Technology and Our Minds

In The 21st Century

By: Sara Wilson
Norwalk Community College
Introduction
It is important to take a look at our extensive
use of technologies. Human Beings have quite a bit. Mr. Carr brings to our attention
advanced enormously in areas such as that, “Never has a communications system
internet and machines, causing a change in played so many roles in our lives- or
how we interact with our world. We have extended such a broad influence over our
built and developed an advanced array of thoughts as the internet does today.” (321)
devices. How has technology helped us? We take on qualities of technology, which is
How has technology changed us? How has adaptation at a biological level. Our brains
technology harmed us? Surely the intended are incredible machines that govern our
goal when creating technical advances is to essential functions, from visual and auditory
empower the human race, unfortunately, stimuli, to memory. Therefore when we
these advances may be changing us for the utilize the net, the patterns that are being
worse. It is no surprise that the experts in woven are quite different than those woven
this field have conflicting opinions. by reading books and the like. The internet
has a huge influence over us. It seems
Expert Opinions
information is becoming instantly available,
The first opinion comes from the expert, replacing our complex inner density and
Nicholas Carr, “Is Google Making Us thought processes.
Stupid?” Carr is a writer specializing in
culture and technology. Mr. Carr discusses
the “struggle” his brain is going through Similarly, another expert, Carole
because of his time spent online. His view Cadwalladr, believes there are negative
emphasizes, “That variations extend across qualities to Google searches. In her article,
many regions of the Brain, including those “Google, Democracy, and The Truth About
that govern such essential cognitive Internet Search”, she explores the darker
functions as memory and the interpretation side of these tools. Cadwalladr informs us
of visual and auditory stimuli. We can about Google, “It’s mission as a company,
expect as well that the circuits woven by our the one-line over view that has informed the
use of the net will be different from those company since its foundation and is still the
woven by our reading of books and other banner headline on its corporate website
printed works.” (318) With the internet today, is to “organize the World’s
becoming a universal medium, our minds information and make it universally
now expect information to come swiftly. accessible and useful.” (“Google, democracy
This lessens concentration and the truth about internet search”, 2016)
We are constantly in the thralls of fake
news, and people are actually doing very tools as humans. Examples in our past show
damaging things. People rarely click on the us we can adapt and use technology to
second page of search results. Therefore we increase memory, insight, creativity, and
are witnessing a kind of war over complex thought. Clive Thompson uses an
information. So when Google presents their example, “Because it turns out that when
results, and hateful information surfaces, it’s chess players were genuinely passionate
safe to say that Google is doing a lousy job about learning and being creative in their
presenting information. Expert Cadwalladr game, computers didn’t degrade their own
puts it bluntly, “This is a propaganda human abilities. Quite the opposite: it helped
machine. It’s targeting people individually them internalize the game much more
to recruit them to an idea. It’s a level of profoundly and advance to new levels of
social engineering that I’ve never seen human excellence.” (358) Some would
before. They’re capturing people and then agree, that working side by side with
keeping them on an emotional leash and computers improves strategic guidance and
never letting go.” (“Google, democracy and problem solving skills. We are recording
the truth about internet search”, 2016) It is ideas more and making connections.
beliefs such as this that make us question Technology gives us the ability to store
whether or not Corporations are abusing information and broadcast it. Socially we are
their power. This may also be leading to able to better understand others we care
Google knowing information before we are about.
even aware of it ourselves. What is the next
stage? And, should we be worried?
Our final expert, Kevin Kelly, served as an
Executive Editor for six years. He has since
On the flip side, some experts view the topic advanced to “Senior Maverick”. Mr. Kelly
differently. Clive Thompson is a blogger has also written many books on the subject
and freelance writer. He writes for The New and is a founder of the Wired Website.
York Times. Mr. Thompson contributes to Kevin Kelly points out, “Once we can co-
the topic with an article titled, “Smarter than work with robots right next to us, it’s
You Think: How Technology Is Changing inevitable that our tasks will bleed together,
Our Minds for the Better”. Thompson and soon our old work will become theirs-
believes that computers help us to see more, and our new work will become something
communicate more, and retain more we can hardly imagine”. (305) Machines are
information. Expert Clive Thompson becoming smarter. Robots are doing jobs
explains, “In a sense, this is an ancient story. that no one 200 years ago would have
The “extended mind” theory of cognition imagined. From loading trucks, to picking
argues that the reason humans are so vegetables. The fact remains that robots can
intellectually dominant is that we’ve always do jobs we are unable to do, and success will
outsourced bits of cognition, using tools to come to those who are able to get work done
scaffold our thinking into ever-more-rarefied with machines and eventually robots
realms.” (347) This seems a very basic fact, working side by side with humans. Mr.
but none the less, it is true. History does Kelly confirms his beliefs by stating,
show us that we refine and improve our “We’ve accepted utter reliability in robot
manufacturing; soon we’ll accept it in robot findings that coincide with this question
intelligence and service.” (306) Mr. Kelly were shocking. These findings may even
and countless others, view these advances as challenge the work of scientists striving to
empowering. An endless offering of create artificial intelligence. Therefore
possibilities. assuming that people want
Methods
Do you think technology
In order to better understand how people
relate to these experts, I conducted a 10
and the internet has
question survey. I designed the survey on lessend our complex
surveymonkey.com. Where I then created a inner density?
link and distributed the survey via email to
my co-workers and family. My co-workers
are a diverse group of people, making them No, 35%

