How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans - Research Paper Example

The Dumbest Generation-Research The Dumbest Generation-Research The concept of change has been undergoing a paradoxical episode, which is ideologically constant. The current era is facing a period of technological changes, which have created division between the generation over and under thirty years of age in terms of moral standpoints, ideologies and personal influences. The two generations, however, are forced to live in the same environment despite the schism between them. Mark Bauerlein, provokes the battle between these two generations in his book, The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future, blaming the generation under the age of thirty years. Bauerlein claims, “The digital age stupefies young Americans while at the same time jeopardizing their future” because of the technological advancements they have adopted (Bauerlein 3). In his book, Bauerlein argues that what the teachers are offering and the available information on internet not sufficient. This makes him refer to it as the dumbest generation, with allegation that their overdependence on media technology has them less intellect compared to generations before them. Bauerlein’s argument, however, is not true because what the teachers are offering and the available information on internet is sufficient for the generation under 30 years. In his book, Bauerlein accuses the teenagers for their lack of knowledge and intelligence, poor scholastic-effort and lack of ability to be attentive unless stimulated constantly. The author presents arguments, which are rich in disappointment, emotion, and despair to express the negativities associated with technological advancements towards the young generation. Bauerlein clearly presents his arguments to prove his point that this generation has been affected to an extent that it cannot understand that it is dumb. He tries to convince the adults that the young generation should agree that they are the dumbest generation. Basing argument from Bauerlein’s school of thought, it is clear that he does not acknowledge the intelligence and knowledge that the generation under 30 is obtaining from use of technology. Bauerlein has not focused his attention on the behaviors, attitudes, and moralities of the young Americans and the things they have engaged themselves into. He also does not focus on the contributions of technology to the lives of the young generation. This is a clear indication that Bauerlein lacks sufficient evidence to support his claim that the information on the internet is making the dumbest generation less intellect. Throughout his book, Bauerlein centers his argument on how technology has affected the intellectual knowledge of the young Americans. Although he gives empirical evidences to support his argument and displeasure concerning media technology and its effects on the young generation, the information is under analyzed. He claims that adoption of media technology has deprived the young generation of their knowledge making them less intellectual compared to the past generations. Bauerlein, however, does not discuss changes that have been experienced in the young generation such as clothing, manners, faith, sexuality, music, diversity and speech, which have are also very different from those of the past generations. The introduction of technology has been facilitated by intellectual minds, leading to the changes that are experienced in the digital era. Bauerlein would have focused his attention on all aspects of the young generation and the changes experienced in their behaviors and values. The empirical evidences that Bauerlein uses do not qualify the under thirty years of age to be called the dumbest generation. The arguments, which Bauerlein uses to prove his claim, that the available information on internet is not sufficient lack clarity and flaw. For instance, although the title itself “How the digital-age stupefies young Americans and jeopardizes our future” blames the decline in intelligence and knowledge among the young generation on media and technology, he does not offer convincing evidence to prove this (Bauerlein 1). Much of research on his book is solely focused on intellect. Basing argument on his claim, this would force one to question the relationship between technology and intelligence and whether it should be blamed in this case. This is because the magnitude of intelligence between individuals varies and cannot be associated to a certain generation. Such arguments qualify Bauerlein’s argument obsolete because individuals have different ambitions and goals in life. He should accept the fact that people are not the same and differences will always be evident irrespective of one’s generation. Bauerlein gives emphasis to the harm that technology has posed to students, especially in depriving them their knowledge and making them prone to future pursuits. He uses test scores obtains from humanities and science to prove how knowledge among students has declined since the advent of technology. He explains that computers skills are inessential and no not translate to good results when incorporated in learning. He explains his disregard for web reading saying, “It does not favor the acquisition of knowledge, distinctive speech and prose…and [hampers] abilities to concentrate upon, a single recondite text… (Bauerlein 148). With this, Bauerlein tries to explain that the use of technology prevents the young Americans from being connected to a broader world, thus decreasing their knowledge of history, philosophy and civic values. The allegations made by Bauerlein concerning technology are not true because technology has broadened student’s minds on current events of civic values and historical information making them more intellect than the past generations. R. Smith Simpson explains this in his article, Are We Getting Our Share of the Best by stating that, “very few Americans could identify and locate simple geographical features on a map such as main rivers and states that form different belts in 1962” (Simpson 45). This information proves that the current generation is better than the past because they can access a lot of information concerning geographical features from the internet. Bauerlein adds that technologies are diminishing the relationship that exists between elder people and the young. He argues that the use of technology separates the dumbest generation from the older generation. This, according to Bauerlein prevents them from achieving wisdom of history and that of their parents, teachers, and grandparents. This is because the young generation is addicted to technology and screens to an extent that they cannot spend time seeking