Christopher Chabris is a psychology professor at Union College in New York. Daniel Simons is a psychology professor at the University of Illinois. They are the authors of the new book “The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us.”
I saw this article while traveling with my daughter last week. I was intrigued by it and wonder what you think. Read through it an let me know by commenting below.
Web of stupidity?
By CHRISTOPHER CHABRIS and DANIEL SIMONS
The latest attack on the Internet and on computers in general is Nicholas Carr’s book “The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains.”
Carr and other digital alarmists make a case that seems plausible, at least on the surface. They argue that the advent of the Internet and the proliferation of new communication tools trap us in a shallow culture of constant interruption as we frenetically tweet, text and e-mail. This, in turn, leaves us little time for deep reading, reflection and serious conversation – pensive activities traditionally thought to build knowledge and wisdom.
The alarmists cite the concept of “neural plasticity” and talk of technology “rewiring” the brain to convince us that the new distractions make us not just less willing but less able, on a physiological level, to focus.
Whenever you hear that something is changing your brain, you ought to be worried – or at least the person telling you wants you to be worried. But does a cultural change such as this necessarily entail a fundamental change to the brain?
Most of the evidence these critics offer is anecdotal: They report feeling less able to concentrate and think clearly now than they did before they started frequenting the Internet. But it could be that they are less able to concentrate now simply because they are 10 to 15 years older.
The appeals to neural plasticity, backed by studies showing that traumatic injuries can reorganize the brain, are largely irrelevant. The basic plan of the brain’s “wiring” is determined by genetic programs and biochemical interactions that do most of their work long before a child discovers Facebook and Twitter.
There is simply no experimental evidence to show that living with new technologies fundamentally changes brain organization in a way that affects one’s ability to focus. Of course, the brain changes any time we form a memory or learn a new skill, but new skills build on our existing capacities without fundamentally changing them. We will no more lose our ability to pay attention than we will lose our ability to listen, see or speak.
The idea that the Internet might make us dumber has some intuitive appeal because it is easy to see how the cognitive performance of people around us drops when they are distracted. Who among us is not scared to see a driver chatting on a phone and looking back at the kids while weaving through city traffic?
Focused on reading
But the notion that prolonged focus and deep reading mark the best path to wisdom and insight is an assumption, one that may be an accidental consequence of the printing press predating the computer. To book authors it seems a heretical notion, but it is possible that spending 10 or more hours engrossed in a single text might not be the optimal regimen for building brainpower.
Before the computer age, chess grandmasters used to study chess books before matches. But now they use laptops to review hundreds of games in rapid succession, in effect “downloading” into their minds knowledge that is customized for their next opponent. They access the knowledge as they need it, discarding it after the match, and the result is that today’s grandmasters play the game better than their predecessors did.
Visual perception and attention work the same way: They grant us conscious but temporary access to the information in our world that we need at any moment, then quickly discard it as we shift attention to other places, objects or events.
If we consider all the implications of this “just in time” approach to acquiring and using information, we may be forced to re-evaluate the nature of knowledge, wisdom and intelligence.
Collective brilliance
It may make less sense to focus on the capabilities of an individual person and more sense to think about the individual plus the cloud of technology and information that he or she has access to at any given moment.
This human-computer-Internet collective is more knowledgeable and arguably more intelligent than a single human being could be alone. By this view, as more and more information becomes available on the Internet, we become not dumber but smarter.
For every way the Internet gives us to waste time, there is a way to increase the scope and diversity of our knowledge and to work collectively on problems.
It was not long ago that scientists worked mostly within their own laboratories, collaborating only with students and assistants. Today, scientists are more likely to collaborate in larger, more diverse teams that often span the globe. With rapid access to diverse information online, ideas, data and resources can be shared faster and on a scale that was impossible at any point in history.
The real danger
Although the case that technology increases our intelligence is at least as plausible as the gloomy idea that it is changing our brains for the worse, there are real downsides to the instant availability of torrents of information. The danger comes not from the information itself, or from how it could rewire our brains, but from the way we think about our own knowledge and abilities.
As the psychologists Leon Rozenblit and Frank Keil discovered, people tend to suffer from an illusion of knowledge: a tendency to mistake surface-level familiarity with deep understanding.
