Lately, I find the progression from newspaper headline fragments to texting in short code as a lower level of intellect.
The acronyms are bad but the ability for the younger generation to reflect on what they’ve read is terrible.
They are working extremely hard at losing the abilty to read in-between the lines and to analyze what is being implied by an argument, missing the point of the one book made into a movie that they actually claim to be their favorite.
They only see what they want to see and focus on that. So the more you write the more they miss. Skimming. You have to be so clear and so short winded that nothing in depth should ever be attempted. They have no patience for that.
Ironic, in this age of information these early adopters are most likely to be mis-informed and fly any flag.
Multimedia art consists of one statement: “we are swimming in so much info, look how absurd it is when we associate any of it.”
They lie to themselves when they say they are good at multitasking.
They request that you add them as friends on any digital platform, not because they know you or want to know you, but because the (number) of subscribed friends is important. So it’s not just reading, but face to face communication. F2F
H.G Well’s The Time Traveller has the humans of the future pegged, frail creatures that specialize in nothing but pushing buttons and giggling uncontrollably, as they gasp for simple breath of red air.
I added that last line and will replace words every so often. They won’t verify it.
FZ and LTF but not RF that gr8 ((()))) monstr. L8r
You really have to look no further than ILP to see the trend - and the results. Armed with wiki, youtube, and a keyboard, we’re all philosophers! Anything past a three sentence gloss is considered too long to read. I’ve been banging around in here for over five years, and I’ve read all the complaints that philosophy is going to hell in a handbasket. It isn’t. But you wouldn’t know it from what passes for “deep thinking” in any philosophy forum - including ILP. Our technologies aren’t dumbing us down, we’re just more surface creatures, preferring sloganeering to actually making careful well thought writings. I’m not sure whether it is better or worse, but it sure is different.
I agree with you.
People are not reading less. Just in more short bursts.
I think I’m bitter as a ex-novelist in a dead book industry.
I feel like the puppet guy in Being John Malkovich with long forgotten art forms. Pathetic.
I am dyslexic, trying to read long posts is time consuming. You have no idea how many times I have to go back over a paragraph because my mind flip flopped something. It gets frustrating. I prefer reading books, they at least don’t criticize my mistakes
Over all I would have to agree with the dumbing down of language. I do believe though it started a few generations back when slang came into vogue. The younger generations are following a trend started by their great grandparents. The 1920’s really put a dent in language.
Tab and I have had an on-going discussion about the effects of the internet and the consequences - realtime and projected, over the last several years. It’s all rather confusing. I maintain that we can’t say that people in general are any less intelligent, but that the modes of communication have changed. For us old dogs, it is disconcerting because it pushes us out of our comfort zone of whatever passes for communication. Language evolves, as does the methods of communicating and in an increasingly virtual communication environment, what is lost and what is gained is a blurry picture. Overall, I agree that there seems to be less thought behind our words, but I’m unsure if it’s because I can’t keep up with the rate of change in the communication environment, or if people are really presenting less intellect.
There was a time when one wrote letters with a quill pen and one would have to stop for a moment and refill the quill. In that moment, there was also the pause to stop and reflect on what was being written. Technology superceded the quill and we finally had a writing instrument that allowed writing without pause. Did the ball point pen change how we think? Has the keypad and instantaneous postings changed us? How? Good, bad, indifferent?
Kris,
Every generation chooses it’s own slang and some of it eventually make’s it’s way into a dictionary. If there is a difference, it is the pace of change that grows faster every year. The slang language now changes twice or three times in one generation, but it doesn’t mean we’re not as smart, just out of the loop…
I forget which book it is, I think it’s the Grand Chessboard, but Brezinski talks about how the plan for the (Western) world is to reduce our language capacity such that we couldn’t even think in the technical definition of the word. We can now emote through catch phrases like ‘change,’ but few people on any given political comment are actually performing tasks of deduction. Most of the things people say are fallacy-riddled rhetoric which says nothing and goes nowhere. This was achieved a while ago in my opinion. Most people don’t understand logic and just repeat whatever is said on the television.
In the movie ‘Crash’ by not Soderberg there is a scene where some white studio executive is making the black guy talk in ebonics instead of talking normally. It captures quite well how it’s old white men, not the grassroots nature of society, who perpetuate social differences and keep things polarized and in a state of chaos. This is done, of course, so that the white elites can retain their control. It’s only possible when everyone else is fighting and being racist towards each other, using words and phrases that will never lead to any synthesis of understanding.
