Critical Analysis of Is Google Making Us Stupid?

This critical analysis explores the impact of Google on our thinking processes and how it may be making us stupid. The author uses rhetorical strategies to persuade readers and provides evidence to support their claims.

Surname 1
Student Name
Instructor's
The Course
Number
Submission
Date
Critical analysis of Is Google Making Us Stupid?
We are living in the era of fast-paced technology, and the advent of the internet and
permeation of web has indeed changed our lives forever. Nicholas Carr, in his article” Is Google
Making Us Stupid?” uses his own observations and research to influence the audience as to how
the Internet has been damaging for our thinking processes (Carr). Fast and easy browsing
reduces the attention spans and the capacity to focus on reading and thus flatten the thinking and
learning experience in the process. The author uses rhetorical strategies to persuade his readers
and is effective in convincing them as to how and why Google is making them stupid.
Carr makes an ethical appeal by raising his own credibility and tries to make connections
with the reader. He offers information based on his experience, and his readers believe him
because they go through the same experiences when they browse the internet or use Google.
Thus, they are able to relate to him. When he writes,” Net is becoming a universal medium,” he
can connect with the readers, and they understand what he is trying to convey and thus believe
him. He mentions what was written by Marshall McLuhan, the media theorist in the 1960s to add
credibility to his article. Later he mentions “I’m not the only one” and involves his friends and
acquaintances in the similar experience. Instead of making some efforts in applying critical
thinking, we rely on Google to look for faster answers. He refers to the web as “writing e-mails,
scanning headlines, and blog posts” and “just tripping from link to link to link” (Carr). He
mentions a regular blogger Bruce Friedman, who thinks like him and writes,” I now have almost
totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print.” The blogger too

Surname 2
mentions how he has lost the “ability to read and absorb” the information. Thus, Carr establishes
his authority and experience on the topic, and by sharing his views and experiences, he gives a
practical example of ethos. At the same time, he gives a reasonable scope of the doubt to the
other side and writes as to how we will have to wait to get a conclusive picture of how the
internet has altered our brains based on long-term neurological experiments. The readers have
little choice but to trust his opinion as he appeals to ethos.
A pathetic appeal is seen in Carr’s article as he tries to invoke the reader’s emotion and
get approval for his ideas. He tries to sympathy the readers by inducing fear into the reader’s
mind and drawing their attention to what Google is doing to their brains. He uses words and
phrases like” unsettling,” “fidgety,” and “the way I THINK has changed” to instill fear into the
reader (Carr). He tries to convince as to how the new intellectual technologies are changing the
way people think as their brains are malleable. It is easy to see what he means when he writes,”
“Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet
Ski.” He mentions as to how the internet has been” reprogramming” (Carr) us and our way of
thinking. It is evident that the author uses the strategy of pathos to convince his reader and makes
use of vivid imagery of words to keep the reader interested and immersed in what he writes. As a
result, his very moving and persuasive writing is strong enough to pull the reader and persuade
him to think and feel like the author.
There is a logical appeal is Carr’s article as he provides careful reasoning behind
everything he says or writes. He offers evidence and proof to build logos with his readers and
uses scientific language wherever he can. For example, he used historical references like the
printing press and the development of writing to make logical comparisons. He offers reputable
resources to give evidence and draw in the reader about the discussion on the impact of Google

Surname 3
on their lives. He cites the example of another writer Maryanne Wolf and how he argues about
deep reading and deep thinking. He differentiates between the type of reading today from the
sixties and seventies when there was no internet. He writes about the reading that “may be
weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading” (Carr). The example is useful in the sense
it is based on logos and pulls the reader. He even contradicts himself by citing an example of a
professor of neuroscience, James Olds and what he says about the brain and how the brain
carries the “ability to reprogram itself.” He refers to the sociologist Daniel Bell and what he says
about our “intellectual technologies” (Carr) and the observations of MIT computer scientist
Joseph Weizenbaum. Thus, he establishes logos by referencing historical innovations and
quoting experiments.
To conclude the discussion, Nicholas Carr relies on the use of ethos, pathos, and logos in
his article. There is an effective use of rhetorical strategies in the article that motivate the readers
to think in his lines and believe what he says.

Surname 4
Works Cited
Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” the atlantic, 2 Apr. 2008,
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/
306868/Accessed 2 June. 2019