"Is Google Making Us Stupid?"

I have often had the thought, especially when using actual books to do research, that Google is making us lazy as a society. Simply type in a phrase, question, or word you wish to search for, and within milliseconds you have billions of results at your fingertips. They are even organized so that the most relevant web pages are among the first results listed. This would be how Google is trying to "understand exactly what you mean and give you back exactly what you want." While this is not necessarily a bad thing--it is certainly a more efficient way to research than painstakingly combing through encyclopedias and nonfiction books looking for exactly the information you need, sometimes to no avail--it definitely does have its downfalls. For one thing, it is very easy to get distracted from what you are looking for, with the countless ads and hyperlinks on the sites you find. One minute you could be reading an article about the Korean War, and within three clicks you could be watching funny cat videos on YouTube.

There are more problems with the way our society reads and takes in information, however. As the article points out, "the deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle." We are unable to sit down and read and understand a long piece of writing because of the way our brains have been trained by the internet. We are too used to efficiency, so we cannot function without it. For some, "thinking has taken on a 'staccato' quality," because this is the way that people read and take in information nowadays. This could easily leave us unable to think on a deep level and form connections when we read, which would be detrimental to us. The ability to contemplate ideas and really think is invaluable, and it is something most people unfortunately take for granted. Forming these connections between ideas is how we help our brain to grow and stay healthy, and without that ability, our brains may deteriorate. The article states, "the human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and bigger hard drive." When I read this, it made me think about how we are letting our brains fall into disrepair, and if we just started to go back to the old ways and really think on a deeper level, we may be able to "update" our cranial computers.

I think the problem that Google is causing lies in our attitudes. We have simply become used to having the world at our fingertips online, and for this reason we are losing the need to think deeply. Our society is one "seeking maximum speed, maximum efficiency, and maximum output,"so that is what we have come to want. I wouldn't say this necessarily means we are "stupid," as Nicholas Carr suggests, it is just the way we are trained to think by our society. So, if anything, I think our society is making us stupid with its ideas and focuses, rather than Google. As the article states, "the ultimate search engine is something as smart as people--or smarter." This, to me, is an incredibly scary prospect. Is our society really so desperate that it wants a computer that is smarter than humans? I do, however, take umbrage to the wording of this. Can a computer ever really be "smarter" than a living, thinking human being? By what definition of "smart" is this measured? Sure, it may be able to pull up any piece of information when asked, or answer any question it is given, but can it really think? Does a computer have the ability to maintain a thought process and form a train of thought? The idea that "intelligence is the output of a mechanical process" is an outrageous one to me.

After thinking about this for a while, I realized that the basis of this entire article is incredibly ambiguous. Everyone defines smart in a different way, and therefore stupid is defined differently as well. So is there really any one way to measure the effects Google is having on our minds? Personally, I think it would be incredibly difficult, maybe even impossible, to do so.

So to answer the question "Is Google Making Us Stupid" may not be black-and-white. I think that, at the moment, we are letting it do just that. However, I think we are very able to reverse the effects Google is having on our brains. After all, if Google is making us stupid, we must have been smart at one time, right? We just need to reject the current ideas of what reading and research are, and transition back to the old ways of curling up with a good book for the night or scouring the stacks for information.

"The Ethics of Living Jim Crow"

This story struck me from the very first sentence. It talked about "how to live as a Negro," as if there is some sort of difference in the way blacks and whites should have to live. In this day and age, this idea is considered archaic and awful, but at this time, it was widely accepted as just the way things were. The story also talked about "Jim Crow wisdom--" but is any of this really "wise?" The separation of whites and black neighborhoods, the war games between black and white children, the inhumane treatment blacks receive: all of these are normal occurrences in this story, and none are questioned as being wrong. It is assumed that Richard is stupid ("'Whut yuh tryin' t' do, git smart?'"), savage, and rude, and is treated with nothing but disrespect and condescension. While this is obviously wrong, it happened for hundreds of years before anyone even so much as thought to make a change. Why is that? Even most blacks just accepted this treatment, as the characters in the story did. It makes me wonder: were they too scared to fight for change, or did they just truly believe that this treatment was what they deserved?

There was another sentence in this story that really took me aback: "even Negroes have those visions." Talking about the dream of working one's way up in a job, this sentence made me stop in my tracks. It really struck me that people could think that people of a certain color are not capable of having the same aspirations. It's as if people thought that blacks had different brains than whites, which is obviously absurd. It especially blew me away that this statement came from a black man. Were they so conditioned by whites that they felt as though they didn't deserve to have such thoughts? Or perhaps they had just always thought they had to "'stay in [their] place' if [they] want to keep working." Such dreams and aspirations could get blacks fired, or worse, killed. It's awful that these people had to live in fear like this, but unfortunately, it was a reality for them every day of their lives. 

As much we don't like to admit it, there is an inherent racism in every human being. We may treat everyone the same, but ask yourself this: do you ever judge someone of a different race or think about them as "sketchy" or "creepy" without anything more than a glance their way? I just feel, especially after reading this story, as though we really need to take responsibility for our thoughts and feelings and try to change them. Though we don't see this blatant discrimination anymore, that doesn't mean there is not still inequalities and injustices. We need to own up and really make a change--the first step would be instilling in our children that everyone is truly equal, not just "sort-of" equal.

"Talk of the Town"

John Updike and Susan Sontag chose to speak with very different perspectives about the same event in their “Talk of the Town” essays. Both were very honest and real, and they made me as a reader question my previous perceptions of the attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

Updike witnessed the attacks and the aftermath firsthand, and gives a very personal and emotion-wrought account of the day. At first, he viewed the events as “more curious than horrendous,” which seems like a natural human reaction. We as a species are an inherently curious one, and we always want to know more. That being said, Updike also noted that it seemed as if the events were all playing out on television, and frequently made references to this analogy, such as “the south tower dropped from the screen of our viewing.” He also made mention of the fact that the whole thing didn’t seem real to him. This point of view was interesting to me—was it just so surreal to watch that it truly didn’t seem as if it were actually happening? Or, was it just so terrible that people wished it weren’t happening? Another thing I was curious about as I read was how Updike felt when the reality did actually sink in—when he realized that this was a real event and he had actually witnessed all these people die. It must have been a very powerful feeling, one that I can’t even begin to fathom.

Another thing that intrigued me about Updike’s essay was his view on freedom. He called it “mankind’s elixir, even if a few turn it into poison.” This, to me, is tremendously powerful. We as Americans must choose how we use our freedom, whether we cherish or abuse it. This decision can mean the difference between, as Updike points out, kamikaze pilots and upstanding citizens. He also said, at the end of the essay, that “New York looked glorious.” This poses a question: is New York so beautiful, and will it always be beautiful no matter what, because we still have freedom?

Sontag chose to focus more on the media and how we as a country handled the attacks. She was not afraid to speak her mind about the media and our government, and said some things that I think could be quite controversial. She discussed how America was “the world’s self-proclaimed superpower,” which I find to be quite true. Americans generally think themselves to live in the best, most powerful country in the world. However, did this pompous attitude instigate, in some way, these attacks? The way I see it, this attitude and boastfulness, and also our exercise of complete power over other countries (“the ongoing American bombing of Iraq”) could rightfully make them angry. Does this give them an excuse to attack us? No. But it certainly gives them a reason to want to.

Sontag’s article was very demeaning towards our leaders in government. While I think they did need to do more than tell us “America is strong,” I don’t feel they deserve quite the criticism that Sontag is throwing their way. America needs to have strong leaders who can handle situations like this in better ways than just reassuring everyone that everything will be okay.