Hi Keith,
Despite the amazing abilities to broadcast to billions and to rally
millions to a cause, I suspect we will see a decline in brilliant ideas
from youth who are raised within the technologies culture.
Personal observations aside, I was watching the last half of a report on
the definite dumbing down of our society due to the obsession with
blackberry's, cell phones and internet/video games. Their knowledge is
growing increasingly limited to what little is offered on the net, where
googling passes for thorough research.
One thing that was stressed was that multi-tasking does not prove to get
better results. Quite the opposite. The possibility of exploring an idea
fully or to other levels, as well as possibly stymieing the creative
process altogether was raised, as was the fact that switching back and
forth across the lobes actually stresses the brain out. Brain scans show
that the brain has to switch when faced with varying tasks. Full spread
becomes limited, cutting off some parts of the brain that may otherwise
become engaged.They also claimed, showing scans, that the brain can
shrink over long periods of chronic stress from tasks that don't
challenge the senses enough, like games, web-surfing, etc.
They dressed up a guy in a clown suit and had him wheel his unicycle
round an out door area where college kids take smoke, cell phone and
texting breaks. Only 25% even noticed anything unusual, they were so
involved with their own little toy worlds. Driving while using a cell
phone is bad enough, but texting, too? Raising kids, car repairs, rocket
science--everyone is limiting their attention span by focusing on the
energies to or from a certain device.
Another point raised was the professionally observed fact that kids are
becoming very poor face-to-face communicators. They are so busy texting
that they don't become engaged often enough in real life situations, and
are losing out on social skills, psychological tools and signs, and even
chemical signals vital to a well-rounded education.
One kid had to have his leg amputated because he stayed in a chair all
the day long and developed thrombosis. Dance has become regimented to
the offerings of media or Wii, pop music is all soupy today, and despite
the fact that most aspire to write a book, most people (according to a
CBC interview), youth included, haven't read a single book on any
subject in the last year.
So where did you come up with that statistic on brilliant ideas? I'd be
curious to see the entire context of the stats, and what is considered
to be brilliant. The latest information I've read on brains is that they
keep getting better, actually continue to provide new cells, especially
when well exercised and challenged.
Natalia
On 11/20/2010 1:29 AM, Keith Hudson wrote:
Thanks, Arthur. A very useful article to consider!
In "Small change", Malcolm Gladwell writes an article introducing a
powerful social innovation (the revolutionary potential of the
Internet/Twitter, etc) and then argues against those such as Clay
Shirky by saying "the revolution will not be tweeted"! Gladwell
concludes that networking is only good for networking but, because it
is a lateral activity, then it's good for nothing else. A monumental
non sequitur.
Let me start at another point which I've frequently mentioned on FW.
Ninety-five per cent of all new key ideas throughout history occur to
people under 30. We now know the reason why. The frontal lobes of
sub-30 year-olds are still growing millions of new neurons. Their
brain networks are not yet largely taken up with the conventional
culture and beliefs around them. If there are to be any solutions at
all to the problems of the Western industrial-consumerist age in which
joblessness (among the young particularly) and welfare dependency
(among the over 50s particularly) are not steadily growing, then it's
going to be sub-30 year-old brains that are going to supply it. The
odds are 95:5 against the possibility that the post-30 year-old brains
of economists, politicians, civil servants or any other pundits are
going to supply them. And, of course, it is the young who are by far
the most enthusiastic users of mobile phones. It is they who will be
networking promising ideas and, it is to be hoped, the results of
practical experiments among them.
(Interestingly, the other theme on FW -- that of the CERN reactor --
for which we currently have to thank the impressive contribution of
Pete Vincent -- is the product of young people. Questions about
antimatter, the "God particle" (Higgs boson) -- two of the principal
items being explored -- are due, respectively, to the 26 year-old
frontal lobes of Paul Dirac and those of Peter Higgs, also 26 years
old when he first suspected it.)
Keith
Read more
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell#ixzz15o4SyQas
At 21:23 19/11/2010 -0500, you wrote:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01CB8830.0D4F0000"
Content-Language: en-us
For those of you interested in 'networks' -- and their link to
social media and social activism -- enjoy this article!
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
