In 1882, Nietzsche began using a typewriter due to vision problems and experienced a stylistic shift and change in his thinking. This is similar to the impact Google has on our critical thinking skills today. Our thinking and expression is deeply influenced by our tools and environment, which emphasizes the need to maintain critical thinking.
“You’re right, the tools we use to write are shaping our thinking.”
In 1882, Nietzsche, who was suffering from failing eyesight, bought a typewriter and began writing with his eyes closed, and when his friend Wagner commented that his style changed, Nietzsche said the above. In response, Wagner acknowledged that his ideas about music and language were influenced by the quality of his pen.
Writing is an expression of thought, and writing contains thought in the form of words. To say that the content of a piece of writing changes depending on the tool with which it is written is to say that the medium of thought affects the thought itself. In Nietzsche’s case, his long, in-depth writings became short and concise, like telegrams, after he used a typewriter. His logic seemed to move more quickly than before, and he often came to unexpected conclusions that he hadn’t been able to reach in his previous step-by-step method. Nietzsche’s thinking was affected by the change in writing tools from pen to typewriter. Is human thought this environmentally dependent?
Unlike a computer, which has a specific logic circuit and gives the same answer to the same input, our brains are influenced by many factors, including our mood, experiences, surroundings, language, etc. And most of us are aware of this phenomenon. Just as we know that we tend to have more negative thoughts or evaluations when we’re going through a tough time, or that the smallest factor, like a comment from a friend, can make us make a completely different decision. These factors are visible and easy to recognize, so they’re easy to deal with. But what if something we use every day is having a huge impact on our thinking without us even realizing it? For example, what if the world’s largest search engine, Google, is changing the way we think?
This is the age of Google. The early Internet, which was limited to internal communication among research and educational organizations, exploded in size when it was opened to the public in the 80s and 90s, and search engines grew rapidly along with it. Google is the poster child for search engines, with 88.8% of the global search engine market share. When people need to find something, they turn to Google, and this happens across time and space, on their phones and computers. Searching the internet via Google is so ubiquitous that the English-speaking world even has a word for it: googling.
At the center of Google’s dominance and what sets it apart from other search engines is a system called PageRank. Named after Google’s founder, Larry Page, PageRank uses a sophisticated formula with 500 variables and 2 billion terms to calculate an objective ranking of web pages. It goes beyond simply analyzing how many times a search term appears on a page, and instead takes a holistic look at the page and shows only the most relevant results.
Herein lies Google’s subtle influence on our thinking. Google does a lot of the judgment for you. The search results it produces through PageRank are already filtered and sifted through its tried-and-true algorithms, which we trust to be the best in terms of reliability and accuracy. Google has dramatically reduced the need for users to go through each page of search results to determine if this is what they’re looking for. Even if there are tens of thousands of results, users don’t have to think about which ones are the ones they want. It’s already on the first or second page, sorted in order. In some ways, this may seem like a 100% user-friendly outcome, and Google is being true to its roots as a search engine, so there’s nothing wrong with that.
But is doing everything for you always a positive thing? Users who have become accustomed to Google now feel that something is different when they take in information from sources other than Google. Their ability to judge whether this information is what they’re looking for and how important it is has deteriorated. By delegating the process of sifting through information to Google, we gradually lose the ability to be critical of information. People who rely on Google now take whatever information they learn from books, TV, etc. and run it through Google again. This is because they are not sure if the information they just learned is reliable, important, or relevant to a particular issue.
Critical judgment is an inseparable part of our thinking. When we judge information, we ask ourselves questions about why it is relevant, why it is important, why it is reliable, and why it is credible, and we build our own rationale. This is the process of logic, and it’s a human ability that distinguishes us from mere lists of information. Google is doing a disservice to thinking in general by clouding its users’ ability to think critically. The typewriter changed Nietzsche’s style and a few thoughts, but Google is eating away at your ability to think critically. It’s a process that requires special attention because it’s invisible and gradual. Ever since the advent of the so-called “idiot box” TV, people have been encouraging each other to read books and meditate because it was taking away their critical faculties. But I don’t know anyone who thinks Google is eating away at our thinking.
We need to stop relying so heavily on Google and start asking ourselves why this information is relevant and important to our query. If you’re just trying to find information quickly and easily, you may lose sight of something more valuable: critical judgment. There is no such thing as too little, too late.
In conclusion, our thinking is very sensitive to our environment and tools. Just as Nietzsche’s use of the typewriter changed his style and thinking, modern people’s use of search engines like Google has changed the way they acquire information and the nature of their thinking. In the process, we’ve gained convenience, but we’re also losing critical thinking skills. Therefore, we must continue to strive to maintain critical thinking and independent judgment while enjoying the benefits of technology.
