rhetoric essay
Rhetorical Analysis
If Technology is Making Us Stupid, It’s Not Technology’s Fault
In his article “If Technology Is Making Us Stupid, It’s Not Technology’s Fault,” David Theo Goldberg effectively informs the reader about the effects that computers in the home and school environment could have on the future education of the coming generations. Goldberg achieves this by executing defined organization and adding unique comparisons about the potentially crippling effects technology can have on a society when put into the wrong hands. Goldberg approaches the organization of his article in such a way that he is able to progress his opinion in a slow enough pace to address all major points, including who society blames as the problem and who is actually at fault, and immediately address the potential counterarguments. He begins with the arguments that would be used against the heavy use of computers such as the “introduction of computers in homes [leading] to children spending less time on homework and more time on recreational games,” causing a deflation in testing scores (Goldberg, 2010). Goldberg quickly counters that argument with multiple counterexamples including the idea that the increased computer use leads to “improved computing skills,” which will ultimately play a role in increasing the employability of the newer generations (Goldberg, 2010). This is effective in achieving Goldberg’s point because immediately addressing the counter allows the reader to clearly understand your view on one point at a time rather than every counterargument being thrown into one jumbled paragraph without an easy flow in the writing. The reader is able to clearly understand what message Goldberg was trying to convey and what he thinks should be done to monitor, or control the potential problems that could arise from the increase in the usage of computers through his choice in organizational styles which proves much more clarity to the article that could have otherwise been
If Technology is Making Us Stupid, It’s Not Technology’s Fault
In his article “If Technology Is Making Us Stupid, It’s Not Technology’s Fault,” David Theo Goldberg effectively informs the reader about the effects that computers in the home and school environment could have on the future education of the coming generations. Goldberg achieves this by executing defined organization and adding unique comparisons about the potentially crippling effects technology can have on a society when put into the wrong hands. Goldberg approaches the organization of his article in such a way that he is able to progress his opinion in a slow enough pace to address all major points, including who society blames as the problem and who is actually at fault, and immediately address the potential counterarguments. He begins with the arguments that would be used against the heavy use of computers such as the “introduction of computers in homes [leading] to children spending less time on homework and more time on recreational games,” causing a deflation in testing scores (Goldberg, 2010). Goldberg quickly counters that argument with multiple counterexamples including the idea that the increased computer use leads to “improved computing skills,” which will ultimately play a role in increasing the employability of the newer generations (Goldberg, 2010). This is effective in achieving Goldberg’s point because immediately addressing the counter allows the reader to clearly understand your view on one point at a time rather than every counterargument being thrown into one jumbled paragraph without an easy flow in the writing. The reader is able to clearly understand what message Goldberg was trying to convey and what he thinks should be done to monitor, or control the potential problems that could arise from the increase in the usage of computers through his choice in organizational styles which proves much more clarity to the article that could have otherwise been