The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to our Brains

[PrincessMommy]

Has anyone read it or interested in reading it? I just finished the 1st chapter. I've long noticed that my reading attention span is almost nil. Now I'm finding out that my brain may actually be changing because of the internet!

 

The first chapter was fascinating although it didn't really talk about the premise of the book. It was talking about brain function and how our brains are changeable and malleable but that "the possibility of intellectual decay is inherent in the malleability of our brains." pg. 35

[Halcyon]

Havent read it, but I'm on the wait list at the library for it. :bigear:

[cathmom]

I'm next on the library wait list for this book. :001_smile:

[PrincessMommy]

Actually, I just realized I finished the 2nd chapter.

 

One fascinating thing from the 2nd chapter was Carr's story about Nietzsche. Because of health reasons Nietzsche went from writing with pen/paper to a typewriter...

 

But the device had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche's closest friends, the writer and composer Heinrich Koselitz, noticed a change in the style of his writing. Nietzsche's prose had become tighter, more telegraphic. There was a new forcefulness to it, too...

 

I find this type of brain function/change so interesting. It makes me wonder what my writing would be like if I used pen/paper in a journal rather than a blog. But, then again, I probably would never take the time to do it.

 

If my adolescent diary is any evidence it would be sappy and egocentric. ;) Don't really want to go there.

[NanceXToo]

I've never heard of it. But you're saying the premise is it decreases your attention span for reading? I've got a great attention span for reading! I've always loved to read and still do.

[PrincessMommy]

I've never heard of it. But you're saying the premise is it decreases your attention span for reading? I've got a great attention span for reading! I've always loved to read and still do.

 

I think he is going to say our reading attention span is one of the symptoms, not necessarily the only one.

[cathmom]

Actually, I just realized I finished the 2nd chapter.

 

One fascinating thing from the 2nd chapter was Carr's story about Nietzsche. Because of health reasons Nietzsche went from writing with pen/paper to a typewriter...

 

 

 

I find this type of brain function/change so interesting. It makes me wonder what my writing would be like if I used pen/paper in a journal rather than a blog. But, then again, I probably would never take the time to do it.

 

If my adolescent diary is any evidence it would be sappy and egocentric. ;) Don't really want to go there.

 

I make mistakes typing that I never would make writing longhand (like typing they're for their or whatever). I think there's a disconnect when you're not writing with your hand.

[DarlaS]

I have heard something about this but I dont consider it very deeply.;)

 

:iagree:

 

 

:lol::lol::lol:

[PrincessMommy]

I have always loved the physical motion of handwriting, and loved to write letters (I wrote 80 multi-page letters a month when I was in college)., I always did very well on essay test questions in school, all the way through college. I was a very early computer adopter, and used a dual-floppy laptop to write all my papers for my MBA program some years later. I noticed that my essay test ability slumped; when I had to answer those questions by hand writing on a test, I could not pull it together anymore.

 

When one handwrites, one thinks ahead, plans the thoughts and structure of the essay ahead of time, and then writes them out. But when writing on a computer, one does a brain dump, and then structures the thoughts by copy/paste/move actions. My skills had deteriorated on one hand. My essays were much drier and less fluent in structure and thought, because it was about organizing thoughts rather than creating a case or structuring a coherent opinion.

 

So I went back to handwriting letters again. There were fewer people to write to now, but I wrote at least a couple a week...and it really helped me to get my skills back.

 

My son's AP English teacher makes them write in-class essays a couple of times a week...because he is training them to do the SAT Essay portion of the test, and the AP English test, and these must be done in handwriting.

 

I have not thought through what this all means--whether the brain will learn (eventually) to make a coherent argument in the computer style of writing, or whether they physical motion of handwriting is part of what makes that happen. I do miss handwriting letters, though, in a correspondence, because it is a much more reflective, less urgent and sound-byte style, and I have noticed that it compels me to longer reflection and deeper communication. I still handwrite about 5 letters a week, but no one really "corresponds" with me...they all email or call their responses.

 

PJ - I enjoy writing letters, although I don't do it nearly as often as you do. I started a few years ago when I realized how much I appreciated it when someone wrote me a note or letter. I've gotten a bit out of the habit, but I think I'll try again.

[plain jane]

I'm presently about to start the last chapter of the book.

