Internet Quarrel

When the internet was introduced to the world it seemed as though it was a knight in shining armor. Now it seems the way we read and react to what we had read has changed from the level it was once at. Clive Thompson a published author who wrote “Public Thinking” argues for the internet and believes that its strengths far outway its weaknesses. Thompson claims that the internet has enhanced our cognitive behavior. He proclaims that the internet has brought us into a literary revolution as substantial as the one that had taken place in Ancient Greece. Contrary to Thompson are Nicholas Carr and Michael S. Rosewald both established professionals claiming that the internet is impairing us. Carr is the author of “Is Google Making Us Stupid,” in which he argues that the internet has been taking away from our capacity for concentration and contemplation. He suggests that with the easy access to vasts amounts of knowledge at your fingertips that people will lose the connection with the material they are researching and not fully comprehend what they had just read. With all the distractions and temptations to move from site to site has formed a sort shallow way of thinking about subjects. Rosewald is the author of “Serious reading takes a hit from online scanning and skimming, researchers say,” which targets the way people go about reading online information. Online information is geared toward simplicity and tend to be a lot less to read. Information we find in

Schwarz 2

books and hard copy materials do not follow this path. Rosewald argues that we are losing the ability to comprehend material containing multiple key arguments and ideas because we are becoming accustomed to information being almost spoon fed to us through online websites. In this paper I will elaborate on and challenge Thompson, extend Carr, and expand on Rosewald with my own argument.

Thompson writes of fantastic claims in his text about how the internet has increased cooperation between working professionals and how writing for an audience will propel students to write with more creativity and logic. The connections made by these working professionals will result in new inventions or new partnerships between industries but the connections made by everyday people are on twitter or facebook and not advancing society in any direction. One the experiments thompson noted in his text was done by a Stanford English professor, Andrea Lunsford, and over the course of five years she collected nearly fifteen thousand pieces of writing from 189 students whether it was from social media or for classes. She concluded that 40 percent of everything they wrote was pleasure and that, “They’re writing so much more than students before them ever did… It’s stunning” (Thompson 51). This study was based off of students that go to one of the most prestigious academic schools in the world. Their writing capabilities are arguably more profound than that of the regular person. When the internet is used by someone who is capable of connecting beyond the social standpoint and uses the internet as one of their many tools than it is a substantial resource. Sadly for most this is not true. Time and time again the internet has become a distraction for many students in class and outside of the

Schwarz 3

classroom. The lack of effort given in the classroom today has in part come from the advancement of the internet.

Carr believes that even though the internet has many redeeming qualities it has weaknesses that outweigh them as of right now. The way we have adapted to taking information off the internet has descended the level at which we retain written information. Carr quotes from Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, “Bowman... coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its brain” (Carr 58).He then goes on to state that he himself is having a hard time remembering what he had read in passages from books these days and how something that use to come naturally such as deep reading has become a struggle. The internet has vastly changed the way we read and comprehend knowledge today by serving the answers to our questions to us on a silver platter and thus eliminating the need for people to find out any of the underlying information. The hinderance of concentration and contemplation is what Carr argues to be overlapping all other positive features of the internet. Carr explained that we only see the surface of the topics we research due to the way the internet pushes out its information and the amounts of information it pushes out each and every day. Carr quotes Maryanne Wolf, a professor from Tufts University and author of Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain, stating that, “We are not only what we read… we are how we read” (Carr 60). What Wolf fears is that when we read online we become “mere decoders of information” and no longer engage that deep thought that connects with and engages the texts on a different level. The way we are reading today is no longer for books or long texts but for the internet article. Since entering high school years ago the internet has had a big impact on my academic career. From

Schwarz 4

watching math tutor videos on youtube or looking up definitions on dictionary.com, the internet has made books almost obsolete in my eyes. I see now that when I take up a book and attempt to read it, I find I have a lack of concentration and remembrance of what I had just read and so I end up rereading it. Compared to the internet which gives you the information you seek right in front of you, when using books you have to dissect the information to find what you are looking for. This ability I find to be hard for  many people today and almost every time they would rather search something on the internet instead of looking for it manually in a book. For me and other students reading books has almost become obsolete with the the availability of written summaries online of  any book you can think of. I find that a connection made through reading a novel is lost when i use the internet to look up a summary of certain chapters because I did not want to read the book. I personally do not use social media all that often compared to other students my age because I prefer to talk to people face to face. So my writing skills and collaboration skills through the internet have not really been affected other than me using the internet for writing papers. I find that many people today do not think before they act, or really think at all for that matter. The lack of common sense in people my age today is astounding and I believe that the increased reliability on the internet has to do with it.

