Feedback on my essay

[Apprentice]

In the first chapter Nicholas Carr’s exposé The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains, Carr writes that, as of late, he’s been noticing something finicky about his attention span. Reading six-page news articles – a rather petty task ten years ago – seems laborious, perhaps even impossible these days, he confesses. When attempting to locate what changed between then and now, Carr pinpoints one likely culprit: technology.

 

The Internet, the smartphone, and the computer have changed society in a way not witnessed since Johannes Gutenberg first unleashed the printing press upon Europe. That, too, had major consequences – consequences worth studying since the proliferation of written technology and electronic technology are parallel. In Plato’s “Phaedrus,” Socrates, in a discussion with his pupil, warns that heavy reliance on books will abolish the oral tradition that required heavy study and intense dedication to scholarly material. While unfailingly accessible access to others’ knowledge was unquestionably advantageous in many regards, it was also a threat to memory. Indeed, when Albert Einstein was questioned about a minute piece of trivia, he responded with (and I paraphrase), “And why should I know that? I could locate it anywhere in a book.”

 

Let’s move forward fifty years. Holding down an iPhone’s button will trigger Siri, who can dictate every crevice of your daily schedule. But our brains are more than capable of doing this themselves. In Joshua Foer’s Moonwalking with Einstein, Foer informs us that London taxi cab drivers must undergo the arduous process of learning hundreds of street names and thousands of city attractions’ locations. Although it is straining, the process, which takes multiple years, is humanly possible. If the human brain can accomplish this monumental task, certainly we too can remember our own agendas.

 

That said, proponents of technology claim that, thanks to computers’ legerdemain, we can offload petty materials from our brains and focus on ideas that truly matter. This argument enters fallacious territory. Indeed, how can we analyze reality without its building blocks? How can we dare to ponder great matters if we do not wish to ponder small matters? Furthermore, technology has stripped us of the patience to ponder great matters. Many of Japan’s current top-ten books are written entirely in a text-message argot called T9. According to their authors, the books are stripped of all depth and deep language, which are too “burdensome” and “get in the way of the story.”

 

Despite my disparaging tone, I must remind my reader that technology has benefits. Where the book solidified information, technology made it ubiquitous. Technology allows us to communicate at rapid-fire speeds with people in Tokyo, Moscow, and Paris – simultaneously. To disregard its benefits would be an intellectual crime, as technology is neither good nor evil, but, in the famous words of Nietzsche, in some gradation of rank.

 

Can you please give me feedback on my practice essay? The prompt is: does technology help or harm human thinking?

 

I apologize if this isn't in the correct space, or if this is against forum regulations. I'm new to this place.