Status
Available
Call number
Publication
W. W. Norton & Company (2011), 304 pages
Description
As we enjoy the Internet's bounties, are we sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply? Carr 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--and interweaves recent discoveries in neuroscience. Now, he expands his argument into a compelling exploration of the Internet's intellectual and cultural consequences. Our brains, scientific evidence reveals, change in response to our experiences. Building on insights of thinkers from Plato to McLuhan, Carr makes a case that every information technology carries a set of assumptions about the nature of knowledge and intelligence. The printed book served to focus our attention, promoting deep and creative thought. In contrast, the Internet encourages rapid, distracted sampling of small bits of information. As we become ever more adept at scanning and skimming, are we losing our capacity for concentration, contemplation, and reflection?--From publisher description.… (more)
Media reviews
Like the majority of contemporary books, then, The Shallows does not justify its length: its natural form was always that of a pithy provocation, so as an argument for the superiority of book-length prose it is rather self-defeating.
Carr’s ability to crosscut between cognitive studies involving monkeys and eerily prescient prefigurations of the modern computer opens a line of inquiry into the relationship between human and technology. Hopefully, other writers will follow.
His new book is an expanded survey of the science and history of human cognition. ... Mr Carr’s contribution is to offer the most readable overview of the science to date. It is clearly not intended as a jeremiad. Yet halfway through, he can’t quite help but blurt out that the impact of this
Show More
browsing on our brains is “even more disturbing” than he thought. Show Less
Carr is a beautiful writer. His word choice, his syntax, his sequencing... all great.
Born in 1959, Carr straddles the book-dominated and web-dominated worlds and is at home in both. Members of his generation, he believes, have lived their lives as a “two-act play,” consisting of an analogue youth and a digital adulthood. You could conclude that when the people educated after,
Show More
say, 1990 die, there will be, in the strictest sense, no literary culture left to speak of. Mild-mannered, never polemical, with nothing of the Luddite about him, Carr makes his points with a lot of apt citations and wide-ranging erudition. Either he is very well read or he is a hell of a Googler. Show Less
In his new book, The Shallows, Nicholas Carr has written a Silent Spring for the literary mind.
User reviews
LibraryThing member elliepotten
Every once in a while a book comes along that changes your life. You suspect it by the end of the first chapter, and by the time you close the book it’s assured. First came Naomi Klein’s No Logo, urging us to look beyond the gleaming images of big-name brands. Then there was Joanna Blythman’s
Like No Logo and Shopped, The Shallows is hard to summarise in any meaningful way because its argument is so complex and sweeping. This is not a book to devour whole – it is a book to be carefully read, considered and absorbed. Carr isn’t a nostalgic professor yearning for the old days of leather-bound tomes and quill pens. But while he readily admits that the Internet has become a vital, entertaining and useful tool in his everyday life, he was also beginning to worry about the unseen effects of his online life. This book is the eloquent sum of his extensive and thorough research.
It’s quite a ride. In exploring his subject, Carr reaches way back into the history of intellectual technology, considering the impact of early innovations such as maps, clocks and the book on human life. From there he moves into the age of the computer, from the earliest machines through to the all-pervasive use of the Internet we see around us today. The last few decades, he explains, have raced by in a blur, and suddenly the World Wide Web is our medium of choice for almost everything we do.
But what about the biological impact of the Internet? Here is where things get really interesting. Modern neurobiological studies have shown that the brain’s neuroplasticity allows it to change with each experience, each path to learning we take. And thanks to the Internet, our brains really are shifting, away from paths that allow deep reading and reflective thought, and towards a chemistry geared to process the distraction and rapid-fire information that the Internet represents. Carr shows how even reading a simple page containing links and hypertext is a far cry from reading a page in a book, requiring us to stop, however fleetingly, to process the meaning of the link (What does it link to? Does it sound interesting? Will it be relevant to me?) and demonstrably disrupting our absorption in and thus our understanding of the text. In fact, it uses a different area of the brain entirely, one geared towards problem solving rather than comprehension. A little scary given the way schools and other institutions are already throwing out their books and replacing them with PCs and e-readers, isn’t it?
I could keep going forever, but the point of the matter is this: the Internet can be damaging. And as the future entwines itself more and more tightly with the virtual world, it makes sense to be savvy enough about its effects to be able to use and enjoy it without allowing it to destroy the things we value: our attention, our concentration and our ability to understand and process information that requires a little more involvement to fully grasp. Go, buy the book. It may just turn out to be one of the most timely and vital books of the decade. Open your eyes, open your mind – and maybe it’ll change your life too.
Show More
Shopped, pulling us behind the benign faces of Britain’s most successful supermarkets. And now I can add Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows to the list, this dazzling polemic exposing the uncomfortable truths behind the all-powerful reign of the Internet over our modern lives. Like No Logo and Shopped, The Shallows is hard to summarise in any meaningful way because its argument is so complex and sweeping. This is not a book to devour whole – it is a book to be carefully read, considered and absorbed. Carr isn’t a nostalgic professor yearning for the old days of leather-bound tomes and quill pens. But while he readily admits that the Internet has become a vital, entertaining and useful tool in his everyday life, he was also beginning to worry about the unseen effects of his online life. This book is the eloquent sum of his extensive and thorough research.
It’s quite a ride. In exploring his subject, Carr reaches way back into the history of intellectual technology, considering the impact of early innovations such as maps, clocks and the book on human life. From there he moves into the age of the computer, from the earliest machines through to the all-pervasive use of the Internet we see around us today. The last few decades, he explains, have raced by in a blur, and suddenly the World Wide Web is our medium of choice for almost everything we do.
But what about the biological impact of the Internet? Here is where things get really interesting. Modern neurobiological studies have shown that the brain’s neuroplasticity allows it to change with each experience, each path to learning we take. And thanks to the Internet, our brains really are shifting, away from paths that allow deep reading and reflective thought, and towards a chemistry geared to process the distraction and rapid-fire information that the Internet represents. Carr shows how even reading a simple page containing links and hypertext is a far cry from reading a page in a book, requiring us to stop, however fleetingly, to process the meaning of the link (What does it link to? Does it sound interesting? Will it be relevant to me?) and demonstrably disrupting our absorption in and thus our understanding of the text. In fact, it uses a different area of the brain entirely, one geared towards problem solving rather than comprehension. A little scary given the way schools and other institutions are already throwing out their books and replacing them with PCs and e-readers, isn’t it?
I could keep going forever, but the point of the matter is this: the Internet can be damaging. And as the future entwines itself more and more tightly with the virtual world, it makes sense to be savvy enough about its effects to be able to use and enjoy it without allowing it to destroy the things we value: our attention, our concentration and our ability to understand and process information that requires a little more involvement to fully grasp. Go, buy the book. It may just turn out to be one of the most timely and vital books of the decade. Open your eyes, open your mind – and maybe it’ll change your life too.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tututhefirst
IMHO, this is one of the most important books to be published this year. I find it difficult to write formal reviews of non-fiction works that deal with scientific topics. I'm always afraid I will misinterpret or worse still, show my ignorance as I divulge in my reporting that I missed some
Rising from an article the author wrote for THE ATLANTIC (July/August 2008) "Is Google making us stupid?" Cass takes us on a trip through the mental history of thinking, producing ideas, and handing on those thoughts and ideas to others. He discusses oral tradition, early writing starting with cuneiform and hieroglyphics, and marches on to the invention of scrolls, and the Phoenician, Greek and Roman alphabets.
