A Happy Medium

My views on the Internet are undeniably cynical. Part of me can't help but feel that the Internet and digital media are being glorified as an academic discipline while simultaneously stunting our intellectual growth. But the more I read, the more I realize that I am not the only person to resent change in the intellectual landscape. 

Plato was a major opponent of the written word. In her article "Blogs, Communities, and Networks," Rettberg notes that Plato "argued that writing creates a distance between author and reader that does not exist in a conversation, because you can read a text when the author is absent. That distance, Plato argued, made texts unresponsive. If you ask a text a question, it will 'preserve a solemn silence'." 

In my mind, the written word has always been the ultimate in rhetoric and communication. It is powerful and effective, able to move and challenge the audience without being subject to imperfect oratory, and able to stand the test of time. However, it hasn’t always been the premiere mode of communication. There was a time when oratory was the dominant mode of communication, and great scholars like Plato were skeptical of the effects of literacy.

Plato’s greatest critique of written word was that it was unresponsive. If you didn’t understand what the author intended by a word or a statement, the text is unable to defend itself. Plato was a firm believer in discourse—a dialogue where ideas are discussed and questions can be posed and answered. The written word is simply disseminated, but the word itself is unable to enter a dialogue.

A blog is, in a sense, a happy medium between dissemination and dialogue—a text that can respond. Walter Ong, a prominent scholar of electronic media, characterized our cultural transition from print to digital media as “a secondary orality, a return in someways to a cultural more like that of the ancient Greeks than of the post-Gutenberg society.” The permanency and salience of the written word collide with the discourse and thoughtfulness of orality in the blogosphere. Bloggers link to other bloggers. Readers survey the works and are able to respond in the comments section. The authorship can then address the questions being posed by the audience.

In her article “From Bards to Blogs,” Rettberg comments that “with every media shift there have been skeptical voices lamenting the loss of whatever characteristics the previously dominant medium was perceived as promoting.” There has always been, and will always be, some form of hesitation towards major changes in the way society and scholarship function. While I do believe that some level of skepticism towards the internet healthy, it was reassuring to hear that even literacy, which has undeniably benefited the history of the human race, was met with some uncertainty.  

A World Gone Digital

In reading his article "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" from the July/August 2008 edition of the Atlantic magazine, I gradually began to resent author Nicholas Carr for his comments on today's generation's inability to focus on dense works of literature, as well as their failure make in depth connections about that which they read. As a Communications major with a focus on rhetoric, I took great personal offense to these statements. Patronizing, illegitimate, cynical were all words that came to mind as I read his case about the affects of the Internet on the brain. In the same breath as my disapproval, I had already disengaged from the article and begun to browse Pinterest for recipes while composing a text to my roommates about our dinner plans. In that moment, I was struck by just how true his statements were. Something has assuredly changed in the way my brain, and other's brains, operates.

It is irrefutable that the Internet has revolutionized society, but I had never before considered the effect that it would have on the human brain. According to Carr, the Internet has the tendency "to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration," and since people today are shifting much of their reading to the Internet, this greatly affects the manner in which the brain operates. When I got over my initial qualms with Carr's argument and reflected on my personal habits, I could see how much his argument rings true. I cannot maintain focus on an article or a book or an argument as long as I feel I am supposed to. My brain is not conditioned to handle large amounts of thick argument or intricate wording. Since much of my literate life is centered around the web, my "intellectual technologies" have been reprogrammed accordingly. I expect clear, concise snippets of information.

However, I would not be quick to claim that the Internet is making us stupid. Socrates feared the effect of the written word would stunt intellectual growth, because "he couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom)." In the same way, the Internet has begun a whole new sphere of intellectual activity and creativity which will undoubtedly flourish in the coming years. This brings into play the concept of "electracy" which "is to digital media what literacy is to alphabetic writing: an apparatus, or social machine, partly technological, partly institutional." Our intellectual technologies have been reprogrammed due to the Internet, and the ability to collect and decode information from digital media and contribute to the web becomes a skill set necessary for any member of the modern generation.

As someone who is relatively unversed in the ways of technology, my biggest aversion to electracy and the Internet is the thought that it can sometimes give precedence to the calculable over that which is beyond calculation, and I see it reflected in my own life--I expect clear, quick, and simple answers to my questions, which has often discouraged me from curiosity. Carr recognizes this shift in attitude, and notes that in the digital age, "ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed." If the world can reach a healthy equilibrium between the concrete objectivity of the Internet and the stimulating relativity of thought and debate, than electracy will be of great benefit to the modern world.