So don’t blame the kids. It was decided long ago by people like Big B that jimmy the white boy would be turned into an pathetic effeminate emo bitch.
As a member of the younger/texting generation I am somewhat annoyed at the line of thinking in this thread.
Its not as much dumbing down of language as dividing it into 2 separate forms.
There is the texting form which is used for surface conversations which don’t need to be deep. For example, finding out if someone whats to hangout or what the homework for a class was etc.
Then there is proper language used for school and important conversations.
And whenever there are options presented, all will prefer one over the other leading to a small demographic that will use shorthand more than proper english (sadly this group is more visible simply because those that shout loudest are heard better.)
As far as a lack of reading comprehension, we are good at that. We are tested on it weekly in school which leads to us viewing it as a chore rather than something important.
Slogans have always been popular. (Long Live the King, Keep Calm and Carry On, Liberté Egalité Fraternité, the list goes on)
Perhaps you have no trouble distinguishing between mundane chatter and serious conversation, but you may be the exception. Since we “think” in language, the linguistic structure has a great deal to do with how we think. Does this make a difference? I don’t know, but I’m guessing it does.
As a corollary, I wonder how many people capable of running a scientific calculator actually understands the math behind it? What happens when the Kindle dies?
Yes, books and mistakes. The funny thing about that is if you show someone a manuscript they suggest different words and look less at the story. If that same manuscript is in official book form, readers rarely think of how the phrase should go. They don’t even see the words.
A spelling mistake on the internet can negate an entire arugment.
The 20’s was been comparable to the 90’s. Ironic that The Great Gatbsy, a pure story of the most elequent prose was writen then.
At same time Ring Lardner was spelling words just like they sound for dumb comic effect. Same as texting.
Okay fair enough. But I’m curious. When typing a school paper have you or your friends ever had the an immediate inclination to use short code, mental backspace. And felt a small frustration about lengthy words.
Keep in mind. I’m not a fan of big words either.
But I think once short code is more established it will channel thought, rather than expand it. Ideas will first be avoided because the is no short code for it. Then abandoned altogether.
Many languages have died throughout human history. When you see a population of speakers getting smaller you realize the type of knowlege that is about to vanish.
When typing a paper there is only a tendency to want to use short hand if we were recently texting or IMing.
However with timed essays in school I often have to go back and fix shorthand simply because my pencil wont keep up with my pace of thought.
While we don’t just want the trunk, it is important that the trunk is the first thing we read. If there is to much of a verbose introduction, it turns into a tl;dr. If the trunk is readily available and interesting we will follow the branches.
As far as the death of a language, that happens more often due to another culture assimilating the dieing one. Shorthand is more like the gradual change from old english to modern english. The only difference is that the ever increasing speed of communication is quickening the process.
I am sure however that eventually the shorthand form will fade as people find longhand more expressive.
Tentative, you bring up a great point but while reading this, you are not thinking in letters, you are thinking in sounds. Shorthand (at least when read correctly) has the same phonetic qualities as the original word so while we may type “l8r” or “whts the hmwrk 4 mth clss?” we are still thinking the same version of the words as a 1984 harvard grad.
Most math teachers still make us do at least some problems on the test without a calculator to make sure we understand how to do it.
Also, my calc class is currently working on sin, cos, and tan formulas that are to complex for all but the most expensive calculators meaning we have to fill entire sheets of paper with a single problem
And you could have pointed out that the word is “losing”, not loosing, which ain’t a word… Although it could be that loosing is a new word describing how young people are losing by loosening language… I don’t know. Is that code or something? :-"
This topic reminds me of a short passage from “The Irrational Man.” This was written in 1958 and proves to be very prophetic.
The extent of our streamlining of communication by use of texting and other methods mentioned in this thread have not only dwindled the human person but severed their ability to communicate with other humans on any level deeper than the external.
That people do not already realize these truths as absolute facts, well, that conjures great doubt inside my stomach regarding the intellect of the human race.
Actually, they say that the language you use does effect the way you think. Logically, since texting is such an ‘edited’ language, it might be reasonable to presume that those whose main form of language use is text/internetz based, especiailly during the years when language skills are cemented, will possess a similar ‘edited’ form of intelligence, or at least congnition.
It would take extreme cases to have an effect though I think. “Kid left in box with mobile for 5 years” etc. kinda thing.
Although it could be that loosing is a new word describing how young people are losing by loosening language… I don’t know. Is that code or something? :-"