He progresses to examine the importance of the discoveries and use of paper, the printing press and the book, and brings us to the present with a discussion of the role of the computer, the World Wide Web and the "instant-ness" of search engines such as Google. He includes an excellent explanation of the the role of Google in its project to digitize every book ever written, and the impact that will have (both good and bad) on research. All of these 'tools of the mind' had an impact on man's ability to obtain, retain, and pass on information. Each era used those tools within a certain ethic.
Throughout all of this, he documents scientific studies showing how the human brain works with each of these 'tools' and how over the centuries, each new thought medium produced a concomitant change in our brains and how they functioned. He is objective, but does manage quite eloquently to let us know that he is concerned that our current state of constant 'connectedness' is becoming detrimental to certain types of mental activity such as 'deep thinking' and sites several studies and experiments to support his position.
Whether I agree or disagree remains to be seen. For now all I can say is "get this one" (or at least get in line at the library for it--the hold list here is already several long). It is clearly and cogently written, quite easy to read in spite of the technical aspects, disturbing and encouraging at the same time. Every parent, teacher, reader, librarian should become familiar with his theory.
He begins and ends by reminding us of Stanley Kubrick's"2001: A Space Odyssey."
"That's the essence of Kubrick's dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence."
I'm sure Mr. Carr would be more than happy to see his closing lines proved wrong. I certainly would.
Show More
horribly salient point.Rising from an article the author wrote for THE ATLANTIC (July/August 2008) "Is Google making us stupid?" Cass takes us on a trip through the mental history of thinking, producing ideas, and handing on those thoughts and ideas to others. He discusses oral tradition, early writing starting with cuneiform and hieroglyphics, and marches on to the invention of scrolls, and the Phoenician, Greek and Roman alphabets.
He progresses to examine the importance of the discoveries and use of paper, the printing press and the book, and brings us to the present with a discussion of the role of the computer, the World Wide Web and the "instant-ness" of search engines such as Google. He includes an excellent explanation of the the role of Google in its project to digitize every book ever written, and the impact that will have (both good and bad) on research. All of these 'tools of the mind' had an impact on man's ability to obtain, retain, and pass on information. Each era used those tools within a certain ethic.
Throughout all of this, he documents scientific studies showing how the human brain works with each of these 'tools' and how over the centuries, each new thought medium produced a concomitant change in our brains and how they functioned. He is objective, but does manage quite eloquently to let us know that he is concerned that our current state of constant 'connectedness' is becoming detrimental to certain types of mental activity such as 'deep thinking' and sites several studies and experiments to support his position.
Whether I agree or disagree remains to be seen. For now all I can say is "get this one" (or at least get in line at the library for it--the hold list here is already several long). It is clearly and cogently written, quite easy to read in spite of the technical aspects, disturbing and encouraging at the same time. Every parent, teacher, reader, librarian should become familiar with his theory.
He begins and ends by reminding us of Stanley Kubrick's"2001: A Space Odyssey."
"That's the essence of Kubrick's dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence."
I'm sure Mr. Carr would be more than happy to see his closing lines proved wrong. I certainly would.
Show Less
LibraryThing member cbl_tn
In The Shallows , Nicholas Carr examines the physiological and psychological effects of the Internet within the framework of Marshall McLuhan's theory. Carr maintains that the influence of the Internet is changing the way people think. Carr addresses topics including information vs. knowledge,
One of my favorite passages is Carr's description of ELIZA, a computer program that simulates a Rogerian therapist. Carr describes its programmer's astonishment at the emotional reactions people had to the ELIZA software.
Even his secretary, who had watched him write the code for ELIZA “and surely knew it to be merely a computer program,” was seduced. After a few moments using the software at a terminal in Weizenbaum's office, she asked the professor to leave the room because she was embarrassed by the intimacy of the conversation. “What I had not realized,” said Weizenbaum, “is that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people.”
I remember being amused by ELIZA as an early teen. This was in the early days of personal computers, before software downloads, when you could buy books of BASIC programs and type them into your home computer. I think I typed the code for ELIZA into my father's computer, and I never believed the computer was doing anything other than what it had been told to do. I thought that it said more about the limitations of Rogerian therapy than it did about the humanness of the computer. (I should add that my father's educational background is social psychology and at that time he was teaching college level psychology. Otherwise I wouldn't have known any more about psychology than the average teenager.)
Recommended for readers interested in technology and its effects on society.
Show More
depth of thought vs. breadth of thought, memory, attention, distraction, IQ, and artificial intelligence and the Turing test. Although the language is often highly technical, the book is accessible to the educated general reader.One of my favorite passages is Carr's description of ELIZA, a computer program that simulates a Rogerian therapist. Carr describes its programmer's astonishment at the emotional reactions people had to the ELIZA software.
Even his secretary, who had watched him write the code for ELIZA “and surely knew it to be merely a computer program,” was seduced. After a few moments using the software at a terminal in Weizenbaum's office, she asked the professor to leave the room because she was embarrassed by the intimacy of the conversation. “What I had not realized,” said Weizenbaum, “is that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people.”
I remember being amused by ELIZA as an early teen. This was in the early days of personal computers, before software downloads, when you could buy books of BASIC programs and type them into your home computer. I think I typed the code for ELIZA into my father's computer, and I never believed the computer was doing anything other than what it had been told to do. I thought that it said more about the limitations of Rogerian therapy than it did about the humanness of the computer. (I should add that my father's educational background is social psychology and at that time he was teaching college level psychology. Otherwise I wouldn't have known any more about psychology than the average teenager.)
Recommended for readers interested in technology and its effects on society.
Show Less
LibraryThing member subbobmail
Is Google making us stupid? Nicolas Carr won't go quite that far, but he's convinced that exposure to the Internet is changing the way we think. He's found a lot of neuroscience to back his thesis. The brain is apparently very plastic and adaptable, and if you trade books (which require deep
Show More
attention) for websites (which encourage skimming and distraction), your mind begins to think very fast, very short thoughts. (Hello, Twitter!) I can't critique the neuroscience, but my personal experience definitely leads me to believe that Carr is correct to be concerned about this phenomenon. He thinks that the habit of book-reading made the human race a lot smarter because it honed and strengthened our minds. If we become what we behold, maybe we should all cut back on the aimless hours spent staring at shiny screens covered with ill-written text, garish ads & Flash animations. Show Less
LibraryThing member BenTreat
Carr has a defensible thesis, and one towards which I am sympathetic -- that the Internet makes us all less capable of paying attention to details and following an extended (especially a book length) argument. However, the author does not defend his thesis effectively. Three main flaws prevent a
First, Carr’s writing is, at times, a bit lazy. Consider page 50: “Language is not a technology. It’s native to our species.” This claim is spurious. Our brains may be hard-wired for communication, but language in all its forms fits the definition of “technology” that Carr seems to be using. He might have said, “Our desire and ability to communicate are not technologies. They are native to our species.”
Second, Carr seems to want to argue that the human mind is more than a computational machine. Again, I am sympathetic to this claim, but Carr seems unable to prove his point with any great rigor. If you find this argument compelling, but note that it has been made poorly, then I recommend Jaron Lanier’s /You Are Not a Gadget/ for a deeper understanding of how the Internet truly has facilitated mechanistic, anonymous, non-human interactions among humans.
Finally, the book is weakened in that it ignores significant counterarguments. The debate is over what the Internet is doing to our brains. A strong counter-argument would point out that the Internet is part of a growing trend of literacy and educational attainment. People in rural areas, who cannot leave their families to attend a 4-year institution in the flesh, can now attend high-quality, non-profit colleges online, for example. Online access to high-quality content benefits high school students, university professors, and amateur genealogists. YouTube can teach us kitchen techniques and rudimentary bike repair.
