Nicholas Carr is the author of The Shallows, a Pulitzer Prize finalist, as well as The Big Switch and Does IT Matter? His articles and essays have appeared in The Atlantic, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Wired, and the New Republic, and he writes the widely read blog Rough Type. He has been writer-in-residence at the University of California, Berkeley, and an executive editor of the Harvard Business Review.
The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains
eBook
-
ISBN-13:
9780393079364
- Publisher: Norton, W. W. & Company, Inc.
- Publication date: 06/06/2011
- Sold by: Barnes & Noble
- Format: eBook
- Pages: 280
- Sales rank: 49,922
- File size: 558 KB
What People are Saying About This
Available on NOOK devices and apps
Want a NOOK? Explore Now
Finalist for the 2011 Pulitzer Prize in General Nonfiction: “Nicholas Carr has written a Silent Spring for the literary mind.”—Michael Agger, Slate
“Is Google making us stupid?” When Nicholas Carr posed that question, in a celebrated Atlantic Monthly cover story, he tapped into a well of anxiety about how the Internet is changing us. He also crystallized one of the most important debates of our time: As we enjoy the Net’s bounties, are we sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply?Now, Carr expands his argument into the most compelling exploration of the Internet’s intellectual and cultural consequences yet published. As he describes how human thought has been shaped through the centuries by “tools of the mind”—from the alphabet to maps, to the printing press, the clock, and the computer—Carr interweaves a fascinating account of recent discoveries in neuroscience by such pioneers as Michael Merzenich and Eric Kandel. Our brains, the historical and scientific evidence reveals, change in response to our experiences. The technologies we use to find, store, and share information can literally reroute our neural pathways.
Building on the insights of thinkers from Plato to McLuhan, Carr makes a convincing case that every information technology carries an intellectual ethic—a set of assumptions about the nature of knowledge and intelligence. He explains how the printed book served to focus our attention, promoting deep and creative thought. In stark contrast, the Internet encourages the rapid, distracted sampling of small bits of information from many sources. Its ethic is that of the industrialist, an ethic of speed and efficiency, of optimized production and consumption—and now the Net is remaking us in its own image. We are becoming ever more adept at scanning and skimming, but what we are losing is our capacity for concentration, contemplation, and reflection.
Part intellectual history, part popular science, and part cultural criticism, The Shallows sparkles with memorable vignettes—Friedrich Nietzsche wrestling with a typewriter, Sigmund Freud dissecting the brains of sea creatures, Nathaniel Hawthorne contemplating the thunderous approach of a steam locomotive—even as it plumbs profound questions about the state of our modern psyche. This is a book that will forever alter the way we think about media and our minds.
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
-
- The Big Switch: Rewiring the…
- by Nicholas Carr
-
- Ghost in the Wires: My…
- by Kevin MitnickWilliam L. SimonSteve Wozniak
-
- Why We Make Mistakes: How We…
- by Joseph T. Hallinan
-
- 150 Things Every Man Should…
- by Gareth May
-
- Alone Together: Why We Expect…
- by Sherry Turkle
-
- Packing for Mars: The Curious…
- by Mary Roach
-
- Physics of the Future: How…
- by Michio Kaku
-
- Genome: The Autobiography of a…
- by Matt Ridley
-
- Book of General Ignorance
- by John MitchinsonJohn Lloyd
-
- The Fifties
- by David Halberstam
-
- Longitude: The True Story of a…
- by Dava Sobel
-
- Winner-Take-All Politics: How…
- by Jacob S. HackerPaul Pierson
Recently Viewed
Just to give you advance notice, the following words are not a typographical or technological error: Whatifthebeginningofthispiecehadbeenwrittenlikethisyouwouldhavehadtosortofreadit outloudtoyourselfinordertounderstanditright?
In the early pages of The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains, Nicholas Carr, the author of two previous and for the most part socially nonjudgmental books about the Web, reviews the enormous change that simply putting spaces between words, beginning somewhere around 1000 AD, made to the act and nature of reading. Before that absolutely brilliant invention, reading had to be done -- and was meant to be done -- more or less out loud. With the insertion of spaces (and the arrival of paragraphs and punctuation and standard word orders), reading began its transformation into something else entirely -- a deep, silent, much more rapid but also far more intellectually immersive act. "Readers [now] disengaged their attention from the outward flow of stimuli in order to engage it more deeply with an inward flow of words, ideas, and emotions," Carr writes. He also points out that this transformation "required complex changes in the circuitry of the brain, as contemporary studies of young readers show."
