Having a low tolerance for extended focus times could perhaps be because of the constant use of the Internet and other forms of media. In the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid,” Nicholas Carr claims that the way we “read” on the Internet makes us less capable of deeply focusing for long periods of time, or of critically evaluating what we are reading. In the article, Carr describes how some of his friends who used to immerse themselves in a book or a lengthy article very easily, who now find themselves’ losing concentration after two or three pages (2). I can completely attest to this; most of my friends often tell me similar stories about how particular websites have made them passive readers. A couple of my friends, who were born and raised with the Internet, often tell me how difficult it is for them to read pages of text, because they’re so used to reading, or more over skimming through sort passages/messages, such as texts. They simply “get fidgety, lose the thread, and begin looking for something else to do” (2). The friends’ stories Carr and I have experienced wholly endorse the idea that what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away the capacity for concentration and contemplation (2).
Personally, I feel the appreciation of beautiful, rich literature, such as classic literature and academic articles have been undergoing rigorous scrutiny because of the way we “read” on the Internet. If we read in this fashion, known as hyper attention, we’re unconsciously choosing to become “skimmers” and “bouncers.” In Carr’s view the more we use the web, the more we have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing; which I think is true. The majority of my friends, who religiously use the web, are the friends who lose their concentration while reading lengthy material. My friends have become part of the nation of “skimmers” and “bouncers.” The web “puts ‘efficiency’ and ‘immediacy’ above all else” (3), which seems to be what people are hungry for nowadays. In other words, speed seems to be the number one priority in reading on the web, comprehending the material is now a secondary issue.
“The shift in cognitive styles can be seen in the contrast between deep attention and hyper attention, “ says N. Katherine Hayles, a literary and social critic and the author of “Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes” (28). One must first understand the meaning of both “deep attention” and “hyper attention” in order to understand the shift Hayles acknowledges. Deep attention, the cognitive style predominately described as having a high tolerance for extended focus times (Hayles 28). On the other hand, hyper attention is described as switching focus rapidly between different tasks and seeking a rather high level of stimulation. (Hayles 28). According to Hayles, the increasing role of media in the everyday environment has shifted younger people to the cognitive style of hyper attention (29). In other words, media has in a way made people more prone to multi-tasking, and constantly seeking higher levels of stimulation.
The essence of both Hayle’s and Carr’s research and claims is that the Internet makes us less capable of deeply focusing for long periods of time, or of critically assessing what we are reading. Although, I agree with Hayles to a point, I cannot accept her overriding assumption that, “children growing up in the media-rich environments literally have brains wired differently than humans who did not come to maturity in such conditions” (32). Though I concede that peoples’ attitudes respond to their environment, I still insist people change in order to strengthen and grow; similarly to anyone who didn’t grow up in a media-rich environment. I think everybody is wired the same when it comes down to approaching the Internet; it makes us less capable of deeply focusing for long periods of time, or of critically evaluating what we are reading. In this sense, people who were born and raised with the internet are just adapting to their surroundings; they aren’t necessarily “wired” differently.
No comments:
Post a Comment