Are we doing stupid things with the Internet? Yes. Do people choose to be lazy while using the Internet, to find easy answers to complex questions? Yes. But if we weren’t wasting our time with the Internet -- we would be wasting it elsewhere. And poorly-conceived books and scurrilous yellow journalism were both being printed long before the Internet came along.
For every 20 youths who now surf the Web instead of watching MTV, there’s a rural, place-bound single mom who can get a “two-year” or “four-year” degree online. For every 20 adults who waste time reading /The Onion/ at work, there are scholars who can find online texts that make their work possible, or at least simpler and cheaper.
Blaming the Internet (which is unlikely to go away) is too easy. It's like blaming steel for swords.
Show More
successful execution of his aims.First, Carr’s writing is, at times, a bit lazy. Consider page 50: “Language is not a technology. It’s native to our species.” This claim is spurious. Our brains may be hard-wired for communication, but language in all its forms fits the definition of “technology” that Carr seems to be using. He might have said, “Our desire and ability to communicate are not technologies. They are native to our species.”
Second, Carr seems to want to argue that the human mind is more than a computational machine. Again, I am sympathetic to this claim, but Carr seems unable to prove his point with any great rigor. If you find this argument compelling, but note that it has been made poorly, then I recommend Jaron Lanier’s /You Are Not a Gadget/ for a deeper understanding of how the Internet truly has facilitated mechanistic, anonymous, non-human interactions among humans.
Finally, the book is weakened in that it ignores significant counterarguments. The debate is over what the Internet is doing to our brains. A strong counter-argument would point out that the Internet is part of a growing trend of literacy and educational attainment. People in rural areas, who cannot leave their families to attend a 4-year institution in the flesh, can now attend high-quality, non-profit colleges online, for example. Online access to high-quality content benefits high school students, university professors, and amateur genealogists. YouTube can teach us kitchen techniques and rudimentary bike repair.
Are we doing stupid things with the Internet? Yes. Do people choose to be lazy while using the Internet, to find easy answers to complex questions? Yes. But if we weren’t wasting our time with the Internet -- we would be wasting it elsewhere. And poorly-conceived books and scurrilous yellow journalism were both being printed long before the Internet came along.
For every 20 youths who now surf the Web instead of watching MTV, there’s a rural, place-bound single mom who can get a “two-year” or “four-year” degree online. For every 20 adults who waste time reading /The Onion/ at work, there are scholars who can find online texts that make their work possible, or at least simpler and cheaper.
Blaming the Internet (which is unlikely to go away) is too easy. It's like blaming steel for swords.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Stevil2001
I skimmed this book a lot when I was trying to find a chapter to pull out and teach to my students (as a companion to M. T. Anderson's novel Feed, which covers the same topic in many ways). I knew that Carr would hate me for that, so I resolved the read the whole book some day. I'm glad I did;
Carr lines up his ducks quite nicely. He starts by demonstrating that the way we think is shaped by the way we read, and that the way we read is shaped by the technologies we possess, by giving a broad overview of the history of print, heavily drawing on Marshall McLuhan, Walter Ong, and Elizabeth Eistenstein. There were a lot of things I knew here, but also ones I didn't-- loved the assertion (I think it came from Ong) that we couldn't have had the scientific revolution without the printing press. From there, he discusses research into how we think is presently being reshaped by the Internet and other electronic technologies. It's hard not to argue with any of his conclusions-- these things are almost certainly happening. Sometimes his arguments boil down to "McLuhan was right all along," but given that we've forgotten that, it's worth repeating.
What are we to do about it? That's where I wish that Carr had gone further. It's fine for his article to not delve into potential actions, but in a book-length work it seems like something of an oversight and misstep. I'm trying to cut down on my Internet use, for what it's worth, but that's hard to do with a brain like mine in a world like ours.
Show More
this is a very effective expansion of Carr's notorious article "Is Google Making Us Stupid?"Carr lines up his ducks quite nicely. He starts by demonstrating that the way we think is shaped by the way we read, and that the way we read is shaped by the technologies we possess, by giving a broad overview of the history of print, heavily drawing on Marshall McLuhan, Walter Ong, and Elizabeth Eistenstein. There were a lot of things I knew here, but also ones I didn't-- loved the assertion (I think it came from Ong) that we couldn't have had the scientific revolution without the printing press. From there, he discusses research into how we think is presently being reshaped by the Internet and other electronic technologies. It's hard not to argue with any of his conclusions-- these things are almost certainly happening. Sometimes his arguments boil down to "McLuhan was right all along," but given that we've forgotten that, it's worth repeating.
What are we to do about it? That's where I wish that Carr had gone further. It's fine for his article to not delve into potential actions, but in a book-length work it seems like something of an oversight and misstep. I'm trying to cut down on my Internet use, for what it's worth, but that's hard to do with a brain like mine in a world like ours.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Paulagraph
Since Carr's thesis seemed self-evident to me, I underestimated how much I'd enjoy reading his book, and how much I'd learn from doing so. Blame it on the neuroscience, which Carr elucidates extensively, and on his historical recapitulation of the impact on the human brain and culture of earlier
Show More
technologies. Since clocks, maps, alphabets, number systems & books have been givens for the entirety of my life, I've given little thought to life without them. Any consideration that I have given to such intellectual technologies has been in terms of how they affect me personally, for example, several years ago, I decided to stop wearing a wristwatch in an attempt to free myself from constantly attending to what time it is(mostly a failed attempt, since now I wear a pedometer with a clock function). Until reading The Shallows I hadn't considered how the advent of timekeeping mechanisms changed the physiology of the human brain itself. Flash forward some centuries to now and the new intellectual technology on the block, rewiring our brains and rewriting culture, is the Internet. I might quibble with Carr's unequivocally negative assessment of the effects of "distraction," "interruption," and "loss of closure" as well as with his perhaps overvaluation of "linear narrative" and "deep thinking." Linear exposition that allows one to follow a complex argument or presentation of information is ideal if one's need or desire is to learn "facts," but fiction and poetry often work quite differently. Non-linear narrative and openendedness as literary strategies are nothing new. For example, Denis Diderot's 18th century novel Jacques le fataliste et son maitre, itself a tribute to Sterne's Tristram Shandy, includes around 60 characters, 21 stories and 180 breaks in the narrative.That said, Carr's arguments are compelling. I particularly took note of his claim that we are distracted by hypertext links even if we don't click on them, because they prompt the brain to shift from reading mode to decision-making mode. The scariest chapter in The Shallows is undoubtedly the one entitled "The Church of Google." Carr notes that "Google's profits are tied directly to the velocity of people's information intake" and that "every click we make on the Web marks a break in our concentration, a bottom-up disruption of our attention--and it's in Google's economic interest to make sure we click as often as possible." For the engineers at Google, "ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed." In the face of such engineers' desire "to create an amazingly cool machine that will be able to outthink its creators," perhaps we can take comfort in Carr's reminder that "biological memory is alive; computer memory is not" and his quoting of Torkel Klingberg's assertion that "the brain cannot be full." Show Less
LibraryThing member onthequest
You know that 'fuzzy' feeling you get when you spend too long in front of the computer feeling. Have you ever looked for the "Undo" button in RL? (That's Real Life for those of us over 30). Nicholas Carr knows why.
There was more substance to this book than I expected from the title (sorry, Mr.
Carr tells us, most convincingly, that it is very likely that none of these are true. His review of the research in memory and neurology is extensive, as is his consideration of the impact of the technology on the way we seek and make use of information. This book is an important addition to the libraries of researchers and upper-school educators, particularly for those who are designing online education and course websites.
There was more substance to this book than I expected from the title (sorry, Mr.
