Has the internet made us smarter?
- Thread starter rah
- Start date
I disagree. Some person's garbage is another man's treasure. There is usually some truth in both sides of a political argument and it's sometimes easier to glisten just what it is by hearing both sides. But you have to pick it out of the rest of the garbage.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
yung.carl.jung
Hey Bird! I'm Morose & Lugubrious
certainly not. more knowledgeable perhaps, but even then I am beginning to question whether it is the right kind of knowledge. the fact that peer-reviewed papers are readily available to "fact check" everything seems to not have stopped the omnipresent flow of reductive or misleading, biased or straight up wrong news coverage or pseudoscience. in fact, that seems to be experience a renaissance right now.
what about like.. agriculture? the wheel? the written word? cooking on fire? printing press? electricity? a proper sewer system? running water? vaccines? penicilin? nuclear fission? some of those are hard to really characterize as an "invention" (esp agriculture), but those all seem much more groundbreaking to me tbh
uh.. no. not just because meme culture has been pretty stale for some time, but also "worthwhile" is just the wrong adjective. entertaining, addictive, sure, but I fail to see any merit in like 98% of memes.
while I do actually agree with that definition (drop the modern tho, theyre contemporary art, modern art is like van gogh and matisse n horsehocky) I do not think art necessarily has nor should have any kind of merit. its nice of course, but certainly not required.
what about like.. agriculture? the wheel? the written word? cooking on fire? printing press? electricity? a proper sewer system? running water? vaccines? penicilin? nuclear fission? some of those are hard to really characterize as an "invention" (esp agriculture), but those all seem much more groundbreaking to me tbh
uh.. no. not just because meme culture has been pretty stale for some time, but also "worthwhile" is just the wrong adjective. entertaining, addictive, sure, but I fail to see any merit in like 98% of memes.
while I do actually agree with that definition (drop the modern tho, theyre contemporary art, modern art is like van gogh and matisse n horsehocky) I do not think art necessarily has nor should have any kind of merit. its nice of course, but certainly not required.
Last edited:
Better than during the Renaissance? We're building on what they discovered... and most of us don't risk imprisonment or even death if our discoveries and insights displease the current monarch or the Pope.
Historical propaganda has been around for millennia.
With face to face there's a risk of physical violence if you're too blatant with the insults. Online, you only risk damaging your own computer.
One of the pre-internet gaming groups I belonged to would set aside several hours and play the original Civilization board game. At some point the conversation would turn to real history, and discussions about history (civil ones and an agree-to-disagree on certain matters of religion, which was necessary in a group comprised of everything from atheists to people who attended church 4 times/week). I've played this game in a PBEM setting, and while it was fun, I really missed the give and take discussions.
Solitaire has wasted much more of my time online than offline. For one thing, offline requires finding room to play. My favorite solitaire game uses two decks and needs much more room than Klondike (which is what most people consider to be Solitaire). Since I never have that kind of room available anymore, it's the computer or nothing.
OTOH, I've learned a lot from people on this forum, including from you. So I don't consider it time wasted.
Exactly.
I've mentioned this before, but why not mention it again: A couple of nights before the turn of the century (20th to 21st), A&E had a two-night countdown in which they enumerated the 100 most influential people of the last 1000 years.
Shakespeare came in at #5. Various scientists were in the top 10. The person who came in 1st was... Johann Gutenberg, inventor of the printing press. Whatever his original intention for creating it, the result was to bring widespread literacy to the world.
If you can read this, thank Gutenberg.
I think that there is also an issue with taking in more than is processed to any reasonable degree. Of course this didn't just start with the internet (in the late 19th to early 20th century people went from horses to airplanes), but it is galloping (pun :/ ).
It isn't unlikely that future generations will sense less of a distinctness between non-web and web than those of us who actually lived for many years without the internet. I was 17 the first time i used the web, iirc. I was 8 the first time i used a computer, i think (and 9 when i first had my own).
It isn't unlikely that future generations will sense less of a distinctness between non-web and web than those of us who actually lived for many years without the internet. I was 17 the first time i used the web, iirc. I was 8 the first time i used a computer, i think (and 9 when i first had my own).
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,583
Well, I personally don't consider "threat of death" as constituting a golden age.
