I work at a small web design company during the summer months, and I know firsthand just how powerful and systematic the Google engine is. On every site that is made, we use Google analytics to track what the visitor searched for to get on the page, how long they have been on every page, and which pages they have visited. From there we react accordingly, often to get the visitor to the product pages and checked out if that is what the nature of the business is. The end result is more organic than artificial to me. The web really reacts to what people do.
Reflecting on how we do things is very worthwhile. Just today I sat down and listened to a new album without doing anything else. It is such a better experience to focus on the music instead of a game, work, or some other project. The internet does amazing things for us, but sometimes at the cost of our thinking skills. It's important to recognize this-- maybe set some time aside to practice lateral thinking, or simply fixing a problem on our own. Too often people try to point the finger at something other than ourselves to explain what we are lacking. The argument may be logically sound, but it shouldn't sway anyone to do anything other than take responsibility and find a solution.
Based off of my claims in my first essay, I'll argue that Google makes us smarter, but more dependent. The internet is becoming more-so an attachment to our own intelligence, turning us into a kind human cyborg. We live and see things differently because of it, and the favorably of it is for each individual to judge. For me, the benefits outweigh the negative consequences. The only thing I fear is where the road will take us in the effect of Google's entry into the smart phone market, and the ramifications of net neutrality. The best thing to do is see the picture clearly, instead of being blinded by fear and only sensing futility and dread.
Side note: The Nietzche reference in the article was very cool-- I knew there was skepticism about his latest writing with the declining of his health and his sister's influence, but I never knew about his change to the typewriter. I would dismiss any changes in his style simply on his unstable mental condition alone.
Interesting - your background gives you a lot of direct insight into this issue, Mike. I think you're right that the web is wholly organic, more reactive than proactive, but I also think the affordances and constraints of a given technology encourage a particular kind of thinking. Maybe not in the physically mind-altering way that Carr suggests, but, as you say, the Net does "amazing things to us."
ReplyDeleteI like the Nietzche connection, too - but not many CW I & II students are familiar with him yet : )