You guys
have probably started writing your blogs or doing your homework, and somehow
through searches and searches, have come to reading this blog. Or, you may be
searching for your research topics in one tab, and chatting with your facebook
friends in another. Whether or not this multitasking is intentional, we could
all say in one voice that distractions through the Internet are inevitable.
For example,
I know that I have to finish writing this blog within the next few hours, but I
have this impulse to watch a new episode of a drama that just came out today. I cannot
finish this homework unless I satisfy my urge, and thus start watching my
favorite drama. But after about 20 minutes into it, I start to panic a little
after realizing how much more I have to write. I then go back to my blog, write
three more sentences, and go back to my enjoyment again. According to Gary Small and Gigi Vorgan’s “Meet
Your iBrain: How Technology Changes the Way We Think,” this continuous partial
attention will sooner or later build up stress in our brains and eventually destroy
our “ego and sense of self-worth.” This also means that the ability of our hippocampus,
which “allows us to learn and remember new information,” subsides (Small and
Vorgan 147). It is thought that the Internet and all the other digital devices is
the cause for this problem.
But is the
digital age that we live in really the problem? Is Internet really doing us
wrong than doing us good? If you think about all the benefits that the Internet
provides us, like enabling us to digitally connect and communicate with one
another and to google map uncertain destinations, the advantages of the
Internet outdo the disadvantages of the Internet. As shown in Friedman’s “Come
the Revolution,” students are now able to earn a degree through online courses
offered by professors from some of the top universities in America for not even
one percent of the normal tuition money that we pay while physically attending
college. Although we may be using our laptops in class to watch YouTube videos or
update our Facebook profiles, there are still many people out there who are
actually willing to learn and work. Snyder states in his essay that the
Internet might be “distracting America’s future workforce” from making our
economy any more prosperous, but this cannot be talking about every single
person out there. There are people who work day and night; evidence is provided
by the fact that America is still one of the most affluent countries in the
world.
Without the
Internet there would be no online classes or google searching. We like to blame
the Internet for our distractions when, in fact, we are our own distractions.
Some people like myself just naturally cannot concentrate on one subject. If we had no Internet, we would still be urged to pass notes to friends in class
or go shopping with friends instead of finishing up homework. Living in a
digital age therefore gives us more opportunities to prosper than to languish.
Grace,
ReplyDeleteOK, good as far as it goes. But can the benefits and the detriments of digital media usage merely be put on a scale and weighed so as to see whether its benefits outweigh its detriments? Shouldn't we rather actually evaluate the claims about what exactly is being jeopardized or lost? Carr, for example, is suggesting that nothing less than one of the major hallmarks of western culture is being threatened with extinction -- the depth of the individual subject. Is this the case? If not, why not? If so, is it irreversible? Can Internet use be supplemented in some way so as to preclude this possible eventuality?