Aligning with Carr’s argument is Rosewald’s. He agrees with Carr in that the internet is handicapping our generation’s comprehensive reading ability. With more time spent today online than on paper students are leaning more toward using the internet than paper. “The students believed they did better on screen. They were wrong. Their comprehension and learning was better on paper” (Rosewald 1). With all the time spent today by students and adults on the

Schwarz 5

computer it is easy to see why we are more comfortable with the internet copy of a text rather than a hard copy. Sadly though accompanying the online copy is the style of reading we perform now with it. Skipping and skimming from one page to the next. Adversely, the reading we do when we use a hard copy is more in depth and concentrated. I proclaim that as a result of all the surfing done on the internet we are left now only recognizing what is written on top per se and not throughout the text. Claire Handscombe a graduate student at American University that Rosewald interviewed stated, “It’s like your eyes are passing over the words but you’re not taking in what they say,” she confessed. “When I realize what’s happening, I have to go back and read again and again” (Rosewald 1). This quote supports my claim about remembrance in that it has been lacking in recent years. With all the reading going on today, why should we settle for only partially comprehending a text?

The internet has come a long ways but it still has a ways to go. Thompson is not wrong in that the internet has helped us a great deal with making connections and writing skills. For now though the claims made by Carr and Rosewald carry more weight to them. The cognitive skills being damaged by the shallow online reading is becoming more and more present in individuals. The internet is a great resource for us but we need to learn how to use it properly and then it will truly bring us into an entire new field of cognitive and contemplative abilities.

Outline

Intro

When the internet was introduced to the world it seemed as though it was a knight in shining armor. Now scholars and working professionals are seeing a change in the way we read and react to what we have read.

• Introduce Thompson and his argument behind the internet
• Next I will introduce Carr and Rosewald and their arguments behind the internet
• Quotes from both texts
• Close intro with my statement of how I am going to present and what I am going to talk about in my paper.

Body 1

• Topic sentence leading into Thompson’s text
• Elaborate and explain Thompson’s main claim - So how has all this writing changed our cognitive behavior?
• Quote one or two examples
• Elaborate on examples
• State that the internet has helped us in those ways but it has hindered us more in these ways...

Body 2

• Topic sentence leading into Carr’s text
• State Carr’s main claim - the internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation
• Elaborate and explain Carr’s principles behind why the internet is handicapping us
• One or two Quotes from text
• Explain and interpret quotes
• State why I agree with Carr and his argument that we are being wounded by the internet but also state that the internet has not completely been harming us

Body 3

• Personal Anecdote

Body 4

• Topic sentence leading into Rosewald’s text
• Explain Rosewald’s text and why I agree

• Introduce my argument - Currently seen as a result from almost two decades with the internet, there has been a decline in the remembrance of what we read today.

• One or two quotes from text extending my argument
• Tying in quotes and my personal experience with the internet

Conclusion

• Restate all arguments and claims
• Restate my place in the main argument
• Close with the fact that the internet has done more harm than good

Nov 24 Homework

Carr’s claim- The internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation.

Subclaim- Currently seen as a result from almost two decades with the internet, there has been a decline in the remembrance of what we read today.

1. Claire Handscombe a graduate student at American University that Rosewald interviewed stated, “It’s like your eyes are passing over the words but you’re not taking in what they say,” she confessed. “When I realize what’s happening, I have to go back and read again and again” (Rosewald 1).

-This quote support my claim about remembrance in that it has been lacking in recent years. Also it is following up on the idea that the internet has altered our concentration from all the skimming and skipping we do on online reading. This quote will coincide with Carr’s claim but repel Thompson’s.

2. “The students believed they did better on screen. They were wrong. Their comprehension and learning was better on paper” (Rosewald 1).

-With all the time spent today by students and adults on the computer it is easy to see why we are more comfortable with the internet copy of a text rather than a hard copy. Sadly though accompanying the online copy is the style of reading we perform now with it. Skipping and skimming from one page to the next. Adversely, the reading we do when we use a hard copy is more in depth and concentrated. This quote will fall behind Carr’s argument and repel Thompson’s.

