A Rhetoric Critique of Nicholas Carr’s, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”

         Today, we have an amazing tool of convenience right in front of our faces even at our fingertips. This tool is called the Internet. It really is amazing that in the comfort of our own homes we have computers, cell phones, iPads, and more that we can have access to all the information about anything in the world. Sitting on our butts we can get a college degree! It really is baffling to me that everyone on this planet can access the internet. But its what we do with this luxury and how it affects us is the basis for Carr’s article.

           Nicholas Carr, a blogger and writer argues that the internet is making it too easy for us and we no longer rely on “old school” ways of research and learning but rather on the convenience of tapping a few letters on a keyboard and then a click of a button. He voices the views of fellow bloggers who say that our way of thinking and our abilty to concentrate and hold attention on reading has been altered and we can’t focus like we used to, maybe because of the pace, longer time and effort of information getting into our brains. Carr informs us that, “we still await the long-term neurological and psychological experiments that will provide a definitive picture of how Internet use affects cognition”. He gives evidence of research projects made by universities studying the behavior of students’ research habits and how it shows “a form of skimming activity”, like they cant get the information fast enough.  Carr compares our brains efficiency to that of factory workers that, with the use of a stopwatch, measure their efficiency and productivity to increase it. And with that, Carr informs us about Google and their goals pointed towards the development of an artificial intelligence to make out brains function at a higher level. He quotes Google’s founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who say that, “The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive”. Carr concludes his article referring back to what he began his article with, a summary of a movie scene from of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. He compares the deactivation of an artificial intelligence device meant to assist astronauts in an outer space mission, but rather was backfiring on its makers by “having a mind of its own”, so to speak. Carr’s comparison shows us that if we allow the Internet to take the place of our own God-given brains and the capacity at which they naturally move, we will lose our sense of self. He concludes his article with a great, eloquent summary of his thoughts, “As we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.”
           

           Overall, Carr’s article supports his point of view and has correct usage of kairos, pathos, ethos, and logos. So, Carr achieved his goal to try and persuade his audience that the use of Google can, has, and will continue to affect our brains in a negative matter if it is relied on too heavily.

           Carr begins his article with wonderful use of pathos, which is the emotional appeal to the audience. By quoting the movie, we as an audience are taken back to the film and get to relive the scene all over again. He quotes the artificial intelligence computer, “Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave? Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it.” Carr quotes this to have the audience see the computer almost like a human, who has feelings and life. By giving it human-like qualities, which appeals to the reader and is more inclined to continue reading, most likely be hooked at the beginning, and have sympathy for the victim in this article. Another example of ethos in Carr’s article is the conclusion. He returns to the Space Odyssey movie and again appeals to the audience’s hearts and makes them sympathize with the computer. But this time his word choices were what stood out to me the most. He uses words like “childlike pleading”, “robotic efficiency”, and another human-like quality, “innocence”. While these words are not genius or earth-shattering, they do the job. They are simple enough and perfect to get the point across in a gentle way, which was refreshing to me.           

           Another tool Carr uses in his persuasion is the use of logos and ethos, which is the use of statistics and facts to show authenticity. He states many statistics from sources and facts from many studies that support his argument. He talks about a study done by “scholars from University College London”. They studied the behavior of online researchers. “The scholars examined” many researchers skim through information and not even read it all the way through. These facts that Carr communicates support his claim and as well do a good job of showing us that when these people “skim over” material on the Internet they are not doing research the way it used to be done. One may say, “Well if they are learning and its faster, is that bad?” Not at all. But Carr is saying that when this type of learning, this skim-reading” is the only way that we know then that’s when we have to re-evaluate. Like Carr says, “It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.”

        Carr’s use of kairos is very interesting in this article as well and is probably my favorite tool of his that he uses. Kairos is giving historical background to support the author’s argument. One instance that stood out to me. One being the reference back to Friedrich Nietzsche in 1882, when his failing eyesight wasn’t helped with his overuse of handwriting. He bought a typewriter, which helped him a lot. Until a friend of his pointed out that his writing changed a lot. His friend said that his writing, “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.” This can still be said today about our writing style that has been changed by the internet. So many kids will say “what” instead of “pardon”. Or “ya” instead of “yes”. Again, simple points and nothing earth-shattering, but its true. Our language and way of thinking is changing everyday, for better or worse.

         So, Carr succeeds in his persuasion of the audience thought the use of his Pathos, Ethos, Kairos, and Logos. He uses these tools to gain the audiences trust and sympathy while also showing them evidence of the argument and supporting it that way.