Book Review
Nicholas Carr, The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to our Brains
W.W.Norton & Company (June 7, 2010)
Reviewed by Heinz G. Dschankilic
At first glance the title of this book might seem reactionary and alarmist. After pushing past my initial hesitancy, I found Nicholas Carr’s analysis of the internet and its impact on human mental processes informative, useful and engaging.
Let me state at the outset, I am not a psychiatrist, psychologist or researcher into human physiology. Therefore, I am ill equipped to evaluate the medical assertions made in this book. Carr documents a number of studies that look at the “plasticity” of the human brain that approach the subject from a number of trajectories. The mass of evidence presented, buttress the assertion that the brain is an extremely pliable organ and can adapt itself, in rather remarkable ways, when confronted with the challenge of new technology. Most alarming, if Carr’s evidence is accurate, is that the brain does not merely adapt but in fact changes its neurological pathways in order to process data input. It needs to be mentioned that these adaptations take place with any new advancement of technology not merely the internet according to Carr.
Carr traces the history of technological advancement and observes with each advance there is a neurological tradeoff that occurs. As the brain creates new pathways to handle changing data streams, new skills become possible making old skills obsolete. Quite literally, the internet does indeed change the way we think. Let me point out three examples from Carr’s book on how this happens.
First, reading and disseminating information online uses a very different portion of the brain than does reading from a book. The region of the brain used while “surfing” is found in the region that hosts short-term memory functions. Carr notes, and as anyone who has spent hours online can attest, screen reading consists not merely of text on a backlit LED. There are also link, hyper-links, banner ads etc. Add to that incoming RSS feeds, “tweets”, Facebook updates and email notifications the mind begins to act like a data sieve or filter discriminating between gold from dross leaving very little time for deep reading.
This introduces the second point. The technology is itself designed with mental distraction as an inevitable outcome. The internet spouts information on a tidal scale making it virtually impossible to spend a sustained amount of time in actually assimilating the information placed before the reader. Carr repeatedly makes the case that there is a vast difference between evaluating raw data and thinking deeply about the data in order to make sense of the information. Therefore, we are rapidly becoming information junkies without a corresponding jump in wisdom. Quite literally we are becoming a culture of shallow thinkers. The neurological tradeoff with internet technology, no doubt an unforeseen consequence, is that as a culture we are witnessing a wholesale diminution of our judgmental faculties.
This brings us to the third and final point. Apostles of internet technology have hailed the new information age with a utopian euphoria. It will, as some have alleged, reshape and replace conventional or traditional modes of learning. Most alarming is the reductionist view of humanity maintained by the high priests of the internet. The brain is seen as merely a biological computer. It is a thing to be programmed with reams of data. Hyper-links and stream feeds provide the needed programming. Carr rightly points out, that they fail to grasp the fact that the brain can exceed the expectations of the programmer making deductions, conclusions and connections that are often beyond the original intent of the programmer. This is called wisdom or judgment and no machine, how well constructed, can ever duplicate. This elementary fact of human engineering does not deter these master scientists from continually creating tools and resources with reductionism in view.
As I said earlier, I am not a scientist and therefore I cannot render a credible verdict if the evidence Carr presents has any scientific merit. However, as a lay person Carr’s assertions resonated at least at an anecdotal level. As one who tweets, emails, surfs, scans, links and updates at an increasingly greater degree I have personally experienced many of the phenomena cited by Carr and others such as a diminished capacity to concentrate and read for pro-longed periods of time. Increasingly my thinking and writing is becoming distracted and disjointed. I may very well be on the path nuerological shallowness.
If nothing else, this book has caused me to seriously examine my own personal habits and step backwards into a quiet corner, with a great book, along with my companion the fountain pen and a good writing pad. If you are at all concerned about what the internet maybe doing to you, Carr’s book is certainly a good starting point.
Heinz G. Dschankilic