knowledge and learning culture from their elders. The form of addiction experienced on the youths on technological devices is not different from the addiction their parents have on television. Bauerlein should understand that the young generation spends time communicating and gaining more knowledge from the different variety of materials that are available online. Additionally, the relationship between the elder generation has not been affected on technology. Technology has made young people busy such that they have little time to sit with their parents and grandparents to learn whatever they can get from the internet. The young people are trying to be independent as they learn by their own because the information they obtain from the internet is sufficient and therefore do not have to inquire from other individuals (Begley and Jeneen 45). Bauerlein adds that schools have turned out to embracing technology, which is replacing school programs while at the same time teachers are neglecting their role of teaching in classroom and advising students to rely on technology for information. He refers to this as the betrayal of the mentors claiming that they have diverted from their duty of teaching students important information that can prepare them to meet future challenges. He blames them for taking their position in advocating for technology, which has influenced the changes experienced among the youth in the contemporary society. He argues that by failing to emphasize the need and importance of using books for their studies, teachers have served to betray the young people. He explains how the traditional culture has been undermined, claiming that educators, especially teachers and mentors do not encourage learners to learn about their culture, but rather encourage them to embark on digital media to source for all information they require. However, it is quite clear to any individual who has spend time surfing the internet and searching information from search engines like Google that technology is contributing greatly to learning. This is because it would take less time to access the information that one is looking for on the internet as opposed to going over volumes of books. Technology has offered an opportunity for learners to retrieve and store information for future reference. A person who has used internet in learning would sympathize with Bauerlein’s argument that the young people will be unable to confront the future due to lack of profound knowledge just because they do not use books as reference materials or because their teachers are not spending most of their times in classroom. Bauerlein argues that the evolution of media technology has stupefied the minds of the young generation through learning of pop culture, which has promoted rejection and the appreciation of traditional values and knowledge. Basing argument on his claims, it is clear that the author has no foundation to which he can base his arguments. For instance, he claims that learners do not acquire profound knowledge, which can support them in confronting the future just because their teachers encourage them to rely on technology and the internet for more information. The fact that teachers are advocating for inclusion and incorporation of technology in their educational programs shows that they appreciate the advantages of using technology as opposed to depending on their traditional programs. However, Bauerlein refutes this with the believe that whatever the young people are taught in schools is not sufficient to help them in challenging and meeting the needs of the future. He does not remember to explain the form and magnitude of knowledge, which an individual requires to confront the future. This clearly portrays Bauerlein as an individual driven by his lack of appreciation for the improvements that have been realized through technology. He, however, does not define the form of knowledge he is referring to in this sense. Bauerlein does not appreciate the various existing media in which one can acquire information necessary to improving knowledge. His lack of appreciation for incorporation of technology in learning is a clear indication that he is adamant to change. This is because science and technology have promoted the many activities of great minds such as coming up with innovations especially in all fields of study. Generations have come and passed throughout life, each with its own features. The emergence of technology, which has been adopted by young people under the age of thirty years, should be welcomed by all individuals. This is because the evident changes are in line with the current generation, and whatever the teachers are offering and their advocating for use of internet in learning offers the young generation sufficient knowledge, which they can use to confront the future (Stock and Charles 67). Although Bauerlein is blaming teachers and the internet for corrupting the young generation, there is nothing wrong about it. This is because technology has been appreciated by many individuals because of the numerous advantages and choices it has placed before them. For instance, Nicholas Carr explains how he has benefitted from media and technology by offering him an opportunity to get more resources, which are helping him in his research and writing. According to Carr (91), there has been very little information in books useful to promote his career. After reading commentaries of a great writer and researcher like Carr, it is difficult to understand Bauerlein’s argument that whatever the teachers and the internet offer is not sufficient for the generation under 30. This means that the digital generation is very influential and the changes they have made life bearable to many people. This is a clear indication that technology has contributed to people being more intelligent and knowledgeable. In addition, Clive Thompson also expresses his appreciation media and the use of technology by the young generation in his book, the new literacy. Thompson states that, “technology isn’t killing our ability to write, its reviving it and pushing our literacy in bold new directions” (Thompson 17). With this positive information from scholars and elites of the adult generation, it quite clear that Bauerlein is simply not appreciating the changes that teachers and use of the internet have brought to the world through technology. Both Carr and Thompson explain that this generation is more intellect than the past generations although Bauerlein does not accept the shifts and differences in intellectual and writing abilities, which have been influenced by use of internet. Although Technology has proven to be a positive feature in the lives of many people, Bauerlein claims that it has degraded the minds