If there is one certain insight gained from reading Mr. Carr's essay, it is his frameworks and taxonomies of reference are galvanized to see detrimental aspects of even the most positive, powerful innovations propelling economies forward.
The ethicacy of technology cannot be judged by a lack of discernment, discipline or judgment on the part of those consuming it. Ethically Google has the responsibility to be egalitarian in their data capture, structure and search, and they strive for this. Their business model is inherently egalitarian, with search being available to anyone, anywhere, with advertisers charged for keywords used by those searching for information. Mr. Carr misses the highly egalitarian nature of the Google business model completely.
Yet more fundamentally, Mr. Carr completely misses...
However, the digital age has provided much more sophisticated methods of cheating on in-class exams, including real-time Internet searches or note retrieval during closed-book exams. In many schools, administrators have even documented instances of students sending one another real-time instant messages during exams (MJS, 2004). Academic dishonesty preceded the computer and Internet age, but the new technology has increased the temptation to take shortcuts and increased the sophistication of the
Google is the catalyst of knowledge sharing in these industries struggling to survive. Without Google, the business processes of mass customization would not have permeated industries that need an injection of innovation to survive. An extreme example but powerful one, this revolution in the most asset-intensive industries globally puts into hard facts what Google does very well, and that is accelerate knowledge transfer. Nicholas Carr's analysis of Google dumbing us
Technology has both enlightened and darkened the souls of humanity. It has connected people from all walks of life and it has also divided people. With the invention and proliferation of the internet, knowledge is just a web result and click away. With articles discussing Google, social networking, and the creation of smarter than human computers, is technology truly a blessing, or ultimately a curse? In an article titled "Is Google
This meant that people were no longer creating mythos, but taking the myths that had been developed earlier, with the understanding that religious myths were meant to be symbolic, as truth, rather than defining their own religious truths. Armstrong describes a very active process in prior religions. For example, she describes shamans seeing the world behind the one they see with their eyes, and spirit quests or journeys are
Hang Up," Terry Castle recommends that we need to engage in a kind of "symbolic self-orphaning" in order to live meaningfully today. What does she mean? What kind of goods does she think we get from this figurative self-orphaning? How is her view related to Kant's views about "enlightenment"? Once you have explained Castle's idea about self-orphaning, consider how she might view the dispute between Nicholas Carr in "Is
Carr "Every technology is an expression of human will," claims Carr (2011). "Through our tools, we seek to expand our power and control over our circumstances -- over nature, over time and distance, over one another," (Carr, 2011, p. 44). In Chapter Three of The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains, Nicholas Carr (2011) presents the Internet in light of other major breakthroughs in human technology. The Internet
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now