Most people find that looking things up on the internet is distracting because you are already on the web so why not check YouTube for a funny video, or update your status on the social network. Is the advancing of our technology worth the making us dumber as Nicholas Carr states in his piece, "Is Google Making us Stupid?" We are live in a technologically civilized society.
Do we really need them? If you are a fast texter, do we really need a slow texter in our lives? My biggest pet peeve is slow texters. I admit that I was a slow texter before but I become a way faster texter less than a week unlike some people in my life where they take forever to text. People will love you more and appreciate you more if you text faster like less than a minute or two depending on what they wrote in the text.
This article is a direct response to Nick Carr’s argument. Maria Bustillos points out the flaws in his argument while supporting the fact that the Internet is indeed making us smarter and has been for years now. She believes that our brains are adapting to this new technology making it easier to obtain new knowledge. She states that the Internet is actually training our brains and making them stronger. By this she means allowing us to learn more in a shorter time frame.
Challengers article explains first that one of the easiest and most widely used signs of determining whether a person is capable of a job is his or her grammar. Misspelling and using poor grammatical mistakes can usually result in those letters of acceptance or applications being put into the “no” pile. The people who make these decisions usually relate them to the person having poor communication skills and someone who doesn’t pay attention to detail. Those seeking careers in writing and verbal communications are rare these days so people feel that it is not important to keep up with correct grammar. He talks a lot about this thing called nontraditional grammar which in younger generations the content of the message was far more important than the actual structure of what the message needed to say.
The essay “Why Games Are Good for You” written by Steven Johnson, was written not to say that video games are any better or worse than reading books but simply to clear the misconception that video games are a hindrance to people who play them when it comes to a normal education or learning the social skills people need to live a healthy life, Johnson believes nothing can replace the benefits of reading a book and the written word. However, video games appear to deliver information that would bore the average student in a way that entices them to learn more and keeps them interested in something ordinarily dull. Johnson believes it is because games give people visual rewards for our time spent that books or other forms of media aren’t able to deliver. For example, in certain games such as “SimCity” a user is encouraged to build a thriving metropolis, which teaches about taxes, population, economics and other subjects that must be considered in order to be progressive in the game. Video games require the player to memorize the information they take in, use their cognitive skills to solve a puzzle in the game or use their sensory skills to complete a task in addition to other benefits that haven’t been mentioned.
“The construction of gender stereotyping of both males and females in the media is based on outdated and unfounded beliefs and therefore has had and continues to have a detrimental impact on society.” (Yes!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUyfD1F7k1I Women are subjected to many stereotypes in today’s society. Movies and television shows suggest that all women are airheads, whose sole purpose in life is to please men and rear children. Magazines and other advertisements push photographs of very slender, over groomed and “sexy women” into our minds. Men’s magazines write articles on how to seduce a girl into sleeping with them.
Nicholas Carr is the author of the article “Is Goggle making us stupid? Google proponents say that it’s not, they say that we don’t have to use our memory as much as before. Thanks to Google we have more time now to daydream or brainstorm. Or that we can see Google as an huge external hard disk for our brain. Carr thinks that this is bullshit.
Rachel Reine English 101 Section 4 February 19, 2012 Internet Use in Teenagers In response to the new generation’s use of internet and lack of reading classic books, Amy Goldwasser defends the teenage reputation in her article “What’s the Matter with Kids Today?” Goldwasser speaks of how the internet has expanded kids’ minds when it comes to school and themselves, also how this generation has more access than older generations due to the internet. Goldwasser claims that teenagers spending time online is overall good for them because they do read and write. The content, however, is not strong enough for educational purposes. A blog post about how to curl hair or how to pass the perfect spiral is not giving them any educational value. Whereas reading the local newspaper or reading a classic novel like “The Great Gatsby” by F Scott Fitzgerald would provide a more intellectual purpose.
This statement may be true for Ban and her friends, but any other nineteen year-old college student who favors speed and effortlessness who pulls an all-nighter for a regular essay would easily wait until the last minute and do the same for a research paper. Ban still brings a tough argument in saying, "Learning how to take what is already known and enhance it in a unique way is an unparalleled learning experience that we should not lose." This ability can be utilized in oral presentations and other essays that do not allow students to use the internet to enhance the work for them. The research paper can be a very useful tool in analyzing student performances and understanding, but there is also plenty opportunity for students to take advantage of electronic information and avoid all of the hard but important work involved in this type of paper. There are other ways of evaluating a student's understanding of a topic that are equally
Brave New World Most people would think that advancement in the scientific fields, new discoveries, and advance technologies would be beneficial to society. Technology is particularly known to have contributed to making our lives easier. With technology such as remote control and the robotic vacuum cleaner, people just have to lift their finger and technology would take care of the rest. However, the Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, predicts a future overpowered by technology that strips people of their own thoughts and identity. Huxley is trying to warn readers that scientific advancements can be a threat to society.