Works Cited

Carr, Nicholas. Is Google Making Us Stupid? Atlanta: The Atlantic, 2008. Print.

Rosewald,  Michael. Serious reading takes a hit from online scanning and skimming,

researchers say. Washington: Washington Post, 2014. Print.

Thompson, Clive. Public Thinking. The Penguin Press, 2013. Print.

Since entering high school years ago the internet has had a big impact on my academic career. From watching math tutor videos on youtube or looking up definitions on dictionary.com, the internet has made books almost obsolete in my eyes. I see now that when I take up a book and attempt to read it, I find I have a lack of concentration and remembrance of what I had just read and so I end up rereading it. Compared to the internet which gives you the information you seek right in front of you, when using books you have to dissect the information to find what you are looking for. This ability I find to be hard for  many people today and almost every time they would rather search something on the internet instead of looking for it manually in a book. For me and other students reading books has almost become obsolete with the the availability of written summaries online of  any book you can think of. I find that a connection made through reading a novel is lost when i use the internet to look up a summary of certain chapters because I did not want to read the book. I personally do not use social media all that often compared to other students my age because I prefer to talk to people face to face. So my writing skills and collaboration skills through the internet have not really been affected other than me using the internet for writing papers. I find that many people today do not think before they act, or really think at all for that matter. The lack of common sense in people my age today is astounding and I believe that the increased reliability on the internet has to do with it.

Thompson makes many great claims in his text about how the internet has increased cooperation between working professionals and how writing for an audience will propel students to write with more creativity and logic. The connections made by these working professionals will result in new inventions or new partnerships between industries but the connections made by everyday people are on twitter or facebook and not advancing society in any direction. One the experiments thompson noted in his text was done by a Stanford English professor, Andrea Lunsford, and over the course of five years she collected nearly fifteen thousand pieces of writing from 189 students whether it was from social media or for classes. She concluded that 40 percent of everything they wrote was pleasure and that, “They’re writing so much more than students before them ever did… It’s stunning” (Thompson 51). This study was based off of students that go to one of the most prestigious academic schools in the world. Their writing capabilities are arguably more profound than that of the regular person. When the internet is used by someone who is capable of connecting beyond the social standpoint and uses the internet as one of their many tools than this resource is a great one. Sadly most people cannot do this. Time and time again the internet has become a distraction for many students in class and outside of the classroom. The lack of effort given in the classroom today has in part come from the advancement of the internet.

Carr Response

In the past few decades there has been one major resource that has been utilized like no other, the internet. This artificial machine has collected millions of facts and ideas from across the world and has placed them at the fingertips of those with access to the internet. As presented in the text “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, the internet is a very helpful source but has our reliance on the internet handicapped us? Carr attended Harvard University and Dartmouth College and was the executive editor of the Harvard Business Review.  Carr attacks this idea from different points throughout his text but his main argument deals with the notion that the internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation. The internet is a valuable resource in that it will supply anyone with the knowledge they need for any subject they come across. Now with knowledge this easily accessible people are less inclined to think about what it is they are researching about and they will lose that connection required to fully understand that topic. This great asset is slowly taking the place of certain skills such as concentration and contemplation. In this paper I will address Carr’s main uses of ethos, logos, and exemplification and how they help persuade the reader.

Ethos is a system of writing covering the diction the author uses and how it is credible. Carr claims, “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for

most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Carr 59). Carr argues that the internet is now the main source of media and information for much of the world. Branching off of that, people will only see the information as the internet pushes it out and it pumps out an unimaginable amount everyday. This alone handicaps us today as we focus only on the surface of all the issues presented from all over the globe.  Carr quotes two men by the names of Scott Karp and Bruce Friedman who are both literary scholars. Scott Karp who was a lit major in college stated, “ I’m just seeking convenience, but because they way I think has changed” (Carr 59). As for Bruce Friedman, who blogs about the use of computers for medical use, the outcome is similar. Friedman states, “I have almost lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article… even a blog post of more than four paragraphs is even to much” (Carr 59). Carr’s credibility for his argument is derived from these examples and others that hes uses throughout his text. This allows people to relate to others who have the same issues and also makes his claim seem more believable. Both these examples relate back to Carr’s main point in that the concentration and contemplation of people is going. Furthermore Carr’s use of diction depicting both these examples influences the reader to follow up on his major claim. The way media appears on the Net is how the mind expects to take information in. A fast moving flow of bits. Carr’s use of ethos presents his text as a formal and credible source.

