The Place of Technology Pollens on the roles technologies have assumed In our lives vary greatly between individuals, but all most often question the potential effects it has on our brains and their functions. Some, like the author Nicholas Carr, see the change as a loss rather than a gain, and others, such as the Glass explorer Gary Shattering, are welcoming the change with open arms. Carr elaborates on his technological concerns in great detail in his 2008 article “Is Google Making us Stupid? When he reveals personal realizations, references to research, scientific standpoints, as well as his win carefully constructed and researched theories. He gives a voice to concerns, such as the qualitative differences in how we think, read, and learn that we otherwise remain subconsciously unaware of. Shattering, however, has adopted nearly an entirely different viewpoint on the developing role of technology in our lives. In his 2012 article “O. K Glass”, he makes it evident that he has become fascinated by the futurism related directly to technology, and continues to willingly Incorporate It Into his life.
Both of these writers meet at the Intersection off largely controversial argument between literacy and tech?not only where we’re heading, but where we already are. Likewise, as the advancement of technology continues to occur, both writers suggest that whether it becomes an advantage or a disadvantage is purely dependent upon the way in which it is applied. In Nicholas Cars piece “Is Google Making Us Stupid”, he presents an argument several of us may not have considered prior to reading the article.
He begins by explaining how his own mind has become more Irregular since his use of technology: “l get fidgety, lose the thread, begin Titlist 2 looking for something else to ad’ (Carr, 1), he says. The amount of information we have access to via technology is limitless, and our consumption of it, even greater. Carr then attempts to explain why this is happening in the first place by introducing a concept called “Intellectual technologies” (Carr, 4), meaning that we essentially personify the technology we possess. He uses the mechanical clock as an example of this by saying “… Let] helped create the belief in an Independent world of mathematically measurable sequences…. In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock” (Carr, 4). Carr goes on to give a very well researched account of how text on the internet is structured to make the browsing experience fast, efficient, and enhanced for profit. He then wraps up the argument by describing the new idea of considering the mind as more machine-like than human, and what we are losing In the shift.
He reassures the audience that it is acceptable to be “skeptical of [his] skepticism” (Carr, 7), but does leave the piece on a troubling note by revisiting the 2001 : A Space Odyssey he uses to open the article. He warns of the dangers we face in adapting to a world almost entirely mediated by technology, and suggests that internet immersion has In Gary Sweetheart’s article “O. K Glass”, he tells about his experience as one of the initial 100 New Yorkers chosen to experiment with a newborn technology called Google Glass.
He was interested in experiencing Google Glass because his new novel Super Sad True Love Story deals with individuals operating an exceptionally similar technology, and he wanted to familiarize himself with it. Throughout his article he not only shares facts of his encounter with Google Glass, but also continues to assure the audience that technology can be used to promote improvement of knowledge and success. As he states in the midst of introducing his novel Super Titlist 3 Sad True Love Story, “… L was more Eunice than Ellen, an occasional rather than a voracious reader, curator of my life rather than a participant… (Shattering, 4), Shattering implements the use of technology as a way to broaden our intelligence and our bank of information rather than dampen it. He acknowledges that with each technological advance there is a loss, yet instead of taking a negative standpoint, he optimistically immerses himself in technology and accepts the resulting change not only in society, but also in himself. As Shattering acknowledges reasonably early in the reporting of his interactions with Google Glass, we want not only to be entertained, but to understand everything going on around us.
As Shattering demonstrates during his visit with his psychoanalyst: “The man stops talking about his dream. Psychoanalytic silence ensues. Boredom. The man [Shattering] flicks his finger against the touch pad of his glasses. The Aerofoil flight to Havana is still delayed. There are three places to eat in this neighborhood… (Shattering, 3), no longer are we expected to know what is going on in our neighborhoods or even our own households, but all current events across the world.
Our daily lives have become increasingly busy and occupied, making it more difficult to stay connected with the world, our families, friends, and even do well in school without access to technology. Our youth are being given cell phones at earlier ages so parents can ensure their safety in an emergency, acquiring goods online is becoming more popular so we can save time and fuel, school cancellations are being sent via text message to eliminate he hassle of waking up earlier than our normal routine. These are Just a few of our daily activities that are made easier by the assistance of technology.
The need for information provided directly and quickly to us has increased dramatically, and we owe it to technology for making that information simply and easily accessible. From smartness to the internet, calculators to tablets, cars to satellites, Titlist 4 we are submerged in valuable technological advances that make our lives simpler as well as making us more efficient in executing otherwise complicated tasks. Shattering, along with countless others, would agree that technology is continually changing ourselves and the world surrounding us; changing with it is nearly inescapable.
Both of these articles address the role of technology in today’s society, yet both express incredibly different perspectives on the positive and/or negative effects it casts upon us. Both pose very considerable arguments, yet still allow the reader to establish their own conclusion. “Is Google Making Us Stupid? ” closes with the reference to the playwright 2001 : A Space Odyssey by directly attacking the reader’s motions with the strange and chilling comparison of technology to a nearly optimistically with Sweetheart’s reference to the short story “Bloodline” by Octavia Butler.
He correlates Butler’s story with his thoughts of technology’s function in society when he states: “Today, when I think of our relationship with technology, I cannot help but think of human and Italic, the latter’s insect limbs wrapped around the formers warm-blooded trunk, about to hatch something new’ (Shattering, 1 1), leaving the audience to associate their individual lives to his dreadfully eye opening point. Not only do these authors express their competing standpoints, they also exhibit their distinct writing styles.
Carr conveys his beliefs and theories to the reader by revealing his own realizations about the changes technology has caused in his life, as well as references to significant research and others’ thoughts and opinions. He targets the rational thinking process of the audience by providing examples of research that produce results which are in line with the message he is attempting to convey, causing his article to be more scientifically appealing and Titlist 5 credible. Shattering, however, casually flows through his article simply ensconcing about his experience, his feelings, and interactions with the objects and individuals around him.
It’s not until the end that he makes his stance clear, that technology is indeed somewhat harmful, yet worth the sacrifice for the benefits and fascination we acquire from it when he references “Bloodline” with his eerie ending quote. He skillfully targets the audience’s emotions in the closing of the article, leaving the reference fresh in their minds as they construct views of their own. Consequently, both effectively yet diversely express their insights, shedding light on essential and opposing portions of the argument that otherwise remain overlooked.
Criticism and appraisal of technology’s role in our lives come virtually hand-in- hand. I do not believe it is the tools or the resources they offer that cause the positive or negative effects, but the self-discipline we chose to apply when utilizing them. Technology offers us services in medicine, education, communication, science, and countless other supplementary factors in our survival. It has undoubtedly offered us beneficial resources and has aided in making our day-to-day lives simpler as well as enjoyable.
Nevertheless, allowing ourselves to be submissive to technology and losing sight of our self-control when it comes to allowing it to do all of our critical and analytical thinking is when problems begin to develop. Yes, our granted immediate access to the endless information of the web undeniably formulates higher intelligence, but the key to that intelligence is making the decision to absorb that information intellectually. The role we allow technology to play in our lives is a decision entirely our own; the technology doesn’t come to us, we bring it to ourselves.
Whether you’re wary of where we’re headed, like Nicholas Carr, or becoming engaged and embracing where we are now, like Gary Shattering, the role technology plays in your life is entirely dependent upon the way you choose to apply it.