Pros And Cons Of Walter Ong

An argument presented by “Walter Ong” is a never ending debate on how writing can “restructure human consciousness”. There are many arguments that convey both pros and cons in regards to this argument. I mainly agree with Ong's thesis statement which is; writing has destroyed our memory and increased our consciousness in various ways; also writing itself has interpreted our lives as technology (Ong 77). There have been many technologized systems, software, and etc, which have made our everyday life easier, but also made less work for the mind to be active. “More than any other single invention, writing has performed human consciousness” (Ong 77). This as has been reflected through a historical study of writing through human behaviour from the
Since technology has been invented, we store less in our brains but more with the help of technology. He also reflects that spoken words are more powerful than the written world. How we can empathize in sounds and use different tones to describe the change in behaviour cannot be done through writing. Writing is just a compose of symbol that represent an object or thing to describe something using letters. “If you as a person to explain his or her statement, you can get explanations; if you ask a text, you get back nothing except the same, often stupid, words which called for your question in the first place" (Ong 78), this clearly provides us evidence that Plato does not like the concept of writing whereas he would prefer oral content. Latin classic also argued that in 1477, books make men less studious. We come at a point that we stock less data in our brains and let information be saved through technology. After the anti-print press came out in 1439, technology has become even more advance on how it was able to make multiple copies of texts and the capacity to store them where it can be read anytime or multiple times. After the printing press has delighted to make more copies of the same text, every class was able to afford