Comments on: The End Of Conversation? http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/03/25/the-end-of-conversation/ Larry A. Herzberg's Blog Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:55:28 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Larry http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/03/25/the-end-of-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-10677 Larry Thu, 26 Mar 2009 04:25:21 +0000 http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=207#comment-10677 John- Here's a possible emoticon for irony (at least when 'irony' is used to mean 'saying the opposite of what one means' - not quite how you were using it). )-:-) There are already philosophical views - one recently put forth in a <a href="http://consc.net/papers/extended.html" rel="nofollow">paper</a> by <a href="http://consc.net/chalmers/" rel="nofollow">David Chalmers</a> and Andy Clark - suggesting that technology literally expands the boundaries of the mind. I'm not sure I buy that literal view, but there's no doubt that it's at least figuratively true. My concern is that even if it expands the mind, currently available technology shrinks communicative intimacy. There's more and more shallow chit chat (email, IMs, tweets), leaving significantly less time for human interaction (where 'human' means, first and foremost, a kind of animal) - the sort of interaction where you can use and develop "mind-reading" or "emotion-reading" skills. The best writers can communicate emotions and other attitudes through word choice, but many of today's high school graduates have a surprisingly hard time writing a grammatical sentence. I'm hoping that their ability to communicate in person is not similarly atrophying. John-

Here’s a possible emoticon for irony (at least when ‘irony’ is used to mean ‘saying the opposite of what one means’ – not quite how you were using it). )-:-)

There are already philosophical views – one recently put forth in a paper by David Chalmers and Andy Clark – suggesting that technology literally expands the boundaries of the mind. I’m not sure I buy that literal view, but there’s no doubt that it’s at least figuratively true.

My concern is that even if it expands the mind, currently available technology shrinks communicative intimacy. There’s more and more shallow chit chat (email, IMs, tweets), leaving significantly less time for human interaction (where ‘human’ means, first and foremost, a kind of animal) – the sort of interaction where you can use and develop “mind-reading” or “emotion-reading” skills. The best writers can communicate emotions and other attitudes through word choice, but many of today’s high school graduates have a surprisingly hard time writing a grammatical sentence. I’m hoping that their ability to communicate in person is not similarly atrophying.

]]> By: John Whitney http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/2009/03/25/the-end-of-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-10676 John Whitney Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:53:26 +0000 http://larryherzberg.com/wordpress/?p=207#comment-10676 There was a great article in the Atlantic a few months back about how the technology for communication impacts our brains, and how surprisingly quickly we are able to re-wire ourselves to handle the technology, but not without impact (both good and bad) on the thought process itself. It touched on the printing press of course, and how when the typewriter became commonplace, it started to impact the style of various authors who had previously written in long hand. I'd send you the article, but it's on my Kindle (is there an emoticon for irony??) The author talked about how difficult it had become for him to read lengthy, deep articles when in the past as a grad student, he'd done it with ease. He attributes that to the effect that the Web has had, and all of its distractions. Anything more than a paragraph or two, and we're onto something else. Perhaps the predictions of the science fiction writers of a symbiotic relationship between computers and humans are destined to come true. We'll all wind up wired together as "cells" in some larger brain, each of us dispensable individually, but somehow adding to the collective. Maybe the Borg had it right after all. And here I sit reading your blog when I should be focusing on my students... There was a great article in the Atlantic a few months back about how the technology for communication impacts our brains, and how surprisingly quickly we are able to re-wire ourselves to handle the technology, but not without impact (both good and bad) on the thought process itself. It touched on the printing press of course, and how when the typewriter became commonplace, it started to impact the style of various authors who had previously written in long hand. I’d send you the article, but it’s on my Kindle (is there an emoticon for irony??) The author talked about how difficult it had become for him to read lengthy, deep articles when in the past as a grad student, he’d done it with ease. He attributes that to the effect that the Web has had, and all of its distractions. Anything more than a paragraph or two, and we’re onto something else.

Perhaps the predictions of the science fiction writers of a symbiotic relationship between computers and humans are destined to come true. We’ll all wind up wired together as “cells” in some larger brain, each of us dispensable individually, but somehow adding to the collective. Maybe the Borg had it right after all.

And here I sit reading your blog when I should be focusing on my students…

]]>