Reading and Technology

Friday, September 24, 2010

“The Future of Reading”

By

Johan Lehrer

Today’s technology is growing at an even more elevated speed then ever before. But, what happens when something so basic as reading is turned into an Internet activity?

In Johan Lehrer's “The Future of Reading”, he makes it very clear who his receptive audience should be: the average citizen that is highly involved in reading and is among the younger generations. Lehrer's point within the article is to persuade the readers to not do away with hardcopies of books and to lessen the use of technology in the aspect of reading. He wants to support the idea of keeping books around and doing away with things like the iPad and the Kindle. The biggest appeal of the article is how Lehrer manages to use arrangement when it comes to organizing his thoughts, opinions, and scientific facts.

At the start of the article, Lehrer discusses his love for books. He stated when he was coming through an airport and his suitcase had gone over the weight limit, he chose to dispose of his clothes as opposed to his beloved books and novels. Lehrer makes his argument by stating, "My problem is that consumer technology moves in a single direction: It’s constantly making it easier for us to perceive the content." He believes that by constantly letting technology run these aspects of our lives that it is going to make it easier and easier, ultimately failing us with the ability to use our imaginations and grow intellectually. Referring to our readings, this article would be a perfect example of Gross’s article, “The Arrangement of the Scientific Paper.” Gross states “Reading experimental or descriptive papers in science, we invariably experience an inductive process, a series of laboratory or field events leading to a general statement about natural kinds.” This article is also relative to Bacon through its style and arrangement. Lehrer takes similar steps and approaches to reach the idea of his “experiment” and “hypothesis.” Lehrer manages to make his “experiment” clear with discussing the decline of reading done through hardcopies of books. This is where he is able to make his “hypothesis” for his argument clear in that technology is useful, but believes that the more reading done through the Internet will slowly keep younger minds from expanding.

All of Lehrer's examples begin with personal experiences and opinions and move more into scientific testing. Lehrer guides the readers into actually studies that have taken place with neuroscience to help prove his theory. Referring back to Gross’s article, this could fall under the “Methods and Materials” category.

Lehrer breaks down the argument by discussing that there are two different pathways to read. The first method is known as the ventral route. This route, as Lehrer describes it, is direct and efficient, and is a large part of how we read today. Lehrer breaks it down further by stating, “We see a group of letters, convert those letters into a word, and then directly grasp the word’s semantic meaning.” He refers to the neuroscientist, Stanislas Dehaene, to explain how the familiarity works in the part of the cortex in the brain referred to as visual word form area. Lehrer argues that this is what makes reading effortless to us and we don’t have to think about the words on the page.

The second method is called the dorsal stream, which Lehrer makes clear that this is the better way to read. It is “turned on” when we are having to pay closer attention to a sentence. Whether it be involving big or awkward words we don’t know or bad handwriting. Lehrer states that many scientists believed that this became inactive after adults learned to read but have come to find out that many adults are still occasionally having to comprehend difficult texts. This was clearly Lehrer’s favorite pathway in his argument because it is a way to keep the brain active and making readers have to comprehend words more to be able to keep learning.

After Lehrer makes his argument, he is able to jump into Gross’s definition of “Results.” He clearly makes his point of what readers in the generation (and future generations) of growing technology should do. He discusses not only what readers should do, but those who provide the technology for reading texts as well. “So, here’s my wish for e-readers. I’d love them to include a feature that allows us to undo their ease, to make the act of reading just a little bit more difficult. Perhaps we need to alter the fonts, or reduce the contrast, or invert the monochrome color scheme. Our eyes will need to struggle, and we’ll certainly read slower, but that’s the point: Only then will we process the text a little less unconsciously, with less reliance on the ventral pathway.” Lehrer presents an argument with style and arrangement in a convincing way. He proves his theories through scientific efforts and manages to engage many different perspectives. He involves not just parents, but children and venders of technology products as well. He makes a persuasive argument that utilizes Gross’s arrangement for writing a scientific paper.