the internet improves cognitive functions as you write more than you would if you had not had access to an audience such as the one the Internet provides. The article written by Rheingold will be able to complicate the main claim that Thompson produces. He does this by stating how the Internet is full of positives but we must be able to resist the strong force of distraction, and if we overcome this then we can harness all of the positives of the Internet while escaping the reach of the negatives.

Anecdote

Brett Stinson

Professor Werry

RWS 100

11/20/14

Beginning in the early 1990’s the Internet has been making constant improvements to fix glitches, bugs and to overall improve its performance, with this came social media and a wide variety of websites for our own amusement and entertainment. In recent years many people debate whether or not the Internet has more positive or negative effects on human cognitive functions. As a student living in the golden age of technology and the Internet, I find myself using the Internet more often as I have to do homework, write papers and research online. Although I do the majority of my schoolwork online, it is not the primary use of my computer. Since the 7th grade I have been a semi-active user of the internet and have always had the social media accounts for the newest websites. For the majority of my life I have been using the internet for both business and pleasure and with this I feel as though I am not at the top of my mental capacity. Just as the Internet has ads and popups, my brain constantly has new ideas and thoughts coming up that it is nearly impossible to focus on one thing sometimes. This can make doing homework challenging when I am one tab away from seeing what parties are going or go and watch funny videos on Youtube.

Although  the Internet has brought so many forms of distractions it has also brought with it more knowledge than any one human can retain. The age of the internet has brought an idea of constant knowledge of what is going on around the world, you can now open up your phone and find out what your friends are doing or even learn about what is going on in any country around the world via news websites and even on social media. There is one tool that has proven to be most useful part of the internet, the power of everlasting knowledge. Despite one of the main forms of pleasure on the internet is social media, websites such as Wikipedia has introduced the ability to nearly instantly find out information about essentially anything you want to know. I find myself going on wikipedia for elongated periods of time just reading about people, places and events in history. This has mainly only shown benefits in normal conversation as I have the ability to recall odd facts that happen to relate to the topic of the conversation.

With my own observations of how the Internet has impacted my life and how it is connected to my skills in reading and writing, I have come to believe that the internet has more negatives than it has positives. Despite the Internet providing the tools to learn about practically anything, with this great power comes great responsibility. Responsibility being the ability to retain your sense of focus and not fall to the depths of social media. Social Media has brought misuse to the internet by plaguing the good intentions that Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf had in mind when birthing the internet. Just by observing how I manage my time while on the internet doing schoolwork compared to my time management while doing work on paper. Although the Internet is predominantly composed of informative sites, online shopping to save time in your everyday life and educational sites to help users of all ages in assisting them comprehend practically any task, the power of social media blankets the shine of the useful resources of the internet.

Attention Literacy

Brett Stinson

Professor Werry

RWS 100

November 18, 2014

Attention Literacy

In the article “Attention Literacy” by Howard Rheingold he presents an argument on the changing internet and how is has emerged as a large force on how society interacts. Although he presents this argument on the internet, he takes neither side and states that it has both positives and negatives and we must take advantage of it as it can turn to be very useful. One of his most important points, which is also included in the title, is the nature of Attention as it has been deteriorated by the newer and faster Internet that is always changing to make itself that much better. Although he discusses how the internet has had a negative impact, it isn’t the most important as attention is something that can be improved and doesn’t always stay the same. So if we are able to control our attention and overcome distractions then it isn’t a major factor. Overall, Rheingold views the internet as a positive and that the negatives are all self controlled and each individual has the power to make the internet a positive.

