If you recognised the reference to Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”, well done. Stay with me and I will explain the relevance.
I have been interested in the thoughts and writings of Nicholas Carr for some time – since reading his book Does IT Matter? and the related articles and debate that followed. I have linked his blog on my blogroll, always interesting reading there.
Today I was reading an article of Carr’s that got be thinking – but only for a short time! The article is titled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”.
Carr is very good at drawing together themes around history and the use/evolution of technology. This article ranges from philosphers of ancient Greece, through the advent of printing to today’s information age.
- It seems Socrates was concerned about the development of writing. People could “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” and they could “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.”
- His fears were well grounded – I think we have all met some of these people!
- Gutenberg’s printing press meant the availability of cheap printed books and newspapers, raising a fear that the authority of scholars and experts would be undermined.
- Google has applied the methods of Fredrick Taylor to knowledge work and workers
So, why is any of this relevant to what I normally write about?
Carr argues that the way we interact with information sources actually shapes the thought process. It changes out attention spans and our contemplative and cognitive processes.
He describes studies that report a higher degree of scanning of articles rather than “proper reading”.
- Do you feel that your reading and thinking habits have changed in this way?
- What does this tell us about how we should be writing Action Plans – those things that we have an expectation that people will use in an Incident/Disaster/Crisis?
- Do we need to change our Incident Management training and briefing processes?
If you are still reading, then I guess Carr was wrong.
The HAL/2001 thing – Carr’s article starts and ends with analysis around that scene. HAL is emotional, Dave is mechanical.
As Carr himself puts it I am “skeptical of my skepticism”. However, you do raise a critical point, which I previously touched on here Want a Better Plan Get A Better Process and our more recent exchanges on software.
Any documentation that is produced as part of any process is an information product. It needs to take into account the type of information that is being presented, the consumer’s requirements, the nature of the medium and of course the context in which it will be used. Otherwise, it will not be fit for purpose.
My heart really does sink when I see yet another incomprehensible 400 page plan. But hey, they’ve got a plan.
As Carr himself puts it I am “skeptical of my skepticism”. However, you do raise a critical point, which I previously touched on here Want a Better Plan Get A Better Process and our more recent exchanges on software.
Any documentation that is produced as part of any process is an information product. It needs to take into account the type of information that is being presented, the consumer’s requirements, the nature of the medium and of course the context in which it will be used. Otherwise, it will not be fit for purpose.
My heart really does sink when I see yet another incomprehensible 400 page plan. But hey, they’ve got a plan.