Is tech making our youth dumber?

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
The dumbing down of America is exactly what the global elite want. The global elite owns the media and use it as a valuable tool to keep the population well entertained so that the sheeple don't start thinking too much. They don't want you thinking about stuff and eventually figuring out their master plan to enslave you.


So name this "global elite." If you can claim they exist, you can certainly tell us who they are and with all the hard copy information properly indexed and cross referenced.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
The dumbing down of America is exactly what the global elite want. The global elite owns the media and use it as a valuable tool to keep the population well entertained so that the sheeple don't start thinking too much. They don't want you thinking about stuff and eventually figuring out their master plan to enslave you.


So name this "global elite." If you can claim they exist, you can certainly tell us who they are and with all the hard copy information properly indexed and cross referenced.

 

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I always enjoy the irony when a topic like this comes up on this board, and we spend hours/days talking to people we haven't met, via an online discussion forum, about how much we lament "technology" in our lives, as if that "technology" isn't responsible for this very form of communication.

It's like a bunch of milk cows eating grass in a protected pasture talking about how much better it was when they roamed free and died of thirst and starvation.


That's a myopic viewpoint on this subject.

There is nothing wrong with using technology to make our lives better and open communication doorways that were never there in the past. The issue is when people allow a form of technology to rule their lives and become a slave to technology while having a paucity of basic, common sense skills.

For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?

For many of us, if the Internet and this discussion forum were to disappear for a month it wouldn't be a big deal. At most it would be a bit inconvenient for me, but I have no issues living free from modern technology. For those who are constantly tethered to technology, losing it for a month would be catastrophic. It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I always enjoy the irony when a topic like this comes up on this board, and we spend hours/days talking to people we haven't met, via an online discussion forum, about how much we lament "technology" in our lives, as if that "technology" isn't responsible for this very form of communication.

It's like a bunch of milk cows eating grass in a protected pasture talking about how much better it was when they roamed free and died of thirst and starvation.


That's a myopic viewpoint on this subject.

There is nothing wrong with using technology to make our lives better and open communication doorways that were never there in the past. The issue is when people allow a form of technology to rule their lives and become a slave to technology while having a paucity of basic, common sense skills.

For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?

For many of us, if the Internet and this discussion forum were to disappear for a month it wouldn't be a big deal. At most it would be a bit inconvenient for me, but I have no issues living free from modern technology. For those who are constantly tethered to technology, losing it for a month would be catastrophic. It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.


A bit of topic here.

Pop_Rivit you may be able to function without the internet. Our national defense down to food and fuel supplies and deliveries are dependent on a functioning and correctly operating internet. I can not name any part of our lives from the food on American's plate to the power that provides power to our homes that is not tied into the internet.

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?


-In what world would these 23 year olds need to function without the internet or their gadgets for a month?

-Why does it matter if somebody can't remember how to do long division with a pencil and paper?

-50 years ago were people asking the question "how many dictionary dependent people can spell without a dictionary?"

-How many people still *need* to be able to read a paper map and memorize a route? Why can't they use the pencil and paper they were doing long division with to write down the directions?

You may call them "common sense skills", I call them antiquaited wastes of time; only useful in niche circumstances that you don't encounter often.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: Mykl
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?


-In what world would these 23 year olds need to function without the internet or their gadgets for a month?

-Why does it matter if somebody can't remember how to do long division with a pencil and paper?

-50 years ago were people asking the question "how many dictionary dependent people can spell without a dictionary?"

-How many people still *need* to be able to read a paper map and memorize a route? Why can't they use the pencil and paper they were doing long division with to write down the directions?

You may call them "common sense skills", I call them antiquaited wastes of time; only useful in niche circumstances that you don't encounter often.


Very true. I haven't killed a buffalo today. I wonder how I will live?

 

[uc50ic4more]

“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”

- Socrates

Whiners have been whining that the face of humanity is not progressing and forming according to the will of the whiner for millennia.

 

[Mr Nice]

Are elementary school teachers still necessary when children can surf the internet 6 hours everyday ?

J/k

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?


OK, I may be just off 33, but other than my work, which is in a technical field, which requires connectivity, computing and analytical resources which tech enables, can say yes to all of the above.

But really? Long division, like the third grade skill? Memorize a map? Sure, but that one is as dumb as can be; have done it tons of times, on long trips, but for exploring and finding new places and things in far off states, GPSs open a whole new world, as do net-enabled smart phones. I wouldnt go off chest-pounding about those skills when they arent particularly impressive and can be viewed as obsolete, and when my 91 year-old grandmother and my fresh from college employees who have smartphones and communicate by text can both do such things.

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


For those who are constantly tethered to technology, losing it for a month would be catastrophic. It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.