My comment was more directed towards the number of developments we enjoy on a yearly basis now as well as the sheer number of researchers required to make it happen (something in the neighbourhood of 8 million researchers working full-time). Those who discovered the foundations of our science are to be credited, but it's a whole different ballgame when those who are fast-tracked into STEM these days are learning calculus before the age of 10 because they have to move onto to vastly more complex material if they hope to contribute towards something new.
True enough.
Risking death for pursuing science and other disciplines isn't a sign of a golden age, but I was also thinking of the sheer will and determination of the people who kept on despite the risks, and what they discovered is what we're building on today.
Not enough people appreciate the risks of the past, and take far too much for granted. There are far too many who assume that Wikipedia is the source of all online knowledge and that every book ever printed is available for downloading.
It isn't.
And personally, I wouldn't consider it a golden age when witnessing a kid throwing a tantrum because they don't even know how to turn the pages of a physical book or being unable to alter the size of a magazine photo by poking it.
Zkribbler
Deity
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,583
Fake history predates history?
Urgo the Caveman told everyone he beat the sabertooth with his club, but I know for a fact that a rock fell on the animal's head.
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Caveman:Og Catch Fish! Yuge Fish! This Big!Fake history predates history?
I wouldn't rule that out as a cause. I mean... the web is hugely addictive, and i have to suppose that most people at some point end up using it for less than challenging/enriching activity.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,060
The internet has made us more distracted and more vulnerable to manipulation.
It has also shifted most public discussion to within the confines and rules of privately owned forums. Some people expect to profit greatly from that power shift, but we have yet to see how big it is and how long it lasts.
It has also shifted most public discussion to within the confines and rules of privately owned forums. Some people expect to profit greatly from that power shift, but we have yet to see how big it is and how long it lasts.
I wouldn't attribute falling IQs specifically to the internet, but rather to automation and computing in general. As the years go on, machines are doing more and more of our thinking for us, which means our brains are less engaged which results in diminished intelligence. I mean, organizing your day may seem like a small task, but even something as small as that keeps the wheels in your brain turning. Now though, there are a plethora of apps out there that can organize your day for you, meaning that's one less activity to keep your brain sharp.
It's almost similar to how automation of physically demanding tasks eliminated "natural" ways for us to keep our bodies in shape to the point that we now have to make a conscious effort to exercise if we want to stay physically fit. The same is now happening with our brains. Soon machines are going to do so much of our thinking for us that we'll have to start making conscious efforts to engage in "brain exercises" if we don't want to become complete morons.
EnglishEdward
Deity
Answer = No
Snerk
Smeghead
No but there are more cats and I find that's half the battle.
One is hardly going to be made smarter by having to include a notion/imagination of there being billions of funny-posting or other not interesting people in potential contact with one. Like it or not, you aren't in contact with the internet, but with your own imagination of it, which is largely formed by the lowest common denominator (memes/forum posting/wasted time).
As for me, i am alien AI, so it is different.
As for me, i am alien AI, so it is different.
The Internet is like every other human invention. We embrace it without fully understanding what it is we are embracing. The thing seems good, and things are going well, until we discover that the invention was not a cornicopia after all. Then we discover the negative sides that don't always top the positive sides. But by then we have come too accustomed to it and it benefits too much some entrenched power structure for us to abandon it.
The Internet is the same. We got into it hoping to unite the world, enhance democracy and bring knowledge to all. What we got was a part of that, but we also got degenerating clickbait news sites, fake news, opinion manipulation, corporations reaching deep down into our personal lives through big data, political polarization, porn for children, communities of "incels" and the like and a decreasing attention span because of all the shiny Tamacochis on the tubes. I couldn't think of searching for information without the internet, but all in all I think the internet as it is now might be a net negative. Alas, there is no going back.
The Internet is the same. We got into it hoping to unite the world, enhance democracy and bring knowledge to all. What we got was a part of that, but we also got degenerating clickbait news sites, fake news, opinion manipulation, corporations reaching deep down into our personal lives through big data, political polarization, porn for children, communities of "incels" and the like and a decreasing attention span because of all the shiny Tamacochis on the tubes. I couldn't think of searching for information without the internet, but all in all I think the internet as it is now might be a net negative. Alas, there is no going back.
I think it will end, actually. Of course it will take nuclear war to end it, but it will end.
Maybe smaller and closed national webs will replace it - with other kinds of garbage.
Similar threads