As more information becomes readily available, that sense of familiarity grows and grows, and with it the illusion of knowledge. On-demand access to reams of data can also trick us into mistaking knowledge we could obtain quickly for knowledge we already have and can act upon.
And if the illusion leads us to neglect the acquisition of true knowledge, we as individuals could become dumber as a result.
Additionally, the more different ways technology gives us to multitask, the more chances we have to succumb to an illusion of attention – the idea that we are paying attention to and processing more information than we really are.
Each time we text while we are driving and do not get into an accident, we become more convinced that we can do two (or three or four …) things at once, when in reality almost no one can multitask successfully and we are all at greater risk when we do so.
Our capacity to learn, understand and multitask hasn’t changed with the onslaught of technology, but our confidence in our own knowledge and abilities have.
So Google is not making us stupid, PowerPoint is not destroying literature and the Internet is not really changing our brains. But they may well be making us think we’re smarter than we really are, and that is a dangerous thing.
So what do YOU think?
How does this relate to your business strategy?
If this true, do you see any new opportunities emerging from this perspective?
I’m standing for all that’s possible for you in life and business.
Sincerely,
Steve
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
knowledge witout the ability to apply it to life is interesting but it does not create wisdom, or change the world, it can however change your perception and that can bring about true crreativity
People are free to have their own opinion, at least at this point in time in this country, and that’s what this article is, someone’s opinion. So here is mine. The internet is an inanimate object, it is neutral, but as usual it takes the rap for what people do with it. The internet can be a powerful tool for good or bad depending on who is using it. Self discipline is the key as it is in all of life.
I feel like I’m always looking for interesting things to read about a variety of subjects, but I manage to include your blog among my reads every day because you have honest entries that I look forward to. Here’s hoping there’s a lot more amazing material coming!
I believe that it is so easy to fall into some very bad habits, like tweeting every five minutes, checking and answering email, etc. I don´t know if that will “rewire” our brains but surely it can make us very unproductive. I believe it is specially dangerous for the youngster.
Anyway, I liked the article and I agree with it. It is up to the user to make the internet a place of knowledge or a place of stupidity.
One cannot blame technology for human stupidity. If we are unable to use the technology to our best advantage it is not the technology (a human discovery to start with) that should be blamed.
Surely a huge input of information can be overwhelming but when that happens it actually forces me to think creatively about what information I can use in that particular moment and how and disregard the rest. So ability to process information is another bowl of fish.
However, as internet gets more and more commertial the information that to start with was freely accessible disappears again behind the ‘pay me first’ door. Money ,money money, always funny sang ABBA. MOney killed the television that from the start was a revolutionary invention, too, with amazing possibility for direct transmission of events, aka, global togetherness, version 2.0 (1.o was radio). And what is left from TV and it beauty and potential today? Zilch. TV beame something we are told to avoid to save time. Now the same warning is issued for internet…. do we ever learn?
There were arts,theater, letters, books (touch, static sight), the radio engaged our hearing, TV engaged our seeing (moving sight in he convenience of our home -not as flicks in movie theaters), internet allows us to bring action into it , be active and connect on different levels with different purpose in mind, from sex to business, religion, whatever….
The talking heads and the more affluent people are already trying to monopolize and control internet and make it into a one way channel (as a radio and TV is) and turn it into one big global shopping mall.
We communicate through a different media and have always done so. I await the time when we can communicate without any technology that interferes with the mind-heart, moreover, I will celebrate when we understand what content helps us to ‘become who we are’. The result might be the ultimate silence but until then, enjoy both your talk shows or and your e-mails.
Sometime I just want to know how to calculate complicted mathetical problems in a hurry and I am not totally interested in the learning every single thing about why the
problem is calculated in a certain manner. The answer is available to me instantly. And, I might not be any smarter for being able to find the answer, but sometime I just
need answers – not a math lesson. The internet – love it, love it, love it. So am I smarter
for just knowing how to find the answer or am I dumb because I would not know how
to calculate the answer without the templetes I find on the internet? Hum?
It seems to me that the Internet has the downside risk of making anyone appear as an “instant expert”. It’s very easy to do some research and regurgitate someone else’s ideas and pose them as your own but doing that makes one shallow and unconvincing. True expertise comes from immersing yourself in a subject and learning how to apply concepts to any given situation.
The big question is then to decide “who can you really trust?”