Show More
Carr). I think we're all willing to admit that, just maybe, all this multitasking is undermining our ability to think deeply and concentrate for long periods of time. Most of us, however, also want to believe that the multitasking is voluntary, and it improves our work, and we could stop any time we wanted, thank you very much.Carr tells us, most convincingly, that it is very likely that none of these are true. His review of the research in memory and neurology is extensive, as is his consideration of the impact of the technology on the way we seek and make use of information. This book is an important addition to the libraries of researchers and upper-school educators, particularly for those who are designing online education and course websites.
Show Less
LibraryThing member JeffV
As someone who has been connected to the net since Al Gore invented it, I just couldn't resist this title. On one hand, it's the kind of book I think I could have written myself. If I felt it necessary to do so, that is. And, may now I do. Of course, now I might be a little too late thanks to Mr.
In The Shallows, Carr sets out to define not only how our brains are "wired" for certain cognitive tasks, but also covers in detail how our brains got that way, in the form of a history of learning, from oral histories to effects the written word. While interesting in it's own right, this portion of the book seemed to be simply filler compared to the actual thesis. Once Carr focused on the topic, my patience was rewarded.
There are things we have always suspected but never confirmed. In the case of this book, it's the illusion that "multitasking" is an admirable skill. Carr cites studies that show that nearly always, multitasking means that a single task simply isn't done well. We retain less information, and are inclined to take the most expedient route to a solution. The Internet, Carr contends, is a substitute for memory -- while it has great capacity as a reservoir of knowledge, it does not abet individual thought or inventiveness. Carr cites studies that show multitaskers are much more likely to accept a known solution to a problem because the net makes it expedient to do so. Creativity that could generate a better solution is relegated to a secondary roll -- the demands of multitasking always lead to the most expedient solution. Those of us living the multitasking lifestyle are doing so on a very superficial level, hence the title of the book, The Shallows.
One example that Carr visits multiple times is that of a graduate student, top of his class, who refuses to read books and has declared them obsolete. This student is a Rhodes Scholar, and yet feels no need to ever read an entire book. Carr contends that reading a book not only exercises the skill of focus, but also can lead to a deeper understanding on a given topic than Google-delivered web pages could ever hope hope to achieve. Research has borne this out: comprehension on straight text (ie, books), is far greater than the measured results of readers following hyper-linked documents.
I admit I do use the Net in much the manner that promotes the bad habits Carr describes. Now, I also read on average a book a week, so there may be some hope yet. I am, however, now more acutely aware of behavior that potentially dumbs-down the human species. I just told my girlfriend that I had no need to remember how to convert from C to F in the temperature scale. The internet can reember for me. However, she actually need so know this stuff. I am certain what she needs to know is best, even if the future will lead to the most expedient solution.
Show More
Carr.In The Shallows, Carr sets out to define not only how our brains are "wired" for certain cognitive tasks, but also covers in detail how our brains got that way, in the form of a history of learning, from oral histories to effects the written word. While interesting in it's own right, this portion of the book seemed to be simply filler compared to the actual thesis. Once Carr focused on the topic, my patience was rewarded.
There are things we have always suspected but never confirmed. In the case of this book, it's the illusion that "multitasking" is an admirable skill. Carr cites studies that show that nearly always, multitasking means that a single task simply isn't done well. We retain less information, and are inclined to take the most expedient route to a solution. The Internet, Carr contends, is a substitute for memory -- while it has great capacity as a reservoir of knowledge, it does not abet individual thought or inventiveness. Carr cites studies that show multitaskers are much more likely to accept a known solution to a problem because the net makes it expedient to do so. Creativity that could generate a better solution is relegated to a secondary roll -- the demands of multitasking always lead to the most expedient solution. Those of us living the multitasking lifestyle are doing so on a very superficial level, hence the title of the book, The Shallows.
One example that Carr visits multiple times is that of a graduate student, top of his class, who refuses to read books and has declared them obsolete. This student is a Rhodes Scholar, and yet feels no need to ever read an entire book. Carr contends that reading a book not only exercises the skill of focus, but also can lead to a deeper understanding on a given topic than Google-delivered web pages could ever hope hope to achieve. Research has borne this out: comprehension on straight text (ie, books), is far greater than the measured results of readers following hyper-linked documents.
I admit I do use the Net in much the manner that promotes the bad habits Carr describes. Now, I also read on average a book a week, so there may be some hope yet. I am, however, now more acutely aware of behavior that potentially dumbs-down the human species. I just told my girlfriend that I had no need to remember how to convert from C to F in the temperature scale. The internet can reember for me. However, she actually need so know this stuff. I am certain what she needs to know is best, even if the future will lead to the most expedient solution.
Show Less
LibraryThing member snat
For the last few years, I've noticed that I seem to have developed a form of ADD. This was always the most apparent during the first few weeks of summer vacation when I would start and stop projects with lightning speed, when I couldn't sit still to read a book or watch a movie all the way through,
In The Shallows, Nicholas Carr questions the impact technology has upon our lives. What’s most important here is that Carr is in no way advocating a return to the pre-technology era. He admits that much good has been done and will be done by technology, and he fesses up to loving and relying on technology himself. However, he examines the idea of neuroplasticity—the idea that the brain rewires itself to adapt to the stimuli it encounters. During the age of the book, the brain had to rewire itself to be able to focus for long periods of time upon text and to think about that text deeply. This didn’t happen all at once, but was accelerated as books became more readily available to a more widely educated public. Our minds became accustomed to taking in information if not rapidly, then intensely as our brains had time to ruminate on and process the information they encountered. The result was a deep thinking, literate individual. People became experts in specific areas and the keepers of knowledge associated with their particular field of specialty. They were responsible for filtering, critiquing, and judging the quality of new knowledge which had to be “vetted” before it could be accepted as accurate and true.
So what have we sacrificed in this age of point and click? We’re losing the idea of specialization, which is one of the more frightening aspects to me. Any idiot with access to a keyboard and an Internet connection can post anything they want online and it’s accepted as truth. A society that becomes accustomed to finding any and all information online may never learn anything deeply (and what will happen when Skynet becomes self-aware, takes over, and the machines rise against us, eh?) Instead, people will have little pockets of knowledge supplemented by what they can find online. Also, I have to wonder how many innovations and ideas were serendipitously created when answers weren’t easy to find. When an answer can be found through a quick web search, the deep thinking that may lead to phenomenal breakthroughs and intense creativity may be forfeited. In addition, our attention spans are suffering. We bounce from hyperlink to hyperlink, chasing new pieces of information which we scan quickly and, because we read over it so quickly, it’s never stored in our long-term memory. The next time we need that information we’ll have to log back on and find it again instead of relying on our ability to recall it.
Carr’s book is not the ramblings of an ill-informed radical. This book is well-researched and Carr traces how the human brain has evolved throughout history, including pre-technology, to show that neuroplasticity has allowed us to adapt to our ever-changing environments. There’s hard science here as well. If you don’t agree with Carr’s thesis by the end, there’s no denying that he’s done his homework.
I love technology and I think Nicholas Carr does, too. Carr’s book is not an indictment of technology, but rather a call for the public to be cognizant of the ways in which technology is affecting us—both the good and the bad. Our society has so quickly and readily embraced technology that we haven’t thought about the potential long-term tradeoffs. When we think about it and realize, “Hey, wait a minute. This food I’ve planted on Farmville—I can’t eat one damn bit of it”, then we might become more responsible about how and when we use technology (and maybe we’ll go plant a garden in the backyard). I know that I, for one, have started logging off more frequently and making sure that the time I do spend online is enriching my life in some way.