 

I'll admit that I do find myself guilty of a lot of the things he wrote about in the book. :o It made me look long and hard at how much time I spend on my computer and I have since had to make a very conscious decision to read a book instead of the WTM boards. :lol::001_huh:

 

There's also a good chapter in there that really solidified why I prefer paperbacks to eBooks. I couldn't really put it into words before but that chapter explained it well for me. I'm in no hurry to get rid of my Kindle but I will continue to read from books as much as I can. :)

 

It was an interesting read and definitely gave me a lot to think about.

 

I once had someone explain to me the importance of the connection of the mind and pen vs. mind and keyboard. I've always taken that advice to heart and noticed a big difference. Try it next time you're angry with your spouse- write your feelings in a Word doc and on a piece of paper. I was surprised at how differently I worded things. :tongue_smilie:

[Tracy in Ky]

I have read this. It is a very good book!

[KnitWit]

I, too, have this on request at my library. I am very interested in it!

[MrsMe]

While I think all the techie stuff is handy, I' always doubted it's done us any good mentally, socially, or physically. Doesn't surprise me. The book Lost Child in the Woods is also an excellent read that contains some very interesting long term results of spending time texting and on the internet.

[PrincessMommy]

I'm presently about to start the last chapter of the book.

 

I'll admit that I do find myself guilty of a lot of the things he wrote about in the book. :o It made me look long and hard at how much time I spend on my computer and I have since had to make a very conscious decision to read a book instead of the WTM boards. :lol::001_huh:

 

There's also a good chapter in there that really solidified why I prefer paperbacks to eBooks. I couldn't really put it into words before but that chapter explained it well for me. I'm in no hurry to get rid of my Kindle but I will continue to read from books as much as I can. :)

 

It was an interesting read and definitely gave me a lot to think about.

 

I once had someone explain to me the importance of the connection of the mind and pen vs. mind and keyboard. I've always taken that advice to heart and noticed a big difference. Try it next time you're angry with your spouse- write your feelings in a Word doc and on a piece of paper. I was surprised at how differently I worded things. :tongue_smilie:

 

Very interesting. Thanks for your opinions

[usetoschool]

I haven't read the book but now I am intrigued. I have heard snippets of research about this and think it definitely applies to me. I used to read for hours. I loved to read. I haven't touched a book in a couple of years and find myself bored and searching for the main points in a paragraph when I read now. I have become a fast fact junky and I find myself becoming more "ADD", for lack of a better term, in my life in general. But I don't want to give up the information sources I find online and I can't give up the email and chats with my kids and extended family who are scattered all over the world.

 

Does the book propose answers or just detail the downsides? Is there a middle ground that doesn't cause the brain changes?

[Pippen]

I'm presently about to start the last chapter of the book.

 

I'll admit that I do find myself guilty of a lot of the things he wrote about in the book. :o It made me look long and hard at how much time I spend on my computer and I have since had to make a very conscious decision to read a book instead of the WTM boards. :lol::001_huh:

 

There's also a good chapter in there that really solidified why I prefer paperbacks to eBooks. I couldn't really put it into words before but that chapter explained it well for me. I'm in no hurry to get rid of my Kindle but I will continue to read from books as much as I can. :)

 

It was an interesting read and definitely gave me a lot to think about.

 

I once had someone explain to me the importance of the connection of the mind and pen vs. mind and keyboard. I've always taken that advice to heart and noticed a big difference. Try it next time you're angry with your spouse- write your feelings in a Word doc and on a piece of paper. I was surprised at how differently I worded things. :tongue_smilie:

 

I'm curious if the author mentioned anything about decreased listening skills? I went back to public school teaching recently and the biggest change in students that I noticed was a bid decrease in their ability to process information that wasn't visual.

[PrincessMommy]

I'm curious if the author mentioned anything about decreased listening skills? I went back to public school teaching recently and the biggest change in students that I noticed was a bid decrease in their ability to process information that wasn't visual.

 

That's a good point. One of my college aged boys has mentioned he has a very hard time reading his textbooks. At first I was worried it was some undiagnosed problem, but now reading the book, I wonder if it's all the computer time he does.

[justamouse]

My worry about the massive web presence in our lives is what is it going to do to our epigenomes. We have no idea yet, we can only proceed with caution.

[ElizaG]

Despite having a pretty strong interest in media ecology ( = the study of the effects of media in themselves), I haven't read past the introduction of this book yet. Maybe because I have a feeling it would be too depressing. :tongue_smilie:

 

If anyone is going to save the post-Gutenberg culture of consistent linear thinking and private points of view (and thus, McLuhan would say, the entire American way of life), it seems as if it will be up to the home schools and private schools that teach according to the sort of rigorous, print-oriented, apply-seat-of-pants-to-seat-of-chair model presented in TWTM. But no matter how many texts we outline or sentences we diagram, the ship might already be too far out of the port.