If you didn't realize this before, think about it now. It makes such intellectually dramatic sense. And it works as an excellent foundation for the main argument of this generally excellent and important book (which is an expansion of a widely-read piece Carr did not long ago for The Atlantic, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?"). That argument is:
- Neuroscientists have now irrefutably shown that our brains change their structure and function even after maturity, depending on what we do or don't use them for. This property of changeability is called neuroplasticity. This term is getting famous, and it should be.
- Every technological development that affects our process of cognition affects the physical nature and abilities of our brains. For instance, the invention of maps enormously expanded our understanding of certain aspects and measurements of geography, but it also (to use a term that Carr borrows from Marshall McLuhan) "numbed" our immediate sensory experience of the "lay of the land," just as high-speed travel does. GPSs can save lives, but their routine use topographically numbs us further.
- The necessity and ability to concentrate on a single task, intellectual or otherwise, is crucial for the formation of deep, long-term memories that ultimately enrich each other and produce what we call wisdom. Scientific research on the cellular level has shown that deep and concentrated cognitive exercise changes the synapses between neurons and the structures of the neurons themselves.
- The advent of the Internet has given us some wonderfully valuable new tools. You're using one right now, as you do when you print out a boarding pass at home, or find a recipe for rhubarb crisp, or listen to streaming music of a sort tailored to your personal preferences, or watch an episode of The Good Wife that you missed when it was first broadcast. Or find your own good wife, for that matter.
- But the Web's accompanying distractions and multi-tasking and data acceleration threaten our society's longstanding practice of and esteem for deep thought and reflection. The influx of competing messages that we receive?whenever we go online not only overloads our working?memory, it makes it much harder for our frontal lobes to?concentrate on any one thing. And thanks?once again to the plasticity of our neuronal pathways, the?more we use the Web, the more we train our brains to be distracted, to process information very quickly, but?without sustained attention.
- Finally, Carr concludes, "One of the greatest dangers we face as we automate the work of our minds, as we cede control over the flow of our thoughts and memories to a powerful electronic system is … a slow erosion of our humanness and our humanity."
Usually, I call this kind of doomy pronouncement "geezer talk," because it's what old people tend to indulge in as they fail to face -- and instead displace -- their own fears of death onto the state of the world as a whole. My parents did, yours probably did -- or do -- too. Not that Mr. Carr is old. He's about fifty, a former editor of the Harvard Business Review whose previous, comparatively neutral attitude toward the technological revolution seems now to have given way to the values of his still earlier incarnation as a Harvard MA in English and American Literature and Language. Because in The Shallows, he clearly and deeply values creative, literary, and philosophical endeavor above all others; he worries about their future, and proves, to my satisfaction anyway, that he is right to worry. This book is not geezer talk, then -- it's required reading for anyone who wants a cogent, comprehensive, and thoroughly researched statement of the techno-fears that, in however inchoate a way, many of us have harbored for going on a few decades now.
Two reservations -- one minor, the other more apocalyptic than geezer talk. The Shallows repeats a couple of its basic ideas more than it needs to, especially the McLuhanite concept that the medium eventually shapes us as much as, if not more than, we shape it. (By the way, when I just typed "the," this word-processing program suggested "themselves" as a convenient Enter shortcut. The. Just did it again. And when I typed in "pro," it suggested "process" instead of "program." Carr brilliantly analyzes the implications of this sort of "helpful" HAL-like technological usurpation.)
The other, more apocalyptic reservation: in saying that we are in danger of losing our "humanness" to the Internet and electronica in general, Carr is choosing to emphasize -- in fact, to posit as central and essential -- certain aspects of that humanness, while ignoring others, which I consider, in my amateur way, and very sadly, just as central and essential. I am talking about our species's tendency to constantly develop and invent and do things not only inimical to our better natures, but threatening to our very existence. To wit: environmental havoc, horrific weaponry, religious zealotry, overpopulation, dietary atrocities, greed. The very cortices and hippocampi and parietal lobes and such, whose higher, deeper functions Carr sees imperiled by the Internet, are what created the Internet in the first place. So wouldn't it be more accurate to say that we are allowing one (destructive) aspect of our humanness to beat up another (sublime) one? I'm afraid so.
--Daniel Menaker
The New York Times