The Outcome of the “Is Technology Making Us Stupid?” Paper
The outcome 2 required me to read, analyze, and synthesize complex texts and incorporate multiple kinds of evidence purposefully in order to generate and support writing. It was important to show there is the discussion on the point and different texts support different points of view. Though the writer may support one point more, and his aim may be to convince the reader it is more reasonable, it is important that all the views are presented with due respect and in an unbiased way.
This task was challenging, as it demanded me to learn to summarize, cite, apply, challenge or re-contextualize texts as well as learn to choose between these options. I think I have achieved this outcome through my paper “Is Technology Making Us Stupid?”. For the purpose of the task, I have created the conversation between the article by Nicholas Carr “Is Google Making Us Stupid”, Steven Johnson’s article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter”, and Daniel T. Willingham’s article “Smartphones Don’t Make Us Dumb”. Carr feels the Internet negatively affects the way our mind works making us stupid. On the other hand, Johnson and Willingham feel that technology affects our mental abilities positively because it increases our ability to think and enhances our sense of awareness.
The presented evidence and ideas from the works of Johnson and Willingham effectively challenge the ideas of Carr, which I discussed in the paper first. I have demonstrated the ideas of the authors both paraphrasing and summarizing their texts, as well as by giving direct citations. I introduced each direct citation with a supporting sentence or phrase to give in the right context. For example: “In general, people think TV shows are easy and dumb because they are only for fun. However, Johnson countered the viewpoint by demonstrating that, “To keep up with entertainment like 24, you have to pay attention, make inferences, track shifting social relationships” (Johnson)”. The example of the paraphrase is: “Willingham also mentions that screen-based activities, such as playing games and answering questions in multiple apps, can take up to 11 hours of a teenager’s day”. In the following sentence is a summary of the information presented by the author in his article: “Furthermore, he utilizes Hill Street Blues to demonstrate that TV shows with complex structures demand people to think deeper”.
In my essay, I contextualized the statements of the authors supporting them with evidence from my own experience. For example, after citing the Carr’s idea that the Net “becomes more a distraction than a useful tool”, I show it in the context of my experience: “when I am doing my homework, I get fidgety because of texting and checking my Facebook on the Net distract me much.” I also give support to the Willingham’s words by showing a smartphone in the context of my effective use: “As a student, I am …