Show More
when I couldn't clean my house all in one day, when I couldn't keep my mind on just one train of thought. As someone who had always lived for structure, who craved the routine and the predictable, who always finished one task completely and thoroughly before moving on to another, this was quite alarming to me. I blamed teaching. My mind had adapted to the need to deliver content, monitor student behavior, answer questions, pass out papers, remind everyone for the umpteenth time that classwork is to be turned in to the orange basket, run the PowerPoint, avoid saying anything that might get me fired (“do not tell little Johnny that there is such a thing as a stupid question and he just asked it”)--and the need to do so all at once. Turns out there may be something to my theory. And it turns out that this manner of thinking, the need to hyper-multitask, may be exacerbated by the rise of technology as a conduit to information. It’s comforting to know that, if I’m becoming stupid, it’s not entirely my fault.In The Shallows, Nicholas Carr questions the impact technology has upon our lives. What’s most important here is that Carr is in no way advocating a return to the pre-technology era. He admits that much good has been done and will be done by technology, and he fesses up to loving and relying on technology himself. However, he examines the idea of neuroplasticity—the idea that the brain rewires itself to adapt to the stimuli it encounters. During the age of the book, the brain had to rewire itself to be able to focus for long periods of time upon text and to think about that text deeply. This didn’t happen all at once, but was accelerated as books became more readily available to a more widely educated public. Our minds became accustomed to taking in information if not rapidly, then intensely as our brains had time to ruminate on and process the information they encountered. The result was a deep thinking, literate individual. People became experts in specific areas and the keepers of knowledge associated with their particular field of specialty. They were responsible for filtering, critiquing, and judging the quality of new knowledge which had to be “vetted” before it could be accepted as accurate and true.
So what have we sacrificed in this age of point and click? We’re losing the idea of specialization, which is one of the more frightening aspects to me. Any idiot with access to a keyboard and an Internet connection can post anything they want online and it’s accepted as truth. A society that becomes accustomed to finding any and all information online may never learn anything deeply (and what will happen when Skynet becomes self-aware, takes over, and the machines rise against us, eh?) Instead, people will have little pockets of knowledge supplemented by what they can find online. Also, I have to wonder how many innovations and ideas were serendipitously created when answers weren’t easy to find. When an answer can be found through a quick web search, the deep thinking that may lead to phenomenal breakthroughs and intense creativity may be forfeited. In addition, our attention spans are suffering. We bounce from hyperlink to hyperlink, chasing new pieces of information which we scan quickly and, because we read over it so quickly, it’s never stored in our long-term memory. The next time we need that information we’ll have to log back on and find it again instead of relying on our ability to recall it.
Carr’s book is not the ramblings of an ill-informed radical. This book is well-researched and Carr traces how the human brain has evolved throughout history, including pre-technology, to show that neuroplasticity has allowed us to adapt to our ever-changing environments. There’s hard science here as well. If you don’t agree with Carr’s thesis by the end, there’s no denying that he’s done his homework.
I love technology and I think Nicholas Carr does, too. Carr’s book is not an indictment of technology, but rather a call for the public to be cognizant of the ways in which technology is affecting us—both the good and the bad. Our society has so quickly and readily embraced technology that we haven’t thought about the potential long-term tradeoffs. When we think about it and realize, “Hey, wait a minute. This food I’ve planted on Farmville—I can’t eat one damn bit of it”, then we might become more responsible about how and when we use technology (and maybe we’ll go plant a garden in the backyard). I know that I, for one, have started logging off more frequently and making sure that the time I do spend online is enriching my life in some way.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dougb56586
The author claims that the use of the Internet is impairing people’s ability to think deeply, due to the format of the communication - e.g. hypertext, text interwoven audio and visual material. Although the anecdotal example which he begins the book with are not convincing to me, the subsequent
Show More
studies the he cites are very persuasive. He describes numerous controlled studies in which reading comprehension is measurably lower with multimedia than just convention text. The author also provides very interesting background on the history of reading and writing. He tells how the Gutenberg printing press resulted in such an increase in the number of books available that people at the time complained that there were too many books. He also asserts that modern “silent reading”, is a consequence of the greater availability of books after the printing press. The result was that it was no longer necessary to share a single book by reading aloud. The discussion (and criticism) of google’s impact on web format is also very informative and enjoyable. In the end, the author does not advocate return to convention text style, even though the studies he cites would seem to lead to that conclusion. The studies which demonstrate the failure of multimedia to assist comprehension remind me of a book written before web browsers existed: “The Visual Display of Quantitive Information”, by Edwin Tufte. That book argues that visual information may be either effective or very ineffective. Although that book and similar ones, do not explicitly deal with the problem of multimedia impairing reading comprehension, the solution to the later problem may be in analyzing the multimedia in a similar fashion. Show Less
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
It seems whenever someone dares to challenge the role of the Internet, he is always met with a "yes, but..". In this book, the author anticipates the yes, buts, and addresses them as thoroughly as possible. The book is a challenging look at how our brains are changing as a result of internet
Show More
connectivity. Some of these changes are good; most of them are not, threatening to strip away our creativity and depth of thinking. The author marshals an array of studies that have been done on the topic, and challenges us to use the interent as a tool, but a limited one. This is not the polemic of a technophobic Luddite, but a reasoned, researched discussion of serious issues by someone who admires and uses internet technology himself. It should be required reading for all parents, teachers, administrators, and employers. Unfortunately, the message will probably receive only limited distribution because reading the book requires many of the skills that the internet has diminished in us. Irony, indeed. In spite of that, give this book to your web-addicted friends, and recommend it to everyone on your facebook. Show Less
LibraryThing member thornton37814
Nicholas Carr, like many others, noted that attention spans are on the decrease. He notes changes in the print media brought about by the age of the Internet. Many newspapers have gone under; others have declared bankruptcy. Formats have changed for both newspapers and magazines to make the
Show More
experience more Web-like. He acknowledges that sometimes it is even difficult to remain focused on a blog post which is more than a few paragraphs long. He notes the presence of e-readers, but at the time he wrote the book, they had not gained the full audience they have now so he didn't feel that they were influencing reading that differently. There is much to think about in this book because Carr also analyzes the experiences of previous generations and the changes they experienced. One of the most thought-provoking sections is one which shares the results of research on multitasking. I think this title would create great discussion among faculty members. I'm not sure that I agree with all conclusions he makes. I find that I am able to stay concentrated and focused while readings books and e-books on my Kindle reader. I am sometimes overwhelmed by information coming to me by way of the Internet through Facebook or my RSS reader for blogs, newspapers, etc. I find that I'm able to often read a headline and pass up an item. I do have trouble staying focused on longer blog posts because I am usually more pressed for time when I'm reading these online items. I realize the need to be offline, so I've prioritized reading and find other ways to keep myself from staring at a screen (both computer and television). I think that the author alludes to the Internet's ability to be addictive, but he probably doesn't address it forcefully enough. This is an important book that is certain to be discussed for years to come. Show Less
LibraryThing member Castlelass
“What the net seems to be doing is chipping away my ability for concentration and contemplation. Whether I’m online or not my mind now expects to take in information in the way the net distributes it, in a constantly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words, now
The author expresses concern that the internet is reducing our ability to process and retain information. He cites many scientific studies to make his point that it is, in fact, rewiring our brains. He examines the many distractions offered by the internet, and how following hyperlinks can result in an unexpected adverse impact on memory.
“When we read a book, the information faucet provides a steady drip, which we can control by the pace of our reading. Through our single-minded concentration on the text, we can transfer all or most of the information into long-term memory and forge the rich associations essential to the creation of schemas. With the net we face many information faucets all going full blast.”
