SWA 2: "Get Smart" Responce

Hope Stewart

"Get Smart" Responce

Jamais Cascio’s argumentave essay, “Get Smarter”, points out that the next obvious step is for humans to further develop and polish already existing technology and pharmacology to raise human intelligence.  His argument seems stronger and better structured than the one presented in “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, by Nicholas Carr. 

Cascio argues that “Google isn’t the problem; it’s the beginning of the solution.”  His point about how companies like Google are adapting to fit more with what users are specifically searching for made me think of Siri on the newest version of the iPhone.  Just as Cascio says, new technologies such as these often start out crude, but as consumers play with the new tools more and more, the company can pick up on changes that need to be made for the next version of the product.  My sister, with a thick southern accent, has trouble getting Siri to understand what she is asking her phone to do.  However, through her rejection of Siri’s suggestions, Apple learns there is a restriction with their technology, and therefore can know what to address when creating the next version. 

Where as Cascio seems to support the insight companies gain from consumers, Carr, author of “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” seemed to fear this voluntary insight.  Casco addresses many other similar fears people discussing a rise in technology and pharmacology may hold onto.  One of these issues was the question of safety involving drugs used for focus.  I was repelled by Cascio’s idea that even if drug use for focus is wrong or dangerous, we cannot fight it.  I found his paragraphs on focus-enhancing drugs extremely interesting, because during finals week, many of my friends chose to take a variety of ADD medicine to gain an edge as they studied.  I stayed away from the medication, but Cascio managed to make some very strong points in his essay about how in a decade or so this type of medication could be simple over-the-counter drugs and those not indulging in them could easily fall behind their peers.

The essay, “Get Smarter” makes many great arguments, but left me with many questions about the effect of slipping morals technology and pharmacology may result in.  The controversy between the two opposing essays gives me many factors to consider concerning the debate on technology, but I have not yet decided if advances yield more benefits or problems.