 

For believers in sola scriptura and secular Enlightenment folks, the prospect of this change in thinking habits has to be especially rough. Catholics and Orthodox at least have a long history that predates the focus on publishing and studying printed texts. Either way, though, it will be a wild ride. Makes me want to go hide under the bed. With a flashlight and a stack of printed books. Come get me when it's over, okay?

[jewellsmommy]

My worry about the massive web presence in our lives is what is it going to do to our epigenomes. We have no idea yet, we can only proceed with caution.

 

 

Yes. I find the subject of various effects on the epigenome to be fascinating. When we mapped the genome, we thought we had it all figured out. :lol: This concept of the epigenome is so nuanced, it's amazing! It's like we are at square one again of figuring out gene expression and cause and effect.

[Heather in Neverland]

It has had the opposite effect on me and my family. We read MORE now that we have mostly ebooks. My oldest ds will concentrate for hours on a topic if he can read about it on the internet. For instance, he is teaching himself HTML by watching YouTube videos and reading website tutorials. If I handed him a big book on HTML it would collect dust.

 

I write more when I can type because I loathe writing by hand. My oldest ds will find new and unique ways to be concise if I make him handwrite something. :tongue_smilie: but if he can type it, he will go on and on. My youngest ds just asked if he could have an old-fashioned typewriter for his birthday.

 

So I guess it isn't true for everyone.

 

 

 

 

.

[VaKim]

I bought and read the book, but honestly don't remember a lot about it except that it was rather disappointing. Seems like there isn't much more to what he says than what you get in those first couple chapters. There is a lot of technical stuff I skimmed (guess that proved the premise of the book, lol). I did not like that there was no solution or suggestions for how to counteract the problem he puts forth. It may just be me, but I don't care for things that only give us the bad news.

 

I would say technology is definitely affecting us for the worse as a whole, though. Just look how many new "conditions" there are, such as ADD, etc. Also, how many young people do you know who seem to have the memory of an old person? Of course, as the book may point out, it is not that we don't remember, but that we don't pay close enough attention to get the information into our brains in the first place. You can't retrieve what was never put in.

 

I think individually, how the internet affects us depends on how we use it. For people who use it to research specific topics, or to read whole essays, books, etc., the negative affects are probably less. The worst affect would be on those who use it to surf from site to site, reading snippets of this, snippets of that, with no real purpose other than to pass the time. That is my opinion and experience, anyway.

[PrincessMommy]

I bought and read the book, but honestly don't remember a lot about it except that it was rather disappointing. Seems like there isn't much more to what he says than what you get in those first couple chapters. There is a lot of technical stuff I skimmed (guess that proved the premise of the book, lol). I did not like that there was no solution or suggestions for how to counteract the problem he puts forth. It may just be me, but I don't care for things that only give us the bad news.

 

I would say technology is definitely affecting us for the worse as a whole, though. Just look how many new "conditions" there are, such as ADD, etc. Also, how many young people do you know who seem to have the memory of an old person? Of course, as the book may point out, it is not that we don't remember, but that we don't pay close enough attention to get the information into our brains in the first place. You can't retrieve what was never put in.

 

I think individually, how the internet affects us depends on how we use it. For people who use it to research specific topics, or to read whole essays, books, etc., the negative affects are probably less. The worst affect would be on those who use it to surf from site to site, reading snippets of this, snippets of that, with no real purpose other than to pass the time. That is my opinion and experience, anyway.

 

I agree, and that is disappointing.

[PrincessMommy]

Despite having a pretty strong interest in media ecology ( = the study of the effects of media in themselves), I haven't read past the introduction of this book yet. Maybe because I have a feeling it would be too depressing. :tongue_smilie:

 

If anyone is going to save the post-Gutenberg culture of consistent linear thinking and private points of view (and thus, McLuhan would say, the entire American way of life), it seems as if it will be up to the home schools and private schools that teach according to the sort of rigorous, print-oriented, apply-seat-of-pants-to-seat-of-chair model presented in TWTM. But no matter how many texts we outline or sentences we diagram, the ship might already be too far out of the port.

 

For believers in sola scriptura and secular Enlightenment folks, the prospect of this change in thinking habits has to be especially rough. Catholics and Orthodox at least have a long history that predates the focus on publishing and studying printed texts. Either way, though, it will be a wild ride. Makes me want to go hide under the bed. With a flashlight and a stack of printed books. Come get me when it's over, okay?