Carr Final Paper

Brett Stinson 
RWS 100 
Professor Werry

Is Google Making Us Stupid

The past century has provided society with a massive technological landslide in the form of cell phones, radios and what many describe as the leading advancement of our civilization, the Internet. After the initial public release of the Internet, everyday citizens have been provided access to the largest library in the world known as the World Wide Web. Although the Internet started out as a source that rarely provided success with slow and glitchy servers, and very few had a viable source of access, it awed the public audience as it was something that no one could have ever imagined coming into existence. Today the Internet is bustling with unbelievably high speeds and more websites than you could visit in a lifetime.  Sites range from how to bake a cake to how to solve quantum mechanics.  The possibilities of the Internet are endless. Although the internet has created a gold brick road leading to endless answers, it has stirred up great controversy. In 2008 the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” was written by Nicholas Carr, he discusses the worldwide debate on whether the internet is doing more good for the public or is it dimming us down. Carrs main argument is that the internet has created a negative effect on the human brain as it has caused it to be always wanting more information more rapidly and it causes the mind to always become distracted and thinking about other things. He states how as a writer where most of his information that he writes about comes from sources that he reads, using the internet has both had a positive and negative effects but he believes that the negatives far outweigh the positives. In this paper I will explore the rhetorical strategies implemented in Carr's argument and discuss whether he has created a persuasive argument.
One of the most efficient tools implemented by Carr is the usage of Analogies, the main one being the references often made to the film 2001: A Space Odyssey mainly during the scene where David Bowman is disassembling the artificial intelligence known as HAL. He uses this scene as a comparison to how the internet is "tinkering with [his] brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory"(Carr 1). In this analogy, Carr is describing how he is similarly suffering the same cognitive effects as he attempts to immerse himself in longer texts but cannot succeed. This comparison provides a good base for his argument, especially for those who have viewed the film, as it provides pathos as some find themselves in the same predicament that HAL and Carr are in. He uses this strategy in a persuasive manner as he wants his audience to gain a visualization of what the internet is physically doing to our brains and imagining our own brain as some super computer did this precisely. The specific comparison not only provided a stable emotional connection between the reader and the subject Carr is addressing, but it also provided a connection between the movie as a whole. It provides a larger connection as HAL in the film is controlling the passengers on the spacecraft the same way that the internet is controlling and manipulating the users. For those that have seen the film this connection is much stronger but for those who haven’t it is still able to imprint the idea of the internet picking apart at your brain so you will remember. By utilizing the techniques of Analogies that many can compare to allows the reader to immerse themselves in a deeper level of the argument as it provides them with a sense of pathos.
One of the strongest tools used by Carr that gives his argument a chance against those who oppose is the use of prolepsis. Prolepsis is a very strong tool when writing a persuasive piece as it takes the counterarguments and addresses them in his favor before anyone can retaliate against his own work. This is a very important tool also because Carr is arguing against the internet which most people find to be beneficial, such as a professor from Stanford, who conducted a study to see the differences betweens students writing from the 1980’s to her current students in the early 2000’s, who says “They’re writing so much more than students before them ever did. It’s stunning”(Thompson 67). So Carr is holding onto the short end of the stick in his argument and will need to find as many ways to prevent himself from being argued against. One key points in Carr’s article is when he states:
“Most of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even prescient.” But, again, the doomsayers were unable to imagine the myriad blessings that the printed word would deliver.(Carr 6)
He argues that past intellectuals have criticized the new inventions such as the printing press and the introduction of writing but in the end, these inventions proved to have a positive impact on society. This section of his argument is key as it addresses his audience directly and states that he is a man such as Plato and Squarciafico who criticize these new glorious inventions.  And while they were right about what they had stated, the wonders overcame the worries. This was a very persuasive section as it had turned away his criticizers, he is saying that he doesn’t believe that in the end the internet won't come out to be this glorious innovation, but instead he is just saying that he has many worries about what the internet will do to our civilization in the short run.
Not only does Carr just disassemble all counterarguments to help show that he is aware of what others might counter argue, but he also presents that he is a credible source himself as he uses ethos. Many writers seem to lack any credibility at all in the topic they are writing about and it gives the reader disbelief in what the writer is saying, but Carr shows that he himself has been affected by this inability to read and write the same way. He begins this article with ethos to immediately give himself credibility by stating, “For more than a decade now,I’ve been spending a lot of time online surfing and searching” and he also states the results of this, “Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy” (Carr 1).  By stating this he displays that he has a sense for what he is talking about and the way he states it makes it prevalent that this shorter reading span has only been occurring since his prolonged usage of the internet and that it hasn’t always been a part of his life. In doing this he has also extended his claim by discerning the view that this lack of focus due to technology has only affected the youth and that it is not something that one can be diagnosed with but instead they are born into this new era where technology surrounds them and it is all that is familiar. but it proves that even the elder generations can adopt this symptom and it is harmful. So in this statement he provides the audience with credibility also while extending his claim even farther.
Throughout Carr’s paper he is able to construct the argument that questions whether the Internet is dulling our minds down and in a sense making us “stupid”. He argues this by presenting a claim and then backing it with concrete evidence making it very persuasive in its own sense but he also fills his paper with more persuasive strategies that make it nearly impossible for someone to present him with a counter argument or to challenge his claims. The strategies he uses to do this are prolepsis, pathos and ethos. One strategy that really stood out what prolepsis as it is such a basic tool for persuasive arguments but many writers still neglect it although it is one of the strongest strategies in developing an argument. By using a mixture of these strategies along with presenting a claim backed with solid evidence, Carr has constructed a very persuasive paper