The human brain was thought to be mostly unchangeable once it had matured but it is actually almost indefinitely malleable. Carr provides an example of this by writing of a German media scholar from the late 19th century by the name of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche was losing his sight when he bought a type write and memorized all the keys positions. With this new

tool Nietzsche’s writing changed slightly and had become more of a telegram style of writing than a rhetorical style of writing. Carr chose this example so people would connect with it and to show that our minds do adapt to ever growing technology. In this example logos is the present strategy for which Carr makes his argument around. “The process of adapting to new intellectual technologies is reflected in the changing metaphors we use to explain ourselves to ourselves” (Carr 61).  As new technological advancements began to emerge such as computer software we began to think like computers. The way we look at information on computers is how we look at all information today, fast and only on the surface. By us looking at information fast and only on the surface is that with all the information flowing through our fingertips, we only spend short amounts of time on subjects because we are looking for a specific piece of information about a subject and that is it. As for us being on the surface, it is that we do not explore all the information we read about but merely glimpse at it now. We have found a way to connect to these new technologies and have moved our thought process to conform with them. This goes back to Nietzsche’s experience with the typewriter, once he had became comfortable with it his writing had changed. Another example Carr uses to is that of a quote from a professor of neuroscience at the George Mason University, by the name of James Olds. Olds states that the adult mind, “Is very plastic… and has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly altering the way it functions” (Carr 60). The statements that Carr provides present the use of logos in his text. The support given and the logic presented in these quotes help create the Carr’s main argument’s logical appeal which is the claim that the internet is taking away from our capacity to concentrate

and contemplate. Neuroscientists claim that this change is occurring not just at a top level but down at the biological level.

Our advancement in writing has presented itself as a blessing to most of us. Through the use of exemplification, the argument that a great advancement in writing will take away from our ability to absorb the knowledge surrounding us. Carr provides several quotes from Plato’s Phaedrus,  Socrates claimed that as people began to rely on the written word more and the knowledge that they would normally carry inside their head would, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful” (Carr 63).  People could now read a book on a certain topic and then speak on it but they will never fully achieve the same amount of knowledge from a book as if they were actually performing said topic. “They would be filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom” (Carr 63). As writing became more abundant, especially after Gutenberg’s printing press emerged in the 15th century, the retaining rate of knowledge dove down from what it had been before. As for the abundance of knowledge available on the internet it deals with the same principle. People are googling things to answer questions but they do not know of how that answer came to be and what ideas lay behind it. Carr also provides the idea that, “The human brain is an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive” (Carr 63). This is the idea that Google goes off of and that an artificial intelligence that can process and move information faster than the human mind can is the next step in our technological advancement. Through the use of exemplification Carr opens the reader to the idea of an A.I. but he slowly brings it back to the idea that with the advancement of the internet we are losing much needed cognitive skills. The problems brought up in these examples from the

text are apparent all over the world now but it can not be forgotten what the printing press and the internet have done for us.

Carr’s specific use of ethos, logos, and exemplification worked to further his claim in that following the evolution of the internet, the cognitive abilities of people have been lacking. People rely on the internet for an astonishing amount of information. Everyday activities that, without it today we would be severely handicapped. A positive for Carr’s overall argument is his use of logos in that he showed us the way we think today has largely to do with the effect the internet has on us.  Carr’s logical appeal to this topic, description of it, and the way he illustrated his points carried his overall argument through the text itself. In that the internet has lessened our capacity today to concentrate and contemplate ideas.

In the past few decades there has been one major resource that has been utilized like no other, the internet. This artificial machine has collected millions of facts and ideas from across the world and has placed them at the fingertips of those with access to the internet. As presented in the text “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, the internet is a very helpful source but has our reliance on the internet handicapped us? Carr attended Harvard University and Dartmouth College and was the executive editor of the Harvard Business Review.  Carr attacks this idea from different points throughout his text but his main argument deals with the notion that the internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation. The internet is a valuable resource in that it will supply anyone with the knowledge they need for any subject they come across. Now with knowledge this easily accessible people are less inclined to think about what it is they are researching about and they will lose that connection required to fully understand that topic. This great asset is slowly taking the place of certain skills such as concentration and contemplation. In this paper I will address Carr’s main uses of ethos, logos, and exemplification and how they help persuade the reader.