I like the way that Henry Ford put it when he was questioned about something about his business in a court case. He had asked something, and he called one of his people to answer it.
When asked why he did not know the answer himself, he replied (and I am paraphrasing):
“Why do I need to know everything? There is only so much on man can know – the importnat thing is knowing where to get the information”
If it wasn’t Henry it was Einstein – anyway bring on Google!
Oh wait – let me check….
The actual commenttary was:
”
Mr. Ford was asked questions like:
“Who was Benedict Arnold?” and “How many soldiers did the British send over to America to put down the Rebellion of 1776?” In answer to the last question, Mr. Ford replied, “I do not know the exact number of soldiers the British sent over, but I have heard that it was a considerably larger number than ever went back.”
Finally, Ford grew tired of this line of questioning, and in reply to a particularly offensive question, he leaned over, pointed his finger at the lawyer who had asked the question, and said, “If I should really want to answer the foolish question you have just asked, or any of the other questions you have been asking me, let me remind you that I have a row of electric push-buttons on my desk, and by pushing the right button, I can summon to my aid men who can answer any question I desire to ask concerning the business to which I am devoting most of my efforts. Now, will you kindly tell me, why I should clutter up my mind with general knowledge, for the purpose of being able to answer questions, when I have men around me who can supply any knowledge I require?”
Case closed!
“
these folks are simply wrong. there is indeed evidence that the brain is changed from its ability not to focus, and that not focusing, by choice or inability or habit, changes the brain. there are studies studies that show the changes and also studies – especially case studies that show the changes that individuals can make from changing the way they use and “operate” their brain.
some important studies are related to the student’s brain. playing video games all day increases brain chemicals that are addictive and that leave the average classroom information at way below the experience of boring. no reward – no win – no fun – no interest, vs. what kids and young people experience in the “game”.
do i think kids should be highly interested in what the classroom is offering ? i wish it was that easy, because the public school system is mostly out of touch with what real learning and real education suited to modern day living is about, but nonetheless, the inability to “listen” and give attention to what might not be that exciting to you, is troublesome — and is definitely and at least partly due to the thrills that mindless video games offer instead.
nevertheless, they conclude with a statement that seems slightly off-message from their article. we think we are smarter than we really are? but the internet is not making us stupid? we could have a lengthy discussion about the dangers of thinking we are smarter than we really are, and how stupid that makes us.
Steve you are brilliant as you are, we all are the more we use the brain scan our brains read its. Yes the brain is a part of the whole computer universal links I call it back to sauce. The tecno stuff on the electronics today make it so much faster than ever before which is great when it comes to things like helping or finding information required its a plus ,gives us answers to much these days to read quicker learn more in less time smart , at the same time it affects sensitives for the electrical that is why the Black Tormalin front of my computer then able to write for a few hours with out it affecting me .. thats great .without it too draining making me exhausted. Personally I do not like to sit at it for hours on end waste of time my life is precious and have sat here trying to work it out not me For I personally felt it would be a great way to make financial gain a little on the side that was why I wanted to know more about it .Personally love the out about meeting people, speaking working enjoy the outdoors for the air the breeze, oceans sky love all tree’s,birds. and all else simply amazing … have a great day .. Estelle
I have experienced the ‘illusion’ of being knowledgable, as mentioned herein. Being aware of my own inherent intellectual limitations, including the capacity to retain knowledge, as with so many others, I have relied on my ability to form and submit ‘efficacious queries’ to search engines when in search of particulars. It is tempting at times to represent to others the image of ‘possessing’ knowledge that is so readily available to those who ‘know where and how to look.’ My distinct preference is to embrace truth however, which inherently mitigates the prospective downside when such an illusion holds the potential for egoistic thinking and behavior. Personal integrity should preclude such misrepresentations.
As for the subject of the article itself, I do not believe that our brains are rapidly changing from an evolutionary perspective - fundamentally in its operation, that is – but I believe to be self-evident that the ‘normal’ operation of our brains conform to the manner in which we use them on a regular basis. If one does not exercise the discipline of focusing sufficient to develop critical thinking skills and competencies in relevant areas of intellect, acquiring the foundations of theory upon which to contemplate plausible hypotheses, one lacks the basis upon which to even form and ponder relevant questions – much less contemplate prospective solutions to relevant problems. When combined with ‘inaccurate thinking,’ operating under a pretense of possessing practical knowledge that is NOT present [a.k.a., the 'illusion' of knowledge], gives birth to the root cause of many a problem – the resolutions of which may evade the perceptions of all but those who DO possess relevant practical knowledge.