 

This is interesting. Why do you think that "private points of view" are in danger? And why would those who believe Sola Scriptura and secular Enlightenment be at risk? I'm not following....at least how it pertains to the book.

 

But, in any event, I do agree that I think it's a bit too late. The ship has indeed left port.

[creekland]

I haven't read the book, but I know the changes over the past 12 years teaching at school has been very noticeable. When I think about it, it's also noticeable among my adult friends/acquaintances.

 

These are some of the reasons we've kept the bulk of technology (esp cell phones with Twitter and texting) from our youngsters. We do let them use computers and they know how to type and do Power Point, etc, but they aren't on it anywhere near the amount of time I'd consider "average" for today.

 

There are pros to technology, but I sometimes worry about the cons and our (collective) future.

[ElizaG]

This is interesting. Why do you think that "private points of view" are in danger? And why would those who believe Sola Scriptura and secular Enlightenment be at risk? I'm not following....at least how it pertains to the book.

Well, these ideas come from Marshall McLuhan's theories of media effects, which he wrote about in books such as The Gutenberg Galaxy. Throughout The Shallows, Nicholas Carr draws heavily on the work of MM and his colleagues, although he's really only explicit about this in the prologue. For instance, on page 2:

 

“The electric technology is within the gates,†[MM] wrote, “and we are numb, deaf, blind and mute about its encounter with the Gutenberg technology, on and through which the American way of life was formed.â€

 

And on page 10, Carr himself writes:

 

"For the last five centuries, ever since Gutenberg’s printing press made book reading a popular pursuit, the linear, literary mind has been at the center of art, science, and society. As supple as it is subtle, it’s been the imaginative mind of the Renaissance, the rational mind of the Enlightenment, the inventive mind of the Industrial Revolution, even the subversive mind of Modernism. It may soon be yesterday’s mind."

 

I wish Carr had been more explicit and provided more hand-holding when he presented these ideas. Instead, he runs through them briefly, then spends a whole chapter giving numerous examples of neural plasticity in both animals and humans. Okay, it exists, we get it!

 

I'd be happy to make an attempt at explaining the point-of-view thing in more depth, though it will have to wait until the little folks are in bed. (For those who are interested in learning more about McLuhan's own work, I'd suggest reading Understanding Media or The Gutenberg Galaxy, along with one or more books about him by Terrence Gordon. Most of his other biographers and critics seem to miss the mark in some way.)

[PrincessMommy]

Well, these ideas come from Marshall McLuhan's theories of media effects, which he wrote about in books such as The Gutenberg Galaxy. Throughout The Shallows, Nicholas Carr draws heavily on the work of MM and his colleagues, although he's really only explicit about this in the prologue. For instance, on page 2:

 

“The electric technology is within the gates,†[MM] wrote, “and we are numb, deaf, blind and mute about its encounter with the Gutenberg technology, on and through which the American way of life was formed.â€

 

And on page 10, Carr himself writes:

 

"For the last five centuries, ever since Gutenberg’s printing press made book reading a popular pursuit, the linear, literary mind has been at the center of art, science, and society. As supple as it is subtle, it’s been the imaginative mind of the Renaissance, the rational mind of the Enlightenment, the inventive mind of the Industrial Revolution, even the subversive mind of Modernism. It may soon be yesterday’s mind."

 

I wish Carr had been more explicit and provided more hand-holding when he presented these ideas. Instead, he runs through them briefly, then spends a whole chapter giving numerous examples of neural plasticity in both animals and humans. Okay, it exists, we get it!

 

I'd be happy to make an attempt at explaining the point-of-view thing in more depth, though it will have to wait until the little folks are in bed. (For those who are interested in learning more about McLuhan's own work, I'd suggest reading Understanding Media or The Gutenberg Galaxy, along with one or more books about him by Terrence Gordon. Most of his other biographers and critics seem to miss the mark in some way.)

 

Thanks Eleanor,

 

I agree with the chapter on the neural Plasticity... I skimmed a bit once it became obvious he was repeating himself.

 

Thanks for the book recommendation. I'll have to add it to my TBR pile.