So when are you going to be willing to give back your profits from efficiencies gained by technology? You talk about writing databases for cemeteries - what if it was your career twenty years ago versus a hobby to get out of the house? What if your family relied upon you doing it to eat? Remember - tech isnt bad, and being tethered to it for gains and creating value can be extremely important and valuable. You dont get one without the other, for better or worse.

And given your commentary against those of us who prefer cars with manual transmissions, I'm especially surprised at your points.

 

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I always enjoy the irony when a topic like this comes up on this board, and we spend hours/days talking to people we haven't met, via an online discussion forum, about how much we lament "technology" in our lives, as if that "technology" isn't responsible for this very form of communication.

It's like a bunch of milk cows eating grass in a protected pasture talking about how much better it was when they roamed free and died of thirst and starvation.


LOL! I was thinking the same thing as well!

 

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I always enjoy the irony when a topic like this comes up on this board, and we spend hours/days talking to people we haven't met, via an online discussion forum, about how much we lament "technology" in our lives, as if that "technology" isn't responsible for this very form of communication.

It's like a bunch of milk cows eating grass in a protected pasture talking about how much better it was when they roamed free and died of thirst and starvation.


That's a myopic viewpoint on this subject.

There is nothing wrong with using technology to make our lives better and open communication doorways that were never there in the past. The issue is when people allow a form of technology to rule their lives and become a slave to technology while having a paucity of basic, common sense skills.

For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?

For many of us, if the Internet and this discussion forum were to disappear for a month it wouldn't be a big deal. At most it would be a bit inconvenient for me, but I have no issues living free from modern technology. For those who are constantly tethered to technology, losing it for a month would be catastrophic. It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.


Simple, yet true.

And for those making this harder, here is an example:

What if a major power grid "blew up" and power was down for a good while?

And, keep in mind not everyone has a generator either.

Heck, could even be a hurricane or tornado....

And while I would miss the net, I could live without it for a while...

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
So name this "global elite." If you can claim they exist, you can certainly tell us who they are and with all the hard copy information properly indexed and cross referenced.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I always enjoy the irony when a topic like this comes up on this board, and we spend hours/days talking to people we haven't met, via an online discussion forum, about how much we lament "technology" in our lives, as if that "technology" isn't responsible for this very form of communication.

It's like a bunch of milk cows eating grass in a protected pasture talking about how much better it was when they roamed free and died of thirst and starvation.


That's a myopic viewpoint on this subject.

There is nothing wrong with using technology to make our lives better and open communication doorways that were never there in the past. The issue is when people allow a form of technology to rule their lives and become a slave to technology while having a paucity of basic, common sense skills.

For example, how many 23 year olds would be able to function if they didn't have the Internet and their gadgets for a month? How many technology dependent people can do long division with a paper and pencil? How many technology dependent people can spell without a spell checker? How many technology depended people can look at a paper map, memorize the route, and then get to their destination?

For many of us, if the Internet and this discussion forum were to disappear for a month it wouldn't be a big deal. At most it would be a bit inconvenient for me, but I have no issues living free from modern technology. For those who are constantly tethered to technology, losing it for a month would be catastrophic. It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.


Interestingly, I can still do long division on paper, I can spell properly, I can use a map if I needed to. Would I survive without internet access? Sure. I wouldn't necessarily be very happy about it for the simple fact that most of the non family members I interact with on a daily basis are online, for one important reason.

I don't know many people personally, offline, who were interested in the same things I am. And the ones that are are mostly 8+ hours away. I'd rather spend more time online talking to people who share similar interests them pretend to be interested in things I'm not. Like sports, or most reality TV. I couldn't care less about most of the things the majority of my acquaintances are interested in. My hobbies are also conducive to using technology. Like video games, instead of what I consider silly, running around a field throwing a ball back and forth.

But the key point here is different strokes for different people. It's interesting to think there are people who do not think technology has had a net positive impact on our lives.

Sent from my Galaxy S5.

 

[Shannow]

My children were doing power point presentations from the age of 6 at school.

I can honestly say that I was not a fan, but later observed that their "manual" poster presentations evolved quicker as they worked out better power point layouts...they could explore a dozen page layouts, erase, arrange, then get a feel for what worked.

I came slowly around.

When I went to university, assignments had to be hand written, to avoid plagiarism (word perfect was about as powerful as word processing was)...now teachers in elementary want assignments on disk/zip drive, and they google phrases that look to polished, to check for plagiarism.

We had a set of Funk and Wagnells, which piques our interest sufficiently to find (maybe) another book at the library.

My 9 and 11 year old have access to multiple sources, and both are analysing them somewhat critically...why does this not say the same as that...tehy haven't established a confirmational bias to a favourite "flavour" of source yet.