of our youth. Youth who, according to him, enjoy more when “the gifts of life lead to social joys, not intellectual labor”. The information that Bauerlein offers is paradoxical because one would be surprised whether those of the past generation would not love to experience a situation whereby they have more “Joy” than “Labor.” It is very true that almost all young people spend their time on screens, cell phones, and computers for more than eight hours in a day (Hershatter and Molly 221). This is highly experienced when they are in their holiday. But again, adult people do a lot of things to occupy themselves when on holiday as well such as going to the beach, reading novels or even playing golf just for pleasure. This is because no one wants to be idle and they at least engage in something that will keep them busy. Even Bauerlein engages himself in doing stuff to avoid being idle. Blaming teenagers for overuse of internet is not right because they are engaging themselves in whatever they find interesting. This is even useful because it prevents them from engaging in immoral activities and behaviors or even associating with bad company. Additionally, the young generation is composed of individuals who are still undergoing the process of growth and development and, therefore, hyperactive. Throughout his book, Bauerlein does not seem to understanding the age group he is focusing, but rather points whatever they are doing as wrong instead of offering solutions on what should be done to help them. The young people are still growing and, therefore, need guidance as they try to build themselves and shaping their future. It is wrong for Bauerlein to claim that the information available on the internet is not sufficient for them. The fact that they have been born during a period of media and technological advancements does not mean that the young people will be less intellect just because they rely more on the internet for information as opposed to books and traditional knowledge. Although Bauerlein holds the misconception that, the Internet decreases the availability of knowledge in a uniformly valuable way, technology has made that, which was once difficult to understand and get available at our fingertips. The past generations suffered from crucial information because the medium they were relying on, especially books, had limited information. The current generation is experiencing a period where information is available everywhere at any time provided that one has access to a computer or a device with internet connection. Marshall McLuhan expresses his appreciation claiming, "The medium is the message" (McLuhan 390). He appreciated the contributions of technology to facilitating communication saying, “each medium-whether telephone, television, or book-affects the content it conveys; the medium is not neutral” (McLuhan 399). This contrasts Baerlein’s argument in which he sees books as the only medium, which should be used as a medium of message. There are very many disadvantages associated to depending on books as the sole providers of knowledge. For instance, information kept on books cannot be highly relied upon because books are torn or lost at any time. This information cannot be retrieved unless one buys another book. There are many challenges associated with the use books especially finances because they are expensive to purchase. So why should one go for books when there is a lot of information available online. This is like dragging people to an era where no intellects exist. Baerlein is just ignorant to change and he should accept the fact that technology offers more than what books could offer. Baerlein is not happy with the way the young generation spends time on the internet all the time. Very people of the young people are interested in reading books or novels as it was the trend with the past generations. Anytime the young people are interested in reading take magazines or their devices to get into the internet. This is because there are fewer resources in terms of books available in libraries for the young people to read. Additionally, with technological advancement, writers and researchers have diverted to using technology to post their materials as opposed to writing and publishing their information in books, which is a tedious and expensive exercise. The fact that the young generation has highly turned to technology and internet does not mean that what they gain is insufficient. The changes that are being experienced in their digital era is a clear indication of the changes that have occurred in their lives as opposed to the past generations. These changes have been influenced by the drastic evolution changes the world is undergoing. That is why in the current world people are busy developing new technologies to meet the needs of the people. If there was insufficient information on the internet as Baerlein claims, then we would not have people building and developing technology because it requires geniuses to do the work. This generation is not the dumbest neither does the use of technology make it less intellectual. In fact, the use of internet and the information offered by teachers has made this generation more intellectual and knowledgeable, the reason why they have made many improvements in today’s lives. Bibliographies Bauerlein, Mark, and Stuart G. Walesh. "The Dumbest Generation—How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future: . Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, New York, 2008; 978-1-58542-639-3." Leadership and Management in Engineering 9, no. 2 (2009): 100-100. Bauerlein, Mark. "The Dumbest Generation." (2011). Bauerlein, Mark. The dumbest generation: How the digital age stupefies young Americans and jeopardizes our future (or, dont trust anyone under 30). Penguin, 2008. Begley, Sharon, and Jeneen Interlandi. "The Dumbest Generation? Don’t Be Dumb." Newsweek, June 2 (2008). Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google making us stupid?." Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education 107, no. 2 (2008): 89-94. Hershatter, Andrea, and Molly Epstein. "Millennials and the world of work: An organization and management perspective." Journal of Business and Psychology 25, no. 2 (2010): 211-223. McLuhan, Marshall. "The medium is the message." Communication theory (2008): 390-402. Simpson Smith. Are we getting our share of the best? Foreign service journal. 1962. Stock, Oliviero, and Charles Callaway. "Multiple coordinated mobile narratives as a catalyst for face-to-face group conversation." In Interactive Storytelling, pp. 209-220. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. Thompson, Clive. "Clive Thompson on the new literacy." Wired Magazine 17, no. 9 (2009): 17-09. Read More