Ethos is a system of writing covering the diction the author uses and how it is credible. Carr claims, “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for the of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Carr 59). Carr argues that the internet is now the main source of media and information for much of the world. Branching off of that, people will only see the information as the internet pushes it out and it pumps out an unimaginable amount everyday. This alone handicaps us today as we focus only on the surface of all the issues presented from all over the globe. Carr quotes two men by the names of Scott Karp and Bruce Friedman who are both literary scholars. Scott Karp who was a lit major in college stated, “ I’m just seeking convenience, but because they way I think has changed” (Carr 59). And for Bruce Friedman the, who blogs about the use of computers for medical use, outcome is similar. Friedman states, “I have almost lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article… even a blog post of more than four paragraphs is even to much” (Carr 59). Both these examples relate back to Carr’s main point in that the concentration and contemplation of people is going. Furthermore Carr’s use of diction depicting both these examples influences the reader to follow up on his major claim. The way media appears on the Net is how the mind expects to take information in. A fast moving flow of bits. Carr’s use of ethos presents his text as a formal and credible source.

The human brain was thought to be mostly unchangeable once it had matured but it is actually almost indefinitely malleable. Carr provides an example of this by writing of a German media scholar from the late 19th century by the name of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche was losing his sight when he bought a type write and memorized all the keys positions. With this new tool Nietzsche’s writing changed slightly and had become more of a telegram style of writing than a rhetorical style of writing. Carr chose this example so people would connect with it and to show that our minds do adapt to ever growing technology. In this example logos is the present strategy for which Carr makes his argument around. “The process of adapting to new intellectual technologies is reflected in the changing metaphors we use to explain ourselves to ourselves” (Carr 61).  As new technological advancements began to emerge such as computer software we began to think like computers. We have found a way to connect to these new technologies and have moved our thought process to conform with them. This goes back to Nietzsche’s experience with the typewriter, once he had became comfortable with it his writing had changed. Another example Carr uses to is that of a quote from a professor of neuroscience at the George Mason University, by the name of James Olds. Olds states that the adult mind,” Is very plastic… and has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly altering the way it functions” (Carr 60). The statements that Carr provides present the use of logos in his text. The support given and the logic presented in these quotes help create the Carr’s main argument’s logical appeal which is the claim that the internet is taking away from our capacity to concentrate and contemplate. Neuroscientists claim that this change is occurring not just at a top level but down at the biological level.

Our advancement in writing has presented itself as a blessing to most of us. Through the use of exemplification, the argument that a great advancement in writing will take away from our ability to absorb the knowledge surrounding us. Carr provides several quotes from Plato’s Phaedrus,  Socrates claimed that as people began to rely on the written word more and the knowledge that they would normally carry inside their head would, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful” (Carr 63).  People could now read a book on a certain topic and then speak on it but they will never fully achieve the same amount of knowledge from a book as if they were actually performing said topic. “They would be filled with the conceit of wisdom instead of real wisdom” (Carr 63). As writing became more abundant, especially after Gutenberg’s printing press emerged in the 15th century, the retaining rate of knowledge dove down from what it had been before. As for the abundance of knowledge available on the internet it deals with the same principle. People are googling things to answer questions but they do not know of how that answer came to be and what ideas lay behind it. Carr also provides the idea that, “The human brain is an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive” (Carr 63). This is the idea that Google goes off of and that an artificial intelligence that can process and move information faster than the human mind can is the next step in our technological advancement. Through the use of exemplification Carr opens the reader to the idea of an A.I. but he slowly brings it back to the idea that with the advancement of the internet we are losing much needed cognitive skills. The problems brought up in these examples from the text are apparent all over the world now but it can not be forgotten what the printing press and the internet have done for us.

Carr’s specific use of the strategies ethos, logos, and exemplification worked to further his claim in that following the advancement the internet the cognitive abilities of people have been lacking. People rely on the internet for an astonishing amount of information and everyday activities that without it today we would be severely handicapped. Carr’s logical appeal to this topic, description of it, and the way he illustrated his points carried his overall argument through the text itself. In that the internet has lessened our capacity today to concentrate and contemplate ideas.

