The savvy shopper knows that when he goes out to buy a "whisper-quiet" dishwasher, the thing is going to be as loud as a brass band. So when the savvy shopper went out to buy a smartphone, did he know it was going to be dumb?
Eh, he probably didn't because truth be told that smartphones do actually seem, well, smart. And in contradistinction to a dishwasher, it turns out that smartphones are changing the retail landscape--smartphones aren't dumb, it's their users who are stupid. The Wall Street Journal Weekend Edition ran an article yesterday by Nicholas Carr who argues that the disjointed and distracting ways we receive information through the internet (and, if I may extend, through portable internet access devices like smartphones) makes us into shallower thinkers. So the argument (and research) goes, the brain responds to an inundation of information not by making us into better multitaskers capable of handling massive amounts of data and ideas but by making us into superficial skimmers. The brain loses its ability to think about one thing deeply because it has become directed toward brushing over many things at once it a way that is more thoughtless and automatic.
As someone who stills prefer the print edition of the paper to the online version and will be forever attached to a physical book rather than an electronic reader cluttered by extraneous information, this research filled me with a sort of Protestant self-righteous glee. You see, it isn't just that these new, more distracting ways of receiving information seem to be making some people into shallower thinkers, it's that it also seems to be making them ruder. Spend a dinner with a compulsive surfer/emailer/texter/Facebooker via a Blackberry or iPhone and you'll know exactly what I mean. And what does this have to do with self-righteous Protestantism? Because there is a part of me that believes that rude behavior should be punishable on earth as it is in heaven. Amen. Turns out the punishment is that your smart device is making you stupider...which really turns out to be a punishment for all of us. (Eh, that's self-righteously fair as well.)
Religious temperament aside, if we are to take this research seriously, it goes some way toward explaining why many smartphone advertisements are indeed so stupid. The woman who explains that she needs an iPhone in order to turn her lights of at home starts to make sense--the device that helps her to turn the lights off can now be blamed as the reason she couldn't remember to turn those lights off in the first place. This is superficial, scatterbrained thinking on a grand scale indeed. Luckily, technology is there to save us from our own stupidity, so long as the battery holds out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 Come Hithers:
Guilty, as charged.
Nah, man. You still seem to use your phone as a phone, and you're not even a compulsive phone caller at that. You have a long way to go, but it's good to have goals. :-P
Funny.... while planning to comment on a dry treatise submitted by someone in my favorite online discussion group, I googled a specific reference to hermeneutics and thus stumbled across your blog. Clicked on your link to the NYT article (thanks) by Carr, whose book was recommended in the same thread to which I'm about to respond. Oh, these intersecting digital ripples.....
Don't own the iPhone, blackberry et al. and folks know better than to try and reach me in person on my cell phone (which is often tossed aside on the bureau with the volume turned off). Does this make me smarter than the average flying squirrel?
Had to fly past your review of Nathalie without looking (I have the film stashed away for later viewing, having picked it up post-Chloe), but enjoyed your commentary on small towns and sore thumbs. By the way, Google translates the Chinese response of 8501 as "People must first learn how to do a camel, and then to do a lion."
I suppose any interpretation must begin with the word "do." Back to my original search on hermeneutics.... {sigh}
Does this make me smarter than the average flying squirrel?
Haha, I think Carr would tell you that it makes you more likely to be able to engage in deep thinking, which sounds like an admirable starting point for distinguishing oneself from a flying squirrel. :-)
"People must first learn how to do a camel, and then to do a lion."
"Do" indeed. Oy vey...
Back to my original search on hermeneutics.... {sigh}
Quite a search indeed. You know, as much as I love the word, it was never one of my big philosophical interests back in my undergrad days. No particular reason. It was a favorite topic of one of my top profs, whom I think gleaned the most on the topic from Walter Benjamin. I was never a big Benjamin fan (though for the sake of Hannah Arendt I tried to be), but you might give him a whirl and see how you like him.
I'll keep an eye on your blog. Good luck getting back to it as the fancy strikes you. Heavens know I neglect mine for long stretches...
Ahhh, so it's merely the sweet linguistic plash of the word "hermeneutics" that woos you.... My personal favorite is the seldom-used but lovely-to-speak adjective "inimitable." But I'm no particular fan of inimitability either.
As for further searches on the original subject, no need: the discussion is already moving on. (I think most of us have ADD anyway.)
My blog. Well. That's a fine euphemism of yours, "neglect." More like "abandon," really. Never could keep a journal, either: my style is primarily epistolary, which means I need to connect with a known receiver. That said, I suppose I now have one... so thanks for the encouragement.
Post a Comment