HW 14- Second Text (long excerpt)

The excerpt I read was the full 100 page one, which discussed fallacies and misconceptions concerning the educational value (or lack their of) of Video- Games, Television and the Internet. The book's title "Everything Bad is Good For You", also happens to be the main ideology that the author Steven Johnson is trying to support. His main arguments are quite broad, and dig deeper than the common knowledge, which consists for the most part of assumptions that are (according to the author) unfounded, and the book's intent is to disprove those very assumptions.

The first argument, which encompasses all of the three media forms is that all of this technological innovation has a strong developmental value personally and globally, which we generally don't recognize. Underneath this main concept, lies three sub-arguments (Video-Games, T.V., and Internet) that serve as evidence to support the main concept by stating the different forms of intellectual growth they stimulate.

According to the excerpt, video-games help to develop your logical abilities to think and problem solve. The step-by-step way that games are structured give us a lesson in how to tackle a larger problem by first dealing with the smaller tasks in order to build your way up to that point. These games also teach us logical thinking because you have to use methods including trial-and-error, and testing the limits of the game's programing to develop a plan or strategy so that you can beat it. Additionally, some video-games can teach you how to solve a problem by first putting it into perspective and organizing your actions in a way that allows you to quickly achieve that goal (step-by-step).

Television is the second example of a developmental tool which is often thought of as counter-productive to our intellectual progression. Johnson sites T.V. as something that increases our social intelligence and lowers our AQ (Autism Quotient) by making us think about complex relationships, and multiple story-lines in shows like "E.R." and "West Wing". He even sites reality T.V. as a subtle way television acts as a developmental platform for understanding social interaction via an unusual and entertaining (to some) premise.

His third example, is the Internet. This is a very basic and much more obvious example, but important nonetheless. Johnson states the Internet is a socially connecting tool that, if used properly (and not for games and YouTube) can be vital in enhancing our awareness and ability to gather and compile information. The Internet after all is the largest compilation of information and data in history, making it a resource with a huge potential to educate, but only if it is used for that purpose.

After reading this excerpt, I came away from it feeling uniquely different than I have after reading anything else before. Looking back at my notes I took while reading, I noticed that I agreed with about the same amount of what I read, as what I disagreed with. The way the book started, I had a very different expectation for what it was going to be about and how it was going to be structured. Johnson's first argument was; Had books been developed after video-games, books would have the same reputation as an effective educational platform as video-games actually had (meaning they wouldn't be accepted as educational devices at all). To me, this seemed to be a highly specious argument with little to no merit whatsoever. Even after reading the excerpt, I still feel that this was not a very coherent argument.

After that first part, the rest of his arguments seemed to be pretty solid. What he actually presented wasn't problematic, it was however problematic that he worked from a premise that was not quite as solid. The way I read the book, I believe that his arguments can be placed into two categories. The first is "subconscious development", which is intellectual development that is attributed to doing something like play World of Warcraft for fun, but end up learning management skills and problem solving through perspective. The second, is "conscious improvement", where you recognize something like reality television, that can improve your social skills, but need to take an extra step to make use of that opportunity, otherwise you gain nothing from it. The problem with most of Johnson's arguments, is that he puts every single one of them into the subconscious category, and works off the premise that we unconditionally benefit from these games, shows and websites.

In Steven Johnson's evaluation that all of these things have the potential to develop our minds, he is absolutely correct, his book is itself a testament to that. The problem is, because of all the fluff, the plots of the stupid reality shows, the subject matter of the video games, and the crap that floods the majority of the Internet, we often get sidetracked by the surface and thus don't ever look deeper, even if we do absorb it, we don't realize it, and thus never develop it. An example of my theory, can be proven using myself as an example. When I was in Kindergarten, I learned to read. That isn't why I can read well now. The reason that I read well now, is that I developed this skill from the point I learned to read up until right now. The idea that we can be "hypnotized" by the new media is not very stable and takes a huge leap from a solid idea, to a theorized connection.

I think that the main way that this excerpt contradicts the main idea of "Feed" is that Feed is based off of the idea that technological developments lead to apathy and loss of self, while the author of "Everything Bad is Good For You" is based off of the idea that these developments lead to mental improvement and discovery of ones self. In some ways, Johnson does indirectly support Tobin's point, because they do both agree that the improved technology causes much more information to be accessed easier, with alot less effort on the part of people to obtain it, and learn it.