Do you think that the massive information flow from the World Wide Web to people, especially young people, is making them more intelligent in a significant way? By intelligent, I simply mean more informed and able to integrate information in a more effective and rational way. I realize that some of the implications are very negative. Please outline both the positives and the negatives according to your views.
Slee
That’s not a reasonable definition for intelligence. Personally, I think the web is making people about the same as the way they were before.
The web can be used to spread intelligence much faster than the old methods.
Unfortunately, it can also be used to spread ignorance much faster too. And judging from the spam and glurge that my in-laws have sent in the past, ignorance is winning this race, hands down.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/overall/
Of the top 20 keywords searched for on Yahoo at least 14 are pop icons. So I don’t know if it matters if you are glutted with info, people use alot of the internet for porn, pop culture and shopping.
Me, yes.
Others, no.
The world wide web can make people more informed, but that’s about it. (And as Wesley Clark’s post suggests, even that’s debatable). But the only thing that can make people more intelligent is thinking, and exposure to raw information isn’t guaranteed to make anyone think.
What is a reasonable definition for intelligence for you and how does that fit into the question?
Even these message boards - which are (rightfully) held in high esteem, support your contention.
[At the risk of sounding smarmy]
Comic Books are discussed far more often than literature
The Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter franchises are written about ad nauseum.
Philosophical questions usually end up as political hack jobs. Etc., etc., etc.
[/At the risk of sounding smarmy]
The most reasonable definition of intelligence that I’ve seen is that it’s the ability to synthesize new ideas from old ones. I really don’t see how the web could help with that–certainly it’s a great source of old ideas, but the input doesn’t matter if you don’t have the aptitude in the first place.
U BETCHA YA!!!1111!1 
THANX 2 (0|/||>|_|+3|^5 I AM DA SM4RTEST H4XX0RS SOOPER BRANE!!111!
DA INTER W W WEB R0000LZZLZ LOL !!!11oneoneone
Based on some responses to the SDMB, the internet is making us dumber.
I believe (bad way to start a sentence, but this is all opinion anyhow) that while the internet contains a plethora of information for young (and old) people, it isn’t used properly, making people less intelligent. Instead of old-fashioned researching for facts, etc. (requiring time spent in the library), people can just type in what they want and have it at their fingers. They don’t even have to put it in their own words – copy, paste, voila!
The web makes it possible for people with similar views, even if they are a very small group, to get together and put their message out there for everybody to see.
This is a good thing. Seeing different perspectives, different ways of reasoning and different sources of information with different emaphases is important to anyone’s intellectual growth. When used correctly, the web can help us understand other people’s points of view, even if we don’t agree with them, necessarily.
However, this same characteristic of the web allows people to seek out and interact only with people who share their views. So rather than learning about different points of view, you can choose to insulate yourself completely from opposing viewpoints. If you believe that the Holocaust never happened, that the Earth is 10,000 years old, that anorexia isn’t a disease, it’s a lifestyle choice, or that Ashlee Simpson is an artistically significant musician, you can spend all your time reading articles from people who agree with you, chatting with people who think the same thing, and never read any contrary point of view—unless it’s linked to, and then immediately ripped to shreds by, your fellow believers.
So we can use the web to strengthen our intellect by challenging our old ideas and critically assessing new ideas, or we can use the web to weaken our intellect by insulating ourselves from criticism and tough questions.
I think we all do both, to some degree. I mean, hey, I don’t hang out on message boards that are primarily frequented by Christians or woo-woos or political conservatives. OTOH, I fancy that I do read a broad spectrum of material on the web, much of which I don’t agree with.
Obviously not.
Instead of “Asking Jeeves” people flock to the SDMB’s to pose thier inane questions.
I don’t know if the web is making people more intelligent, but I strongly suspect it’s making deaf people happier.
Back in the 60’s, early 70’s I worked in the advertising and PR department of American Optical Corporation. We had a Safety Products Diivision which included hearing protection. We commissioned the ad agency to do a movie on hearing loss due to noise. (Which when you lose it, you never get it back, so wear plugs or headsets whenever appropriate.)
In their research they found that people with hearing loss tend to be much lonelier than blind people. And when you think about it, you might tend to agree. Imagine a factory scene. Can you see anyone shmoozing with a deaf guy? Sharing a joke? Talking about Monday Night Football? The weather? Hell no. You’d have to shout.
And when all the others are ganged together and laughing, the deaf guy often thinks they’re laughing at him.
Then here comes the web, and deaf people have found a new and wonderful way to fit in. I’ll bet there are quite a few hearing impaired Dopers who know only too well what I’m talking about.
Ya took da woids right outta me mout’, Colophon.
The Web is a great and wonderful thing, and I can’t believe we survived without it. But I don’t think it’s making people more intelligent.
Intelligence, to me, implies thought. Lots of patient, deep, thoughtful thought, with careful investigations of information and a serious consideration of meaning, value, and consequence. The Internet does practically nothing to encourage careful, patient thought, and a whole lot to encourage indiscriminate consumption of text, shallow reading, and yelling at other people.
The people who use the Web to carry on serious discussions and investigate difficult ideas are IMO the same people who would have hung out a lot at the library and at intellectual coffeeshops 20 years ago (and who probably read a lot of serious books now). It’s a great medium for those people to carry on with what they would have done anyway. It’s also a great medium for people with other tastes to carry on with what they would have done anyway, only intensified.
It is far too easy to sit in front of the computer, randomly clicking on things while you think “gee, I really ought to go do something useful, I’ve read all the good threads for today, and now I’m just looking at links about bad plastic surgery.” It’s a huge timewaster, unless you’re a more disciplined person than I am. It’s instant gratification and easily turns into mindless channel-surfing. I love me some Internet, but I don’t think it’s making me more intelligent–that’s what my reading program is for.
Wesley Clark’s post only makes a good point if we knew how much relative effort people were making before the internet to learn about a) pop stars, b) other stuff.
Like others, I would use a different word than intelligence (informed, probably), but I think the OP is a fine topic of discussion.
And I think the net is making people more informed - which says a lot about how ignorant people were before.
Doesn’t the word ‘risk’ imply you might not succeed? You did. I don’t think discussing pop culture is a sign of a lack of intelligence.
People are always going to be people, it doesn’t really matter what media they use. Since most of them don’t exercise any skepticism and treat the 'net with the same certainty as slower-moving media, it seems like people are exposed to and fall for more B.S. than ever.