[silliness7]

Well, these ideas come from Marshall McLuhan's theories of media effects, which he wrote about in books such as The Gutenberg Galaxy. Throughout The Shallows, Nicholas Carr draws heavily on the work of MM and his colleagues, although he's really only explicit about this in the prologue. For instance, on page 2:

“The electric technology is within the gates,†[MM] wrote, “and we are numb, deaf, blind and mute about its encounter with the Gutenberg technology, on and through which the American way of life was formed.â€

And on page 10, Carr himself writes:

 

"For the last five centuries, ever since Gutenberg’s printing press made book reading a popular pursuit, the linear, literary mind has been at the center of art, science, and society. As supple as it is subtle, it’s been the imaginative mind of the Renaissance, the rational mind of the Enlightenment, the inventive mind of the Industrial Revolution, even the subversive mind of Modernism. It may soon be yesterday’s mind."

 

I wish Carr had been more explicit and provided more hand-holding when he presented these ideas. Instead, he runs through them briefly, then spends a whole chapter giving numerous examples of neural plasticity in both animals and humans. Okay, it exists, we get it!

I'd be happy to make an attempt at explaining the point-of-view thing in more depth, though it will have to wait until the little folks are in bed. (For those who are interested in learning more about McLuhan's own work, I'd suggest reading Understanding Media or The Gutenberg Galaxy, along with one or more books about him by Terrence Gordon. Most of his other biographers and critics seem to miss the mark in some way.)

 

I just started this book. I learned of it through this thread in fact. I'm on ch. 2 about the plasticity of the adult brain and how our brains, even adult brains, change due to experiences, including how we get our information.

 

Re-reading the bolded quote above got me thinking back to pre-Gutenberg time. How did our brain change from that time to the age of print, and how did it continue to change as print became ever increasing?

 

Based on what I've read so far the human brain must be wired quite differently between people who pass information orally and those who pass information with print. Now that we can share information digitally our brains are changing yet again. Is that necessarily a bad thing?

 

If we had not developed print or the technology to mass produce print would we have the life-saving and labor-saving advancements that we have today? Probably not.

 

Not having read any information on the topic I could brainstorm some things I imagine we lost when we went from an oral society to a print society. Memory probably being a huge one. You don't have to remember stuff if you can just write it down and read it later.

 

I know I'm rambling. It seems like the author is asserting that we are losing the ability or will lose the ability to concentrate as a side affect of the digital age. That sounds like very bad news.

 

But if this book had been written as Gutenberg was printing the first books and someone came along and warned how pitiful our memories would shrink if we let books do all the remembering for us it would seem as if that someone had a point. But all these years after the fact, do we really miss that memory loss? And in fact did freeing up the memory and the ability to pass information accurately through generations give us something better than memory? Air condition and airplanes, for example.

 

Perhaps it's true that our brains will be wired differently due to the internet. But is that a bad thing? Is it a necessary compromise to discovering the cure for cancer or colonizing the moon?

 

Maybe it is a bad thing. Maybe there are people who think the world was a better place pre-Gutenberg. Maybe we are not similar enough to pre-Gutenberg man for the comparison to be helpful or valid. I am just rambling and wondering. But so far I am enjoying the book.

[PrincessMommy]

I'm nearly finished the book....

 

It isn't necessarily a bad thing that our brains are being re-wired. The problem is how we are being changed. We are basically becoming a distracted society (in other words - we're all suffering from ADD!). We can multi-task and think quickly and we're all over the place. What we are losing is the ability to think deeply and to be focused. Those skills lend themselves to new innovations. Would Einstein been able to come with the theory of relativity if he had constantly been distracted and couldn't focus for long periods of time? Could Ford or Edison?

 

So, we gain one skill but we lose another. I think it's still too early to see if this will ultimately be a good thing or not. I think that society, and especially education, will have to adapt. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence that kids off all stripes cannot concentrate like students could 15-20 yrs ago. Carr quotes even literature majors who cannot sit and read a book without being distracted. They would rather get information about the book in snippets online!

 

The author also quotes people from back at the time of Guttenberg and their predictions of how bad all this bookish stuff was (something about being distracted by too many books to read!! LOL). We're still in the infancy of the internet. It will be interesting to see how things are in 100 years when we are long gone.

[-M-]

An M-mv entry from earlier this month may interest you:

 

■ The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains (Nicholas Carr)

Non-fiction. You may remember the stir Carr created three and half years ago with the publication of the essay "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" (The Atlantic, July/August 2008; related M-mv entry here). The book is every bit as compelling as the article led me to believe. Chapbook entry to follow. Until then, two links -- NPR's "All Things Considered" on "'The Shallows': This Is Your Brain Online" and Carr's blog, Rough Type. (Bookmark that last one; a great site for readers, thinkers, and autodidacts.)