ENG 111 - Essay 2 - Comparative Analysis (Final Draft)

Raymond Prescod
Professor - Dr. David R. DiSarro
ENG111 Critical Reading and Writing I
December 24, 2016

Looking at Carrs, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" and Thompsons, "Smarter

than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better" one may think
that there is absolutely no correlation in the writings. The contrast of the two titles allows
the reader to explore from two different points-of-view and at the same time realize that
there could be some correlation in the two opinions after all.
It took a while to determine which of the readings would work well together and
after much deliberation, I thought that choosing two titles that steered in a similar
direction would provide a challenging contrasting comparison over one that was more
complimentary. Carr suggested that the internet is weakening our capacity for the kind
of deep reading - once promoted by print media but has now fallen to shallower mode
of information processing. This information is obtained by way of quick browsing without
the thorough engagement of the mind allowing for any kind of sustained reflection or
analysis. (Carr, N. (2015). Alternately, in Thompsons Smarter than You Think, he
speaks of smart amateurs that could even outplay a supercomputer on the level of
Deep Blue. (Thompson C. 2013). The opposite approaches to human interaction with
the computer, was a perfect design for contrast.
Carr anecdotally cited his own experience explaining that his reading habits
changed due to the internet and was now experiencing difficulty focusing. He uses this

experience as evidence to conduct a study of online research habits through the

University College London. He had hypothesized that the modified reading habits
represented deeper changes in our cognitive architecture. Carr was able to look at the
negative impact and effectively delineate the many sides of this issue in order to get the
reader to see effects of the dependency of computers and technology have on our
brain; how our critical thinking skills and our attention spans have deteriorated. He gives
a very thorough researched account of how information from the internet has been
tailored to make the browsing experience faster, user friendly and profitable. He
elaborates by describing how the internet is geared toward making money for others.
He summed up his argument by describing the loss incurred as we migrate toward the
internet as our go-to information resource. He laments about the prospect of the mind
being seen as a computer and regrets the loss of deep reading and the stimulation that
comes along with it.
Thompson on the other hand looked at the interaction with computers and
determined that there was a benefit to us to maintain that interaction. He pondered
about the possibilities where instead of competing against each other, humans and
computers collaborated. He theorized that there could be some mutual benefit because
the strengths of each could complement each other where the computer would bring the
speed into the equation while the human would bring intuition and insight. Thompson
documented how all technological innovations have promoted repeated anxieties where
we panic that life will never be the same and yet we adapt. We learn how to use the
new tools and develop based on past successes. In his argument, he was able to
introduce the reader to a number of persons who we have augmented their minds in

innovative ways. He used experts and amateurs, specifically, a set of gamers who
solved a puzzle in one month that took HIV scientists a decade.
These comparisons may introduce the question of whether or not the population
chosen can be compared to each other. The selection includes a set of intellectuals who
play chess and could be considered anomalies whereas the other is represented by the
average person. Can you make a fair comparison in this case? I believe that it is a
matter of how much dedication and time that is available. One party uses the computer
to advance while the other depends on it for everything. By doing so, the brain becomes
more and more used.
So the question is - Is Google really making us stupid? The irony is that Google
gives us direct access to all genres of information and having that access we are
certainly smarter for it. This is not Carrs point of view as he was quick to point out the
problem - he cant focus on reading. He used the early part of the article to establish
credibility and examine the causes using mostly rhetorical proof. Smarter Than You
Think on the other hand isn't just about pioneers, nor is it simply concerned with the
world. It is about the future and how computers are improving our memory. He
addressed which tools are boosting our intelligence and which ones were hindering our
progress. Although the differences are clear in the two pieces, the similarities are also
present. In each case the computer is available as a tool and therefore like any tool it is
only as good as the user that is operating it. Having to read the pieces repeatedly in
order to understand and justify the comparison, allowed me to identify with each of the
writers perspective on the issue.

We have become slaves to our devices and are more inclined to skim across
emails and gather quick information so that we can move onto the next task. This
behavior is reminiscent of the youth today and perhaps Carr should not generalize but
pin point where the problem resonates. Ironically, the youth is our future, so Carr may
not be so far from the truth after all. There are some areas where the skeptic may refute
Carrs point of view. Yes, he shared the problem but he also gave a lot of rhetorical
evidence. He was able to satisfy the ethos by simply stating that hes not the only one
with the problem. He made mention of credentialed bloggers and his colleagues or
literary types who also struggle with this problem. He did also concede that it wasnt
really enough to convince everyone so he appealed to the logos and cited a few studies
of internet practices. This info suggested that there may be a possibility that internet
might be changing the way we think in hope that the reader would come to a logical
conclusion that he may have value in his position. Thompson actually also used a
number of techniques in an effort to convince the reader that people today are smarter
than people of the past as a result of technology. He reached out to both logos as well
as pathos and referenced many events as evidence in an effort to build his credibility.
Thompson successfully brings facts and hard evidence to the table in order to support
his ideas.
I am more inclined to agree with Thompson because technology is a tool and we
should use tools to enhance or aid in our development. We should remove the empty
dependency and embrace the privilege of having the information that we have at our
finger tips. Although each writer made valid points in their argument, anecdotally, the
use of the computer has enriched my brain power and increased my productivity. It is

easy to point out the differences in the opinions of the two authors but I choose to look
at this by taking both opinions and combining them as reinforcements to each other. I
have used Google and the computer to gain knowledge in a more expeditious manner.
Perhaps I have become more lazy in that since the information is a at my finger tips, I
can wait until the last second and still produce quality work as though I spent hours at a
library. I tend to not use my dictionary any longer because I can now right click and
learn a meaning of a word so yes I have become lazy but not brain dead. Mankind used
manual processes in the past which allowed us to process and think according to Carr
When the mechanical clock arrived, people began thinking of their brains as
operating like clockwork but he argues that the computer is different, that its effects on
cognition go much deeper than metaphor and he further states that we are
reprogramming the way we think. To this point is where I believe that it introduces
laziness. Technology affects people in different ways; those who do not want to learn
will focus on non-educational items while persons with zeal to learn will grow with the
technology.
Both authors approached their analysis with extreme bias and even after
thorough review of the pieces I could find no neutral opinion from either of them. I
strongly believe that when taking an objective approach to any topic a person should
weigh the pros and cons and then form an opinion. One area that both authors do agree
on whether explicit or implied is that the technology offers convenience. Carr states that
[un]like footnotes hyperlinks dont merely point to related works; they propel you
toward them; while Thompson believes The computer would bring the lightning-fastif

uncreativeability to analyze zillions of moves, while the human would bring intuition
and insight.
In the end, does technology and computers make us stupid? Maybe! Does it
open a door to be smarter? Perhaps! One thing that is sure is that technology offers us
a convenience that we are never going to be able to back away from. Like most
conveniences, technology has opened the door to a new dilemma (implied) laziness.

References

Carr, N. (2015). Is Google making us stupid? In G. Graff, C. Birkenstein, & R. Durst

(Eds.),

They say/I say: The moves that matter in academic writing, with

readings (3rd ed.,

pp. 313329). New York: Norton.

"New Nonfiction: Excerpt from Smarter Than You Think by Clive Thompson." Penguin
Press. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2016.