Technology: Addiction or Necessity? (Point/Counter Point)

While my research has shown that technology as a whole can be very beneficial when applied appropriately, some people believe that technology will be the downfall of the human race. One might argue that technology is hindering our ability to think critically and effects our every day lives entirely too much. This is a valid argument as technology has indeed changed our everyday lives, and critical thinking may not be as prominent thanks to websites like Google answering any questions we have.

In Matthew Wisnioski's article, “How Digital Technologies are Leaving Their Mark on Our Brains,” he quotes neuroscientist Susan Greenfield, who argues, “Our technologies are not only addictive, they are an existential threat. The brain has an evolutionary mandate to adapt to its environment and the digital world is changing at too rapid a pace for individuals or government regulations to keep up (Wisnioski 1).

While I agree that technology can be addictive, this is not proof that technology is making us less competent in the thinking department, nor proof that we are headed for disaster. One could argue that we are addicted to water and oxygen if the basis for addiction is a necessary and required component of our survival. Technology is in the same vein as water and oxygen. I would argue that the human race would not have gotten far had our earliest ancestors not developed the most basic forms of technology, like tools and weapons. Just like water an oxygen, technology is a necessity. I also do not agree that the digital world is moving at too rapid a pace because it cannot move faster than we allow it. The digital world is a product of us, therefore it cannot outrun our ability to use it. While I agree that our brains adapt to our environment, I would argue that the brain adapting to a particular technology is not enough to jump to the conclusion that it is an existential threat. I would also argue that technology is increasing, rather than hindering, our mental capabilities because the way we obtain information is much more efficient.

While I do believe that the various characteristics of technology are not always in our favor, to claim that the societal structure as we know it will inevitably collapse seems like a massive exaggeration. The main point I am trying to argue is that technology will not contribute to our demise as long as we monitor our usage closely. I believe that too much of anything is bad for you, therefore we must try to limit how much we rely on or use technology, however, I find the claim that technology will be our end to be invalid.

Works Cited

Wisnioski, Matthew. “How Digital Technology is Destroying Your Mind.” The Washington Post. (2015) Web. 1 Aug 2015.