Response to scholarly article #1

“In fact what makes human thought so dynamic and powerful is that it is largely external (or more precisely that the external/internal binary is misleading.) “

I believe this binary is completely misleading. External vs internal thought implies that the human mind is capable of one or the other. I do not believe this is so. I think that any sentient being will have their thought processes so mixed up between what we label as external and internal that it is impossible, and completely counterproductive, to even try to identify the differences between the two. I have yet to find a situation where the resulting thought process, or the result of said through process, was affected by an arbitrary external or internal label.

It is my belief that we, as human beings, are the product of our environments. That is to say, we are a collection of our experiences. Before writing technology came into being our only source of experience was first hand and through that which was told to us by word of mouth.  Having the technology to read and write has created a situation where we are able to “experience” things that we did not actually experience. We are able to read and comprehend facts observed (experienced) by other people, then internalize those facts and make logical and emotional decisions based on those “second hand experiences” as if they were our own. This is only compounded by the advent of multimedia. The sheer volume of “second hand experiences” we can be exposed to in the course of one day is well beyond that of what a pre-literate person might have been exposed to in their entire lifetime.

I know that I’m making a logical leap here, but I will make it anyway. If we can agree that the human mind is made up of the sum of it’s experiences, and if we can agree that the experiences we gain through reading and interacting with multimedia are part of that sum, then it stands to reason to say that today’s human mind would be vastly more complex than that of it's pre-literate predecessor. I am not stating, or even implying that we have a higher IQ.I would not compare many modern people to intellectual giants such as Aristotle and DaVinci.  I am merely postulating that the massive amount of data we absorb, cognate, and then use in future decision making processes is bound to create a more complex thought process.

I have yet to decide whether i believe that is good or bad for the critical thinker. There is a part of me that believes we are filling our minds with way too much non-essential information. That perhaps the reason great minds of earlier centuries were able to think on such a high level is that they were not filled with the pre-conceived notions of other people before they had the chance to work things out for themselves. If this turns out to be the case, future generations may consider the interactive media writers of today to be the greatest threat to human intellectual growth in modern history.

Digital Literacy Autobiography

The first computer I owned was an IBM 8088, regarded by many to be the first true personal computer ever sold. It was given to my father in 1985 by his company as a reward for his years of service. I was 9 years old and was immediately entranced by the potential that I saw in them. I started acquiring any knowledge about computers that I could get my hands on, which was substantial considering my upbringing. By the age of 15, I had an (at the time) advanced network in my room with 4 computers communicating on a token-ring network.

By Bundesarchiv, B 145 Bild-F077948-0006 / Engelbert Reineke / CC-BY-SA 3

My family shared my love of computers, and were co-owners in one of the first internet service providers to bring internet service to Utah, Nevada, and Montana. I have pursued this love of computers and fascination with their potential in both my personal and professional lives. I am an avid online gamer and have worked in the networking industry as a switching and routing engineer for over 15 years.

My first exposure to online social networking was through Myspace, in my early twenties. In the beginning, it was something that only "nerds" were interested in, but in a short period of time just about everybody I knew had a Myspace account and was using it to share music, videos, and thoughts throughout the world.

Having access to the internet, and specifically sites like Google and Wikipedia, has changed the face of education forever. When I was at Dixie College in 1996, I was the only person in the dorms that owned a computer. Internet access was available, but unreliable and not a priority for the administration. Now I am able to find information on any topic whenever and from wherever I wish. Any question I have, be it academic or just idle curiosity, can be quickly answered through a simple internet search. These search engines provide a starting point for any research I might wish to do, and give direction to verified sources of said information.

Having access to such huge amounts of information can be both a blessing and a curse. The main problem with internet research is validation of data. The format of the internet allows any person anywhere in the world to create articles or websites saying literally anything they want to say. An unwary researcher could easily be misled by these sites. Another possible problem with internet research is the sheer volume of data available. It can be very challenging to sort through all of the information available and narrow it down to the specifics that you are seeking.

Modern researchers must defend themselves from these issues through a combination of skepticism and experience. One must always verify any information gleaned from the internet. The best way to do this is to only take information from trusted sources. Wikipedia has become one of the premier sources of information on the internet. It is not only verified literally by the entire internet using population of the world, but most articles site sources for their information which can be checked or even accessed for more detailed information. Researchers can deal with the extreme volume of data by being very specific in their search queries, and limiting their search to known-good sources of information. The more specific the query, the fewer hits it will turn up on any search engine.