a great resource. Seventy percent of people

interviewed were between the ages of 25
and 54. The other thirty percent comprised Yes, 65%
all other ages 18 and older. With eighty five
percent of the people interviewed having
went to college. The questions ranged from Yes
closed questions to open ended questions.
(See attached Survey) Their own robot. (See pie chart below)
Results These two discoveries have significant
influences upon what types of robots are
Everyone interviewed, answered all 10 produced. And whether or not said robots
questions. I found two of the questions to be are appropriate for the average person.
the most interesting and provide the most
insight into whether or not people were
happy with technology and it’s interaction Would you like to have
with their minds, or if they thought there your own personal robot?
may be some problems. Question 9, though Yes
it may seem basic, it asks a very profound 20%
question. Do you think technology/ the
internet has lessened our complex inner
density and thought processes? There was a
strong response, with 65% believing that
Yes, technology has hindered our thought No
processes. (See pie chart on the right, top) 80%

Similarly, question 10 was very direct, and Yes No

strongly speaks to how people view living
side-by-side with technology. It asks, would
you like your own personal robot? The
At first glance, people may find robots to mindful of what is being looked at? Most
appear beneficial. But on closer inspection, people, 50% answered yes. However they
people seem to be warry of them. are aware that this might not be possible.
Therefore siding with Cadwalladr and
Discussion
similar sceptics.
Recent studies like this one shed light on
Conclusion
how people would like to interact with
technology in the future, which previous This article has helped us delve deeper into
studies had not addressed. The diverse group our minds, asking us to consider how we
of people surveyed were asked what social really feel about our use of technology. Just
media they use every day. Facebook was the like all areas of our lives, we need balance.
most popular. However, a close second was Naturally we don’t want to admit we are not
Instagram, which was tied with people who in control of our own destiny. Technology
do not use any social media what so ever. and the effect it has on our minds will
This demonstrates a nice balance of people remain controversial. Next time you reach
contributing to social media. These survey for your smart phone, ask yourself, “Who is
results support Clive Thompson’s view really in control?” After conducting my
because he believes the internet helps us research, I believe people do generally
communicate more and have more insight. possess a healthy awareness of how
These findings support that most people, technological advancements are imprinting
45%, use the internet less than four hours a upon us. It is this caution and awareness,
day. Followed by people using the internet when combined with technology, where we
less than two hours a day, coming in at 30%. may discover anything is possible.
It is answers like these that guide this
research.
Predictably, people leaned towards
gathering research information from the
internet, 90%. As opposed to the library,
scoring only 10%. I believe this is mostly
due to convenience. However, it does
support Clive Thompson’s view, and Kevin
Kelly’s as well. People seemed to maintain
their warry view on technology with the
question; sometimes information that is bad
or hurtful is more powerful. Do you agree or
disagree? 55% agreed that hurtful
information is more powerful, and 40%
were unsure. Leaving only 5% disagreeing
with this question. Lastly, the interviewees
were asked, Should Google and other search
engines put more effort into censoring
harmful information? Should they be more