Intro and Body

In the past few decades there has been one major resource that has been utilized like no other, the internet. This artificial machine has collected millions of facts and ideas from across the world and has placed them at the fingertips of those with access to the internet. As presented in the text “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, the internet is a very helpful source but has our reliance on the internet handicapped us? Carr attended Harvard University and Dartmouth College and was the executive editor of the Harvard Business Review.  Carr attacks this idea from different points throughout his text but his main argument deals with the notion that the internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation. The internet is a valuable resource in that it will supply anyone with the knowledge they need for any subject they come across. Now with knowledge this easily accessible people are less inclined to think about what it is they are researching about and they will lose that connection required to fully understand that topic. This great asset is slowly taking the place of certain skills such as concentration and contemplation. In this paper I will address Carr’s main uses of ethos, pathos, and logos and how they help persuade the reader.

Ethos is a system of writing covering the diction the author uses and how it is credible. Carr claims, “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for the of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Carr 59). Carr argues that the internet is now the main source of media and information for much of the world. Branching off of that, people will only see the information as the internet pushes it out and it pumps out an unimaginable amount everyday. This alone handicaps us today as we focus only on the surface of all the issues presented from all over the globe. Carr quotes two men by the names of Scott Karp and Bruce Friedman who are both literary scholars. Scott Karp who was a lit major in college stated, “ I’m just seeking convenience, but because they way I think has changed” (Carr 59). And for Bruce Friedman the, who blogs about the use of computers for medical use, outcome is similar. Friedman states, “I have almost lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article… even a blog post of more than four paragraphs is even to much” (Carr 59). Both these examples relate back to Carr’s main point in that the concentration and contemplation of people is going. Furthermore Carr’s use of diction depicting both these examples influences the reader to follow up on his major claim. The way media appears on the Net is how the mind expects to take information in. A fast moving flow of bits. Carr’s use of ethos presents hi stext as a formal and credible source.

The human brain was thought to be mostly unchangeable once it had matured but it is actually almost indefinitely malleable. Carr provides an example of this by writing of a German media scholar from the late 19th century by the name of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche was losing his sight when he bought a type write and memorized all the keys positions. With this new tool Nietzsche’s writing changed slightly and had become more of a telegram style of writing than a rhetorical style of writing. Carr chose this example so people would connect with it and to show that our minds do adapt to ever growing technology. In this example pathos is the present strategy for which Carr makes his argument around. “The process of adapting to new intellectual technologies is reflected in the changing metaphors we use to explain ourselves to ourselves” (Carr 61).  As new technological advancements began to emerge such as the computer software we began to think like computers. We have found a way to connect to these new technologies and have moved our thought process to conform with them. This goes back to Nietzsche’s experience with the typewriter, once he had became comfortable with it his writing had changed. People all over the world can relate this psychological change for neuroscientists claim that this change occurs at the biological level.

Brett Schwarz

November 3, 2014

Intro and Body

In the past few decades there has been one major resource that has been utilized like no other, the internet. This artificial machine has collected millions of facts and ideas from across the world and has placed them at the fingertips of those with access to the internet. As presented in the text “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr, the internet is a very helpful source but has our reliance on the internet handicapped us? Carr attended Harvard University and Dartmouth College and was the executive editor of the Harvard Business Review.  Carr attacks this idea from different points throughout his text but his main argument deals with the notion that the internet is taking away our capacity for concentration and contemplation. The internet is a valuable resource in that it will supply anyone with the knowledge they need for any subject they come across. Now with knowledge this easily accessible people are less inclined to think about what it is they are researching about and they will lose that connection required to fully understand that topic. This great asset is slowly taking the place of certain skills such as concentration and contemplation. In this paper I will address Carr’s main uses of both ethos and logos and how they help persuade the reader.

Ethos is a system of writing covering the diction the author uses and how it is credible. Carr claims, “For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for the of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Carr 59). Carr argues that the internet is now the main source of media and information for much of the world. Branching off of that, people will only see the information as the internet pushes it out and it pumps out an unimaginable amount everyday. This alone handicaps us today as we focus only on the surface of all the issues presented from all over the globe. Carr quotes two men by the names of Scott Karp and Bruce Friedman who are both literary scholars. Scott Karp who was a lit major in college stated, “ I’m just seeking convenience, but because they way I think has changed” (Carr 59). And for Bruce Friedman the, who blogs about the use of computers for medical use, outcome is similar. Friedman states, “I have almost lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article… even a blog post of more than four paragraphs is even to much” (Carr 59). Both these examples relate back to Carr’s main point in that the concentration and contemplation of people is going. Furthermore Carr’s use of diction depicting both these examples influences the reader to follow up on his major claim. The way media appears on the Net is how the mind expects to take information in. A fast moving flow of bits. Carr’s use of ethos presents hi stext as a formal and credible source.

