The last section that we read of "The Shallows" was pretty interesting. One point that really caught my attention was Carr's analysis of the Flynn effect.
The Flynn effect, as this phenomenon has came to be called, is real and been confirmed by many subsequent studies. The Flynn effect says that IQ scores have been rising steadily and pretty much everywhere they have been throughout the century. "The Flynn effect has been used to defend TV shows, video games, personal computers, and, most recently, the Internet." (Carr 144).
Carr talks about how there has not been an increase in other measures of intelligence like that has been seen in overall IQ scores. Those have even been sending mixed signals. "Tests of memorization, vocabulary, general knowledge, and even basic arithmetic have shown little or no improvement." (Carr 145). Other tests of knowledge such as the PSATs have not increased at all over the past 10 years.
Flynn himself talks about the paradoxes associated with his theory.
First, the steepness at which the test scores have increased suggest that our forebears must have been dimwits, even though what we know tells us otherwise. In his book, Flynn wrote "If IQ gains are in any sense real, we are driven to the absurd conclusion that a majority of our ancestors were mentally retarded"
Second, comes from the different sections of the test and the disparities in the scores. Flynn wrote "How can people get more intelligent and have no larger vocabularies, no larger stores of general information, no greater ability to solve arithmetical problems?"
Flynn concluded that the gains in IQ scores have less to do with an increase in general intelligence than with a transformation in the way people think about intelligence. I think people think about intelligence differently today because of things such as the internet. I think our immense exposure to everything creates a generally smarter group of people. Where as past generations learned in different ways...What do you think?
I think IQ tests are bullshit, and most people are not smart (me included). If test scores haven't changed much, doesn't that support the argument that the new media doesn't make any difference at all?
ReplyDeleteI'm going to give Andrew's argument and say that memorization and basic knowledge, etc. are less relevant if people are carrying internet connected computers around with them. I don't need to memorize things if I have infinite notespace; I don't need to remember things that I can look up.
I know there is a question of the legitimacy of the knowledge I find there and I think that's relevant to discuss, but not in this context. We can't assume that I am incapable of figuring out which knowledge is relevant and which isn't.. unless we wanted to admit my first point: people are not smart.
These are all good points. I kind of agree but I think people are smart. what makes us stupid? we have so much knowledge at the tips of our fingers that we don't need to memorize everything...but that doesnt make us dumb because some of the knowledge we have readily available isnt memorized...thoughts?
ReplyDelete