A byproduct of the information age, I propose to be of great significance the fact that the internet makes it very easy for us to mistake or to misrepresent what we know versus what we have easy access to. Those who make this distinction can be the greatest of assets to themeselves and to others. In like manner, those who do not can be the greatest of liabilities.
Hmmm… I wish the author had been a little more descript about what the “acquisition of true knowledge” involves, he seems to infer that true knowledge can only be obtained from a source offline.
I would argue that the University of Phoenix is a formidable competitor for pretty much any brick & mortar traditional University. Learning online does not compromise the quality of content or knowledge gained; it merely delivers it in a 21 century way that meets people where they are.
This is the take away to me, be the University/Business/Entrepreneur that delivers via a medium that meets people where they are and don’t listen to critics that are “married” to old school thinking/delivery systems.
After all, times change, the pony express gave way to the mail service and the mail service is being rendered more & more useless by email every day. Time marches on.
Hi Steve,
The evil computer. Once upon a time it was attacked because it was anti social. Now it’s attacked because its too social.
For myself the Net has been a huge library in my very own house and I shake my head in sadness at folk who dismiss it as light entertainment. A lack of using it intelligently is more a reflection on their inability to recognise opportunity than any short coming of the Net.
For older folk it lessens the impact of immobility and offers strong relationships where they might otherwise be left staring at the idiot box.
From a business perspective it offers a wealth of information including your own excellent program.
I won’t be turning my Net connection off any time soon.
Dear Steve,
I found your writing very interesting. I believe both things are happening, the shallow knowledge along with the neuroplasticity but, I see it as an ability of adaptation. To focus is also an ability that needs practice. Only through practice we can go into deeper understanding of concepts and consciousness and of course with the help of others (collaborative work). We know we don´t know all but, the wonderful thing of today is that we can begin to see the whole and we as part of it. Now we know we are connected to an everything complex universe, to the whole. Becoming smarter has to do with the neuro-nets we construct in our brains along with creating ways of understanding the whole. I believe that the most important aspect in this process is not becoming smarter o dumber but the intention behind it. Intention makes the difference and it does affect the result.
Thanks for your writing.
Beatriz
Good logic here.
Yes, I think it’s true that “many” people delude themselves into thinking they are an “expert” just because they have done some Internet research. The very fact that anyone can put anything up on the Internet tells me that a “lot” of that information is probably not correct or has been spun for a reason, such has wanting to make a bunch of money fast. It they don’t have true experience in their subject, plus a burning desire to help others overcome something that they know how to do, then their “business” is only there to make money and it will probably fail because there really is no expertise and absolutely no heart.
Good article Steve.
The same argument could be made for most technological advances, for example;
It could be suggested that air travel giving us the ability to cross multiple time zones in a short time compared to the leisurely pace of ocean liners or horse drawn transport, could affect our internal natural rythm.
The introduction of mechanized agricultural equipment and agricultural chemicals changed the nature of farming dramatically and was a contributor to the urbanisation of many developed economies. It could therefore be argued that this technology has been a factor in inner city poverty, suburban expansion, poor diet, loss of the rural work ethic and even child obesity.
It’s very easy to blame new technology, but as the authors suggest, it’s what we do with it that’s important.
Albert Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge when considering the future, the unknown.” I am 75 years young and find the internet to be not only a huge technological learning challenge but an adventure into areas of consideration I had never before considered.
As a result of over three years work I have discovered a way to guild a home business for every adult in the USA that will produce $8,400 residual, passive income for that business every month. I call it my Automated Cash Flow Generator. If you want to know how it works send me an email. It uses leverage to the power of seven and is built through cooperation not competition. Want to know more? Send me an email and I’ll send you both written and visual illustrations as to how it works.
Thanks, Glenn
I agree with the above articles conclusion. I think on the whole Intenet makes us smarter by intraction with others. You can read books, I do and still read and write on the Internet and communicate with others. Internet is my lifeline. Happy holidays Lena Ps I havent got an internetbusiness yet. It is only on the planning stage.Ds