A Change of Heart about Animals

One strategy Rifkin uses in his text is that he relates animals to humans. He goes on to say that we share many similar traits. Only a couple decades ago humanity believed that it was the only species capable of compassion and critical thinking. This strategy used by Rifkin presents a type of ethos that people can really connect to. This is the goal of the text.

For-Profit Institutions

For-profit institutions have become the hot topic in the secondary education industry now. These schools in the eyes of the Department of Education seem to be an indictment to the American education system. For-profit institutions have been apart of the post primary education system for decades now but have gone by titles of career colleges or art institutes. Major for-profits that many people know are University of Phoenix, DeVry, and many other colleges. We see these colleges publicly marketed on billboards, over the radio, and on t.v. commercials. It seems today as more and more individuals seek a post secondary education community colleges and larger universities are turning a larger number of students away. That is when these individuals seek out other education opportunities and end up at for-profit schools. community colleges will take any student that applies but lately these colleges have been underfunded and can no longer accept all the incoming students. Kevin Carey, a professor at John Hopkins University author of a short text titled “Why Do You Think They Are Called For-Profit Colleges?” sheds light on some positive and negative aspects of for-profits colleges. Carey has published articles for The New York Times, The New Republic, Slate, and  The American Prospect, among other publications. Also he has been recognized as one of the leading authors

Schwarz 2

on higher education. He delves into arguing that for-profits account for a disproportional amount of the student loan debt and that these institutions specifically target veterans seeking a college

degree. Now he also illustrates a positive aspect of these colleges. For-profit institutions fill a void left by traditional nonprofit public and private schools. That void is the ever increasing number of students that were not accepted into those schools and have no where else to turn but to for-profits. They play a an almost safety net role and have been catching all the students falling through the hands of the nonprofit institutions. In this paper I will address Carey’s positive and negative positions using outside sources on for-profit institutions while extending or challenging his claims.

For-profit institutions are under extreme scrutiny from the government and President Obama has even proposed cutting off for-profit funding due to the substantial debt their students have from taking out student loans according to Carey. A large and growing number of graduates from for-profit colleges are having trouble paying off those loans. All colleges, for-profit and nonprofit, have students with loans taken out so they may attend college but the ratio of student loans to students in for-profits far exceed that of nonprofit colleges. Also almost exclusively for-profit colleges make most of their money from these loans or grants which is what they prefer to call them. Of the entire U.S. 25% of students loans are for for-profit colleges and they only enroll 10% of the post secondary student force. In “For-Profit Colleges: Undercover Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices” a testimony by Gregory D. Kutz given in August of 2010, showed how some for-profits would go to some extreme measures to reach their main goal which was to get that

Schwarz 3

individual to sign up for a loan. Gregory Kutz is a managing director of forensics audits and special investigations for the government accountability office, GAO, which is an independent agency that provides audit, evaluation, and investigative services for the United States Congress. Kutz’s first hand accounts of fifteen colleges tested saw that four encouraged fraudulent practices. Kutz recalled in his testimony:

Our covert testing at 15 for-profit colleges found that four colleges encouraged fraudulent practices, such as encouraging students to submit false information about their financial status. In addition all 15 colleges made some type of deceptive or otherwise questionable statement to undercover applicants, such as misrepresenting the applicants likely salary after graduation and not providing clear information about the colleges graduation rate (Kutz 7).

The extent that these colleges are willing to got to in order to get individuals to take out a loan to attend their school is ridiculous. The type of students attracted to these colleges normally do not have the adequate funding to attend these colleges. For-profit colleges on average cost eight times as much as nonprofit community colleges and twice as much as nonprofit state schools. The loans that these students are taking out will follow them to their grave. To add onto what Carey wrote that many of the degrees these students dive so far into debt for are nearly worthless. The government is not longer sitting on the sidelines staring out at for-profit colleges while they slowly root their way into the American education system of the future.