In addition to brain science, he relates a history of communications. It is quite informative about the history of language, alphabets, early printing presses, books, the typewriter, word processing. Each of these advances have impacted the way humans process information. He looks at trends in writing and publishing. I sincerely hope his statements about the future of the book (in any format) does not come to pass. This book was published in 2010, so I imagine what has happened since then would reinforce his message.
Prior to reading this book, I had already quit all social media except Goodreads. The author does not advocate such “extreme” measures, but my peace of mind has improved immensely. This is definitely a book that will prompt people to reevaluate their usage of the internet.
Show More
I zip along the surface like a guy on a jet ski.”The author expresses concern that the internet is reducing our ability to process and retain information. He cites many scientific studies to make his point that it is, in fact, rewiring our brains. He examines the many distractions offered by the internet, and how following hyperlinks can result in an unexpected adverse impact on memory.
“When we read a book, the information faucet provides a steady drip, which we can control by the pace of our reading. Through our single-minded concentration on the text, we can transfer all or most of the information into long-term memory and forge the rich associations essential to the creation of schemas. With the net we face many information faucets all going full blast.”
In addition to brain science, he relates a history of communications. It is quite informative about the history of language, alphabets, early printing presses, books, the typewriter, word processing. Each of these advances have impacted the way humans process information. He looks at trends in writing and publishing. I sincerely hope his statements about the future of the book (in any format) does not come to pass. This book was published in 2010, so I imagine what has happened since then would reinforce his message.
Prior to reading this book, I had already quit all social media except Goodreads. The author does not advocate such “extreme” measures, but my peace of mind has improved immensely. This is definitely a book that will prompt people to reevaluate their usage of the internet.
Show Less
LibraryThing member libri_amor
Most thought provoking book I've read in quite some time. It is a very well researched analysis on the impact of the internet and the way we think. Carr is an excellent writer and communicates a serious concern without being alarmist. Everyone who reads books, uses the internet regularly and has
Show More
children; MUST read this book! If it doesn't provoke significant concern then read it again AND think about the book's message. Show Less
LibraryThing member wvlibrarydude
The basic theme of this book can be taken from his reading of McLuhan " the medium's content matters less than the medium itself in influencing how we think and act."p3.
Carr progresses through the history of different technologies, especially the progress into a reading culture and how these
Carr's second point (actually before history of technology), is that neuroscience has shown that our minds are much more "plastic" and malleable than we were told. This rings true, since I was taught that our minds were fairly fixed after say the age of five. New research that he puts forward refutes that old theory, but also emphasizes that the more a certain thought process or technology is used, the more the mind becomes fixed into that format.
His basic theme then comes into play that our move from a reading culture towards one based on the internet (and booming popularity of ebooks) is changing our minds from deep reading, linear, thoughtful focus to a much more distracted, superficial, scatter shot. I see some truth in this theory, but I think it is too soon to put down as an absolute version of the future. Over the last 6 years, I have become progressively focused more on the internet and reading books (physical). I tend to watch very little television, and actually avoid it quite a bit because of how much more pleasurable the internet or good book can be. Is this contradictory to Carr's thesis? I think so.
Overall a good read and glance through Carr's take on the research he put forward. I'll have to do a little more "deep reading" on the subject to see if there is research that contradicts his analysis.
Carr progresses through the history of different technologies, especially the progress into a reading culture and how these
Show More
technologies changed our brains and thought processes. The chapters leading through the history of reading were quite interesting.Carr's second point (actually before history of technology), is that neuroscience has shown that our minds are much more "plastic" and malleable than we were told. This rings true, since I was taught that our minds were fairly fixed after say the age of five. New research that he puts forward refutes that old theory, but also emphasizes that the more a certain thought process or technology is used, the more the mind becomes fixed into that format.
His basic theme then comes into play that our move from a reading culture towards one based on the internet (and booming popularity of ebooks) is changing our minds from deep reading, linear, thoughtful focus to a much more distracted, superficial, scatter shot. I see some truth in this theory, but I think it is too soon to put down as an absolute version of the future. Over the last 6 years, I have become progressively focused more on the internet and reading books (physical). I tend to watch very little television, and actually avoid it quite a bit because of how much more pleasurable the internet or good book can be. Is this contradictory to Carr's thesis? I think so.
Overall a good read and glance through Carr's take on the research he put forward. I'll have to do a little more "deep reading" on the subject to see if there is research that contradicts his analysis.
Show Less
LibraryThing member fpagan
An important and well-written contribution: We may be in the late stages of the biggest mode-of-thinking revolution since the advent of printing; constant connection to the digital infosphere is causing humans' highly plastic brains to undergo momentous changes, such as losing the concentration
Show More
ability needed for book reading. For myself, not only do I spend a fair amount of my online time identifying and locating printed books I want and eschew flightily distractional pursuits like constant email checking, RSS feeds, and instant messaging, but also much of my "surfing" is aimed at saving text-rich webpages for later perusal offline. Sometimes I think I must be the only one who uses the Web this way. (Page designers, certainly, don't seem to think anyone ever would.) Show Less
LibraryThing member markarayner
The irony is a spongy wad, so thick the fine edge of your keyboard or netbook would be enough to cut it.
I’m trying to write a review of Nicholas Carr’s new book, The Shallows, and all the while, I can’t seem to stop myself from checking TweetDeck every few minutes (there just did it again);
This is the welter of distractions we face every day, for those of us who are wired, reading, and working. Even if you’re disciplined, the distraction is there — it takes an act of will to resist it, and what happens to your brain in that instant while you’re deciding if you should click on that link, open up that Facebook app, or make a comment on the article you’ve been reading between tasks?
A lot. In fact, your brain is being rewired while we you read this, assuming, of course, you’ve made it this far in the review and you’re still reading.
This is why I believe everyone who has any interest at all in the Internet, the web and reading should study this book. If you’re intrigued by the ultimate the fate of the human species, and where this information age is taking us, you’ll want to have a look. Hell, probably anyone who uses the net should consider at least scanning it. (Yes, more irony.)
Carr’s writing and research is excellent, and his thesis is straightforward: we’re giving up part of our humanity in the headlong rush to absorb as much information as we can, as quickly as we can. The book discusses the history of media, and how our brains have changed before — first with the advent of writing, and then with the development of Guttenburg’s press; he carries the argument from current studies of the brain and consciousness to the flawed model of our brains as computers and our minds as software; he delves into how philosophers and other thinkers have meditated on this subject throughout history.
And it is exactly the discipline of meditation, and “deep reading” as he calls it, that we are starting to lose with the web. It’s changing our writing, our thinking, and ultimately, it’s changing our culture.
If nothing else, this book will help you be more aware of what is happening to you on a daily basis. I’ve already been aware of some of the effects he discusses — for example, when I’m writing a piece of long fiction, I always make sure my computer is disconnected from the net, and I don’t have any other programs except for my word processor (and iTunes) open. Now, I see that I need to give my brain at more of a break from the constant info-dump of the net than that.
We’re all altering human evolution with this experiment, and who knows where it will end? Carr is not optimistic, and he worries that when it is all over, we will no longer be homo sapiens, we will be homo informavore.
I’m trying to write a review of Nicholas Carr’s new book, The Shallows, and all the while, I can’t seem to stop myself from checking TweetDeck every few minutes (there just did it again);
Show More
or a quick dip in to my email, or to check my blog comments…This is the welter of distractions we face every day, for those of us who are wired, reading, and working. Even if you’re disciplined, the distraction is there — it takes an act of will to resist it, and what happens to your brain in that instant while you’re deciding if you should click on that link, open up that Facebook app, or make a comment on the article you’ve been reading between tasks?
A lot. In fact, your brain is being rewired while we you read this, assuming, of course, you’ve made it this far in the review and you’re still reading.