I still stand that they have to be able to do mental arithmetic...calculators off during math homework.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
The issue is when people allow a form of technology to rule their lives and become a slave to technology while having a paucity of basic, common sense skills.

...

It's those who have allowed technology to rule their lives who are the subject of this topic, not those of us who only use it as an additional tool, on par with a new pitchfork for the garden.


"Technology" is often a scapegoat for many things, and it seems to be (even if it's not) that "more" of it is characterized as a step backwards. But it's an inescapable truth that the basis upon which modern society exists, the foundation upon which we live, is "technology". It's already been pointed out that this very same conversation's been had for thousands of years. Sure, we may not be as proficient at hand-written long division today. Whether that will eventually bite us in the rear is yet to be seen.

We're also not as proficient at basket-weaving or at forming and kilning clay pots, either. I can't speak for everyone, but I haven't had to go down to the river lately to draw a pot of water; a well that's powered by an electric motor does that for me. Since the discovery and/or invention of alternative building materials, we might not be as skilled at constructing grass huts as we might have been in the past. Will I regret some day that I can't build my own house out of grass? Possibly. I'd say that it's not likely, but it is possible.

My response may read as rather flip, but I assure you that it's genuine. Many skills, MANY skills, that humans once had in the past have been supplanted by the efficiency that technology brings. Whether that's an aqueduct to carry water or a bridge built to carry a road over it, technology has touched every aspect of our lives. It does so today and it's done so for thousands of years prior.

I suppose that we could make the legitimate case that there would be hardships if the more recent forms of "technology" were to no longer exist. That's undeniable. Witness the chaos that ensued about 10 years ago during the massive power outage in the northeast United States. This is both an example of how much we truly rely on "technology", far above and beyond a simple iPad or too much TV watching, and a warning that as the human community continues to progress on, we need to safeguard and protect those forms of technology that drive our culture as we know it.

 

[KrisZ]

We substitute old technology for new or we outright loose the technology or the know-how altogether. That is why it's so easy to convince people that aliens build the pyramids or other ancient structures these days.

The easier the technology makes something to achieve, the quicker we forget the fundamentals on which the technology is based on. There is no surprise there.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Trajan
So name this "global elite." If you can claim they exist, you can certainly tell us who they are and with all the hard copy information properly indexed and cross referenced.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants


Those are not the "global elite" by any means. Really, the Prince of Wales and his father? Why not the Queen herself? The list is full of *former* this and *former* that.

You have failed.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Trajan
So name this "global elite." If you can claim they exist, you can certainly tell us who they are and with all the hard copy information properly indexed and cross referenced.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants


Those are not the "global elite" by any means. Really, the Prince of Wales and his father? Why not the Queen herself? The list is full of *former* this and *former* that.

You have failed.


This just got interesting.

 

[gathermewool]

Without technology, my job would be much harder. Looking up diagrams, control-F'ing a procedural steps or allowances I haven't memorized or had to use in a while, or any number of other technology-based advantages are what make tech beneficial.

There will always be idiots and narcissists in the world, and it may be that these buffoons put themselves in the spot light, where as one had to BE put in the spot light in years past, but that doesn't change the fact that the people who run this world are the smart, witty or driven individuals who really try.

Today, however, it's not enough to be driven as a young person if you're not driving with tech assistance.

Originally Posted By: morepwr
It may not be making anyone dumber but it sure has hurt the social skills of the young.


Maybe, but I tend towards being a hermit. I'm not big on talking on the phone, be it cellular or land-line, and I feel more comfortable in small groups or even by myself.

I probably wouldn't be married to my wife or have so many high school and college friends to keep in touch with were it not for technology. I still visit some of them - those who live close enough - but most I keep tabs on via Facebook. I don't know if my random likes or comments bring joy to their lives, but it makes me feel good when something big happens in my life and I get likes from people I haven't talked to in a while.

It's even better when I go to visit some one I literally haven't spoken with in decades and it's like we were never apart, all because I see what's going on with them online, and them me.

Granted, I only have 231 friends on Facebook, which may seem like a lot to those of you who don't partake, but it's really not. only a handful are true friends, another couple of handfuls those with whom I used to be close, but life and distance have changed that, and then the rest are recent friends, co-workers who I like enough to befriend and other social contacts who share my interests or provide some benefit to my life.

 

[Merkava_4]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Those are not the "global elite" by any means. Really, the Prince of Wales and his father? Why not the Queen herself? The list is full of *former* this and *former* that.

You have failed.


Here's the 2014 Participant List:

https://publicintelligence.net/2014-bilderberg-participant-list/

Any elected officials won't be on the list since it's against the U.S. constitution for them to attend, but they're still there unofficially. Actually, the whole list is supposed to be unofficial, but the list gets leaked out to the Bilderberg hunters by spies in the hotel staff.