Following the fraudulent tactics taken up by for-profits to get civilians to sign for loans to attend the school, for-profits have turned their crosshairs on veterans who are looking for college

Schwarz 4

degrees. Carey notes that, “ The University of Phoenix will make $1 billion from Pell Grants this year and $4 billion in federal loans” (Carey 53). This gargantuan number is for the University of Phoenix alone, so imagine the numbers of all the for-profits combined. Since the G.I. bill grants money to veterans so they can earn a post secondary degree it has become a new option on the menu of fort-profit institution targets. According to Hollister K. Petraeus, who had published an article for the New York Times titled “For-Profit Colleges, Vulnerable GI’S,” for-profits are taking advantage of our veterans through the use of misleading marketing tactics. Then they provide them with below average degrees and poor advising and counseling services. Beyond the poor services given the main issue is the amount of money the for-profits are squeezing out of our veterans. Petraeus argues that, “Between 2006 and 2010, the money received in military education benefits by just 20 for-profit companies soared to an estimated $521.2 million from $66.6 million” (Petraeus 1). This excerpt from Petraeus’ article extends Carey claim that most of the money made by for-profit institutions are through Pell Grants and student loans. In expanding their horizon for students for-profits have formulated the idea that veterans are money signs in uniforms. The G.I. Bill works for veterans just as Pell Grants and students loans work for the civilian students of America. Many of the veterans are returning today and willing to obtain post secondary degrees to replicate the generation that returned from WWII and supercharged the decades following in industry.

Although Carey’s strongest claims were against for-profit institutions he also made some appealing claims as to why they are prospering. We cannot place all the blame onto for profits for all the students they recruit and eventually lead into debt. Our nonprofit post secondary schools are receiving record numbers of applications and now even the community

Schwarz 5

colleges are having to turn students away due to underfunding. Carey argues the claim that for profits exist in large part to fix educational market failures left by traditional institutions, and they profit by serving students that public and private nonprofit institutions too often ignore. Due to the large amount of adults going back to college and all the young adults just getting started on their college career, many nonprofit colleges are only accepting the elite few and then the rest fall on the community colleges that are unable to supply the amount of courses required for all the students applying for them. Carey states, “While old-line research universities were gilding their walled-off  academic city-states, The University of Phoenix was building no-frills campuses near freeway exists so working students could take classes in the evening.” These simple but very smart strategic moves made by the University of Phoenix and by other for-profit schools have made their campuses easy to access and thus you might say more user friendly. Brian Darling author of “For-Profit Education Under Assault,” extends Carey’s claim that for-profits’ are as big as they are today as a direct result of the nonprofit schools turning down and rejecting students. Darling also believes that these institutions are filling the holes dug by nonprofit colleges. They are providing blue collar working class people with an education and the potential resources to better their degrees and find a better life them and their families. Darling argues that:

For-profit education is under assault from elitists who hate the idea of free market educational institutions.  It is also under attack from bureaucrats at the U.S. Department of Education who are trying to make it hard for students to arm themselves with the education needed to find a job (Darling 1).

Schwarz 6

Darling is content on relaying the message that the government is punishing for-profit organizations for doing what he believes is right. Moving beyond that Darling argues that the elitists within the nonprofit industry are pulling strings with the Department of Education officials to handicap for-profit institutions because they are threatened by them. For-profits are alternatives to the traditional nonprofit university or community college and offer similar options in many career choices.

For-profits have strategically maximized their opportunities by moving into specific areas around the U.S. to enroll students. Their enrollment has been greatly increasing every year and soon their student numbers will rival those of nonprofit schools if they keep up the pace. With that a growing number of students who will be unable to pay off their loans will come be a result. Among those students will be the veterans seeking a college degree and for-profit schools seeking their the money from the G.I. Bill. For-profit colleges are ran like a business and seek to maximize revenue in every aspect they can. They have shareholders as corporate businesses have shareholders. They make education a business. They also accommodate those who are left behind by all other colleges. They are their to provide the option of an education for those who want one but do not have the necessary requirements met for nonprofit universities. For-profit institutions serve our community in a manipulative way but also fill voids left open by traditional colleges. There are some aspects that for-profit colleges shine for but there are other aspects that they are seen as frauds for. The way in which they draw students in, how they get them to pay, and how the degrees are subpar compared to other colleges are very large negative traits. For-profit institutions should not be chosen as a main source of an education. Post secondary

Schwarz 7

education degrees should be able to carry some weight behind them but a degree from a for-profit college is seen as a below par. Whether we like it or not for-profit institutions are going to be apart of America’s education system for the foreseeable future.