This is why I believe everyone who has any interest at all in the Internet, the web and reading should study this book. If you’re intrigued by the ultimate the fate of the human species, and where this information age is taking us, you’ll want to have a look. Hell, probably anyone who uses the net should consider at least scanning it. (Yes, more irony.)
Carr’s writing and research is excellent, and his thesis is straightforward: we’re giving up part of our humanity in the headlong rush to absorb as much information as we can, as quickly as we can. The book discusses the history of media, and how our brains have changed before — first with the advent of writing, and then with the development of Guttenburg’s press; he carries the argument from current studies of the brain and consciousness to the flawed model of our brains as computers and our minds as software; he delves into how philosophers and other thinkers have meditated on this subject throughout history.
And it is exactly the discipline of meditation, and “deep reading” as he calls it, that we are starting to lose with the web. It’s changing our writing, our thinking, and ultimately, it’s changing our culture.
If nothing else, this book will help you be more aware of what is happening to you on a daily basis. I’ve already been aware of some of the effects he discusses — for example, when I’m writing a piece of long fiction, I always make sure my computer is disconnected from the net, and I don’t have any other programs except for my word processor (and iTunes) open. Now, I see that I need to give my brain at more of a break from the constant info-dump of the net than that.
We’re all altering human evolution with this experiment, and who knows where it will end? Carr is not optimistic, and he worries that when it is all over, we will no longer be homo sapiens, we will be homo informavore.
Show Less
LibraryThing member KeithAkers
"The Shallows" is a straightforward indictment of our use of the internet. Sounds like a good subject for my next blog post . . . uh, wait a minute . . .
I have been bothered by the internet even though I use it a great deal. Several times in previous months my wife has asked me, "so what happened
Nicholas Carr makes this process understandable -- that it isn't just a personal failing and it isn't just an accident. What makes this book so persuasive is that he can clearly state, and even defend, the opposing point of view, showing that he is not interested in merely creating a persuasive narrative to defend his case. He shows how the internet is like all the other great technologies (and information technologies) that humans adopted. After all, Socrates seemed to think that writing things down would make us stupid. But the internet is also very different, and Carr tells us how and why, by looking at everything from the physiology of the brain and the structure of memory, to contemporary icons such as "the church of Google."
The one negative of this book is that he does not give us any remedies, either as a society or as individuals, nor does he try. (There are, though, some hints strewn around as to how individuals could alleviate its effects.) Should we modify or restrict internet access? Should we modify or restrict our own use of the internet? It's not clear where we're supposed to go, and I suspect that Carr isn't interested in solutions at this point, just in presenting the problem, which he has done very well, thank you very much.
This is a book which really is changing my personal behavior. I'm not giving up the internet yet, but I'm not going to put any hyperlinks in that blog post I'm writing.
I have been bothered by the internet even though I use it a great deal. Several times in previous months my wife has asked me, "so what happened
Show More
this afternoon?" and in reply I could only say, "well, I was on the computer." It was as if the entire afternoon had been blacked out in a drinking binge. I knew I'd been reading something, probably quite interesting, probably about oil depletion or Pythagoras or one of the other subjects I'm interested in. But I couldn't pin down what, if anything, about the process was worthwhile or even what had happened.Nicholas Carr makes this process understandable -- that it isn't just a personal failing and it isn't just an accident. What makes this book so persuasive is that he can clearly state, and even defend, the opposing point of view, showing that he is not interested in merely creating a persuasive narrative to defend his case. He shows how the internet is like all the other great technologies (and information technologies) that humans adopted. After all, Socrates seemed to think that writing things down would make us stupid. But the internet is also very different, and Carr tells us how and why, by looking at everything from the physiology of the brain and the structure of memory, to contemporary icons such as "the church of Google."
The one negative of this book is that he does not give us any remedies, either as a society or as individuals, nor does he try. (There are, though, some hints strewn around as to how individuals could alleviate its effects.) Should we modify or restrict internet access? Should we modify or restrict our own use of the internet? It's not clear where we're supposed to go, and I suspect that Carr isn't interested in solutions at this point, just in presenting the problem, which he has done very well, thank you very much.
This is a book which really is changing my personal behavior. I'm not giving up the internet yet, but I'm not going to put any hyperlinks in that blog post I'm writing.
Show Less
LibraryThing member paulsignorelli
Nicholas Carr begins "The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains" with a conundrum: he tells us he is rarely able to "immerse myself in a book or a lengthy article," then expects us to read his book-length treatise on the topic. And, because he is an engaging and thoughtful writer, he
Show More
succeeds. Those of us who do not have trouble reading (or writing) long articles or books would suggest to Carr that he appears to be right on target in explaining how our brains change physiologically in response to the constant inundation of information we encounter on the Internet. Furthermore, he builds a strong case for his contention that quickly leaping from one website to another in a frenetic race through an enticing array of hyperlinks leaves us with little time to reflect upon and absorb the writing in any one article we encounter. And yet it seems as futile to blame the Internet for what we are doing to ourselves as it would be to blame television or radio or videogames for the shallowness that is so often apparent in our intellectual lives. If "information overload had become a permanent affliction," as Carr asserts (p. 170), then those of us who are trainer-teacher-learners need to play a leading role in acting upon that diagnosis and showing our learners--while reminding ourselves--that slowing down a bit will bring us long-term benefits including reduced stress levels, higher levels of creativity, and more productive approaches to the challenges we face in our work and personal lives. As Carr notes, it isn’t easy. But it is rewarding enough to be well worth the effort. Show Less
LibraryThing member ammie
Carr's research into controversial scientific findings and hotly contested topics seems thorough, balanced, and well-cited. Even though some of his conclusions are unproven and even tenuous, they are also well thought out and supported. I found his arguments that the internet does reinforce certain
Show More
types of thinking--types that many of us do not value and would label shallow or addictive rather than useful and thoughtful--convincing. As a social commentary, this book is revealing. It even has functioned for me as a sort of self-help book. Show Less
LibraryThing member StephenBarkley
Have you ever tried to read a book—the sort of book you could lose yourself in only a few years ago—only to find yourself fidgety and distracted? That symptom, described by Carr and attested to by some of his friends, resonated with me as well. The symptom is a result of, as the book subtitle
Not many people paint the internet in unfavourable terms. It's the information superhighway, an unlimited source of information and connectivity at our fingertips, and our biggest distraction. Our short-term memory can only hold amount of data. It takes time to ship that data into our long-term memory. The internet, with its style of reading which combines multimedia and hyperlinks, overfills our short-term memory and shortcuts our ability to digest information.
Some suggest that filling our long-term memory with data is pointless now, since we can Google it in a heartbeat online. Carr takes the idea of internet-as-external-memory to task. Our long-term memories actually make us who we are. It's not enough to know where data is located: it has to be absorbed to form a worldview.
Carr's book isn't one-sided—he's no Luddite. There are incredible benefits added to the human experience by the internet. Carr's persuading us to be informed about how it is changing the way we think.
Show More
reads, "what the internet is doing to our brains." If you've ever felt this way, you owe it to your brain to read Nicholas Carr's The Shallows.Not many people paint the internet in unfavourable terms. It's the information superhighway, an unlimited source of information and connectivity at our fingertips, and our biggest distraction. Our short-term memory can only hold amount of data. It takes time to ship that data into our long-term memory. The internet, with its style of reading which combines multimedia and hyperlinks, overfills our short-term memory and shortcuts our ability to digest information.
Some suggest that filling our long-term memory with data is pointless now, since we can Google it in a heartbeat online. Carr takes the idea of internet-as-external-memory to task. Our long-term memories actually make us who we are. It's not enough to know where data is located: it has to be absorbed to form a worldview.
