Advances in Technology = Regression in Independent Human Intelligence

This particular pseudo-paradox hit me while using the Google Map function on my Blackberry Bold 9000 as I drove.  In the old days (haha, like year 2000), when going to a destination I'd never been to, I would get verbal directions and then follow-up by looking at a physical map, so I had an idea of the lay of the land, the distance, etc.  When I drove, I might have the map next to me as a reference, and of course I'd have written down directions on a scrap of paper.

Since I reviewed the directions and map prior to driving, I usually didn't have to spend too much time referring to them while driving.  I pretty much had the route memorized, and just referred to the directions to verify if I was heading in the right direction, or if something unexpected happened, like road construction, I'd look at the map to see what alternate routes there were.

Heck, I might map out alternate routes in mind before driving, so even then I'd be able to drive around with referring to the map.

In other words, I could concentrate on DRIVING.

Now, let's fast forward to today.  I punch in the destination address in Google Map.  It generates a route, using GPS to locate me and track my every move, within 3 meters of accuracy.  I briefly run through the map route (I barely read the street names; I'm more concerned with distance, time, and anticipating the turns) and then drive.  I keep the phone on the dashboard, and watch myself move on the map as I drive.

So, it's like I've given up a mental skill by adopting this new technology.  I've freed up a task my mind knew how to complete, and replaced that space in my mind with knowledge of how to use my spartphone and download apps.

This is progress?

I recently saw on Drudge that Sergei Brin, Google Co-Founder, said he wants Google to be the "Third part of your brain."

Huh.

I think modern technology is a reflection of our current generation(s), and is not necessarily an improvement for humanity.

I'll give you another anecdotal story. When I was a kid, my brother and his family would visit us from Brasil. I was lucky enough to learn how to speak Portuguese while growing up in New York, so I could communicate with my Nephew, Nieces, Brother, and Sister-in-Law. Well ... I thought I was doing a good job communicating. My family would occasionally chide me for not conjugating a verb properly or whatever.

Years later, I saw my Sister-in-Law and she recalled this. I did not remember this, nor did I remember the specific Portuguese grammatical lesson they had been trying to impart.

I wonder now, if I had been growing up in an era without C64's and 2600's and Nintendo's, if I had less video games and programs soaking up limited mental capacity, if I would have remembered the grammatical lesson.

My point on this second story is this: I believe we've pretty much lost our ability to keep an oral history. If it's not codified on paper, film, digital, whatever, we are more likely to forget. I think, even in the 1980's, my mind was being hardwired for the notion that technology would help me remember things, and that if it's worth remembering, it'll show up on my television screen, or be in a book I'm reading.

I think Sergei's pronouncement is part of this.

Now, I've joked with Damian about the idea of computers being part of our brain in the past. I'm still looking forward to the day I can plug in an SD chip into my brain and speed up my mental processes, download info, etc. Unfortunately, we, as a society, have given up essential human skills in order to adopt new technologies without considering whether or not this was really a good idea or not.

It's like the new religious mantra is "New is always better, particularly if the crowd adopts the new." While I embrace and love technology, I feel, perhaps too late, that we put the proverbial cart before the horse on this issue.

I feel like we're caught in a Pseudo-paradox.