Carr's book isn't one-sided—he's no Luddite. There are incredible benefits added to the human experience by the internet. Carr's persuading us to be informed about how it is changing the way we think.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Fips
The blurb claims this book to be a Silent Spring for the literary mind. That is certainly comparing apples to oranges, but at the core to this book there is a thought-provoking argument about the impact of various technologies on the workings of the mind. Carr's main thesis (to be found almost in
Whilst much of the furore that came after the publication of his article/this book ascribes him to being a drum-bashing technophobe, there is little Luddite rhetoric here, and this book is far from the grandiloquent jeremiad its often labelled as being. The book itself is largely well-written, with the core argument never far from the narrative, and there is plenty of research here to back up the claims. Certainly this is no serious scholarly work, the charge often levelled at Carr that he only cherry-picked research findings which bolstered his main argument is probably justified, but there is enough food here for thought. The arguments of the aforementioned article have been padded out with some interesting historical background, findings from the realms of neuroscience and psychology, and parallels to other technological shifts, but at times it does feel like one is reading an undergraduate essay hurried off to a deadline: a string of hopefully worthy quotes, strung together by the occasionally conjunction ("..." and "...", however "..."). The best chapters are those which don't shy away from using the personal pronoun 'I' and reflect the authors own observant struggles with the new age technologies, and the sadly all too short chapter on the Internet's influence on our use of memory is of its own a very thought-provoking aside.
At less than 250 sparsely-packed pages, this is a book that shouldn't exhaust even the attention span of the novus homo it describes. It should be of interest to people born both sides of the Internet divide, and the well-researched reports on historical parallels and psychological aspects offer plenty of titbits for our minds to work on. The reproach that Carr offers no solutions to the problematic developments he highlights is, in my opinion, to the book's strengths not weaknesses. It is a commentary, rather than a critique. Social change can be halted about as easily as the tides, though we might as individuals choose to tread our own paths. But it behoves us all well to acknowledge Change's existence.
Show More
its entirety in his article "Is Google making us stupid?") is that the Internet is changing our minds, our ability to think and the way we use our memories, and all this not necessarily for the better. Essentially, the Internet is a universe of distractions, offering endless light entertainments and pointless interruptions that train our brains into an addictive shallow pattern of ineffectual multitasking. We hold up the new technology on a pedestal as a doorway to a new world of knowledge and communication, bringing with it benefits for social interaction, personal liberty and scientific endeavour, but Carr claims that this portal is not without its drawbacks vitiating our ability to think deeply, or use our memories effectively.Whilst much of the furore that came after the publication of his article/this book ascribes him to being a drum-bashing technophobe, there is little Luddite rhetoric here, and this book is far from the grandiloquent jeremiad its often labelled as being. The book itself is largely well-written, with the core argument never far from the narrative, and there is plenty of research here to back up the claims. Certainly this is no serious scholarly work, the charge often levelled at Carr that he only cherry-picked research findings which bolstered his main argument is probably justified, but there is enough food here for thought. The arguments of the aforementioned article have been padded out with some interesting historical background, findings from the realms of neuroscience and psychology, and parallels to other technological shifts, but at times it does feel like one is reading an undergraduate essay hurried off to a deadline: a string of hopefully worthy quotes, strung together by the occasionally conjunction ("..." and "...", however "..."). The best chapters are those which don't shy away from using the personal pronoun 'I' and reflect the authors own observant struggles with the new age technologies, and the sadly all too short chapter on the Internet's influence on our use of memory is of its own a very thought-provoking aside.
At less than 250 sparsely-packed pages, this is a book that shouldn't exhaust even the attention span of the novus homo it describes. It should be of interest to people born both sides of the Internet divide, and the well-researched reports on historical parallels and psychological aspects offer plenty of titbits for our minds to work on. The reproach that Carr offers no solutions to the problematic developments he highlights is, in my opinion, to the book's strengths not weaknesses. It is a commentary, rather than a critique. Social change can be halted about as easily as the tides, though we might as individuals choose to tread our own paths. But it behoves us all well to acknowledge Change's existence.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Ellesee
I'm usually not one to declare a book a "must-read" for everyone, but I think The Shallows should be required reading for anyone in education at the very least. In the same vein as Jaron Lanier's _You are Not a Gadget_, Carr looks closely at how computer technology, particularly the Internet, has
This is not a diatribe on the ills of technology, but it is a warning that too much of a "good" thing can have detrimental effects. Starting with reading and writing (the first of many technologies), Carr maps how the brain's structures have been altered by the technological tools humans have developed over the years. Yet, as he point out, until the advent of accessible network technology, all human tools served specific functions that kept them limited: radios only broadcast audio, film and television sent images and sound, cassettes and vinyl, audio. In contrast, computer technology is a media that "does it all"--it is the one-stop shopping for all communications, entertainment, information. It is all-encompassing, and all-enslaving.
The Shallows raises questions about when enough is too much, and how we can become more conscientious users of informational technologies so that we don't lose the richness and depth that is human thought and the human mind.
Show More
changed our thinking. This is not just a superficial adaptation to a new media, we are literally changing our brains--re-writing neural pathways, growing sections, shrinking others, as a result of the constant barrage of informational tidbits, multimedia mash-ups, super-hyper-highway links and all that comes with being hip with the techno-trends. This is not a diatribe on the ills of technology, but it is a warning that too much of a "good" thing can have detrimental effects. Starting with reading and writing (the first of many technologies), Carr maps how the brain's structures have been altered by the technological tools humans have developed over the years. Yet, as he point out, until the advent of accessible network technology, all human tools served specific functions that kept them limited: radios only broadcast audio, film and television sent images and sound, cassettes and vinyl, audio. In contrast, computer technology is a media that "does it all"--it is the one-stop shopping for all communications, entertainment, information. It is all-encompassing, and all-enslaving.
The Shallows raises questions about when enough is too much, and how we can become more conscientious users of informational technologies so that we don't lose the richness and depth that is human thought and the human mind.
Show Less
LibraryThing member mdoris
Our daughter who is doing a Library Science degree suggested this book to us. She had read the [End of Absence] by [[Michael Harris]] at our suggestion. EofA won the Canadian Governor General Award for non fiction in 2014. [The Shallows] was mentioned in the EofA bibliography and it is a very
(from the book jacket)....He challenges that with Net use we are sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply.....the technologies that we use to find, store and share information can literally reroute our neural pathways,....we are becoming ever more adept at scanning and skimming but what we are losing is our capacity for concentration, contemplation and reflection.
This is a very interesting and somewhat disturbing book. It is well written and well referenced.
It is very easy to be whisked away by technology without seeing the changes that it is making in us and for us over time. It brings many of those changes to a conscious level.
Show More
interesting read. It is now 5 years old and in this computer driven world, 5 years is a long time and what he discusses is in many ways in sharper focus. He discusses brain plasticity and the effects of computer use.(from the book jacket)....He challenges that with Net use we are sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply.....the technologies that we use to find, store and share information can literally reroute our neural pathways,....we are becoming ever more adept at scanning and skimming but what we are losing is our capacity for concentration, contemplation and reflection.
This is a very interesting and somewhat disturbing book. It is well written and well referenced.
It is very easy to be whisked away by technology without seeing the changes that it is making in us and for us over time. It brings many of those changes to a conscious level.
Show Less
Awards
Pulitzer Prize (Finalist — General Non-Fiction — 2011)
Wissensbuch des Jahres (2011)
San Francisco Chronicle Best Book of the Year (Nonfiction — 2010)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
2010
Physical description
304 p.; 5.5 inches
ISBN
9780393339758