Are We Losing the Ability to Think Abstractly?
Ronald T. Floyd
University of Advancing Technology
Is technology creating a decline in visual imagination?
Students claim that the world is better off with technology. Certainly, without technology, there would be also be no video games, cell phones, iPods or even the Internet. This increased dependency upon technology is not problematic for students; rather, it is actually seen by most students as a necessity. Much as the automobile, the telephone and the microwave oven impacted previous generations of teens, today's technology is creating dependencies-technological comfort zones-beyond the anticipated benefits.And because of this, it appears that the ability to create abstract thought is becoming a vanishing commodity among the college-age population.
Such dependency on technology has created an oracle of entertainment and knowledge that runs deep into the cultural foundation of the everyday lives of students. It is robbing students of their ability to think abstractly, destroying social interaction, and creating a false sense that all problem solving revolves around Google. Such a mentality creates a cycle that pushes technology down to the pre-school level and creates even younger dependencies, restricting and altering abstract reasoning at the earliest ages.The outcome is that our technology-structured world is impacting the ability of our children to handle problem solving and abstract thinking.
Contemporary technology creates a private, controlled environment of comfort for students. Such a comfortable world rarely calls for abstract reasoning or theoretical thought; in my experience, being presented with assignments that force them into unfamiliar thinking is petrifying for them.Their everyday existence is structured and predetermined. They are taught to survive by button- selection education. When pushed outside that structured order, their inability to reason or think abstractly readily becomes apparent.
Baroness Professor Susan Greenfield of Oxford University has also voiced some pretty significant concerns about the future (Cornwell, 2008). Greenfield predicts that the current teenaged generation is headed for a "mass loss of personal identity," which she terms the "Nobody Scenario":
By spending inordinate quantities of time in the interactive, virtual, two-dimensional, cyberspace realms of the screen, she believes that the brains of the youth of today are headed for a drastic alteration. It's as if all that young grey cortical matter is being scalded and defoliated by a kind of cognitive Agent Orange, depriving them of moral agency, imagination and awareness of consequences. (2008)
Greenfield is emphatic about the consequences of this for teenagers:
"the substitution of virtual experience for real encounters; the impact of spoon-fed menu options as opposed to free-ranging inquiry; a decline in linguistic and visual imagination; an atrophy of creativity; contracted, brutalised text-messaging, lacking the verbs and conditional structures essential for complex thinking. Her principal concern is how computer games could be emphasising what she calls "process" over "content"-method over meaning-in mental activity." (2008)
This inability to generate abstract thought is simply illustrated by a recent assignment given to a sophomore drawing class.The assignment consisted of creating an abstract drawing that included elements of perspective and chiaroscuro. The assignment was a relatively loose and manageable exercise, but elicited a predictable reaction from students. Students requested instructions on how to create an abstract drawing.The discussion that ensued ranged from how to think abstractly to actually questioning the need for creating abstraction.The assignment was a major challenge for most of the students, not because of a lack of drawing skills, but because they lack the ability to think conceptually.
Is there hope among the debris of technology? I am an optimist, and the mere thought that students question the need for abstraction signals that both reasoning and questioning are occurring.This thought-creep does not mean we are doomed as a thinking society. In trying to better understand the concept of abstract thought, I turned to the Oxford Desk Dictionary and Thesaurus.The definition given defines abstract thought as the process or power of thinking (Oxford University Press, 1997). Another definition revolved around the terms of a faculty of reasoning. These definitions were found lacking as they did not readily apply to the concept of abstract art.
Professor Allan Randall has stated that "by definition, the 'abstract'must have no mass, shape, size and color, and almost all works of art are definitely concrete" (Martins de Oliveira & Rochado do Amaral, 2001) In examining an original painting, the result grows "from an initial abstract conception of the artist's mind, from which he built a certain image and then painted it. Thus, [the artist's] work became concrete, because it has mass, color and dimensions"(2001). Interaction between the artist, the visual consumer and the abstract conception is part of the missing link of socialization among students.
Declining social skills and infrequent interaction between peers are, by their very nature, destructive forces on abstract thought. Students bury their faces in illuminated screens, often instead of making human contact. Schools and parents enforce this idea by insisting on rubrics that spell out exactly how students will be graded. In an effort to cater to this growing phenomenon, colleges are instituting more online classes, insisting that everything must be black or white and technology-driven. Technology for technology's sake is becoming the standard mantra.
In the adolescent days of consumer electronics, the common joke was that no one over 30 could program their VCR to the correct time, and the blinking light where the correct time should be displayed was a sign of being technology-challenged. Looking back, society missed the early-warning signs of the VCR and dismissed this as a generation gap issue-the VCR was the first device causing a shift in the thought process, and one of the first big consumer products that did not work intuitively.
Intuitive reasoning was replaced by an instruction manual.The prearranged world of technology left little room for thinking, room which was taken up by consumer- electronics conformity. The use of such items as TV remotes, cell phones or even MP3 players imply in their operation a predetermined course of events. Everything is defined by a set of instructions. Students are well-adapted to comply with these rules of operation, but they find unstructured assignments extremely difficult-they stare blankly out into space, unable to conceptualize, struggling to understand the lack of structure. In the technologydriven world, students expect predetermined outcomes, because self-imposed boundaries do not exist.
We missed the message that the VCR was sending us, so we need now to be cognitive of the disruption of abstract reasoning associated with the increased usage of technology.The key to not losing our humanity depends on educators using technology to foster learning rather than relying on technology to push content to students.
Facebook and YouTube may be the most recent obsessions moving into education-in the sense that they offer ways for educators to tether themselves to the world their students are living in-but technology only creates the learning environment, not the content. Online classes that utilize this new technology must not fail to reinforce the loss of thought, allowing students to just fill in blanks and communicate in chat rooms. Students will use the technology in their lives to get the correct answer as quickly as they can. Educators must reinvent the path to the answer using technology as a source tool for building on reasoning skills.
In our rush to make everything digital, are we taking the "human" out of humanity? Students don't think, they produce work like machines, and it is happening in lower and lower grades.Getting students to stand up in front of their peers and share an opinion is seen as cruel and unusual punishment. Children are diagnosed with anxiety disorders, and they get special labels that excuse them from stressful thought-building exercises. Furthermore, the "stress" of interaction, discussion and debate are being allowed to disappear. A recent local youth group discussion panel I attended exemplifies how technology is being allowed to replace discussion. Questions on dating and marriage were text-messaged to the speaker, and the whole discussion was centered on answering texted questions, with no dialogue or discussion taking place. The speaker then questioned the loss of human interaction and real human discussion and the point was made that, in doing this, the audience had been robbed of an important aspect of communication: the other humans in the conversation.
It seems that society is allowing technology creep to occur at the earliest stages of human development, when interaction with others helps form personalities. Children's art supplies are being developed that require less abstract thought processes. Preschool children are presented with markers that require no discipline in reasoning and can be used anywhere without thought. A combination paint bottle, paintbrush and a shakeand- paint approach have replaced the need for separate art supplies.With such toys, children no longer have the choices selecting a brush, loading it with just the right amount of paint, blending colors and applying paints using different-sized brushes to produce various effects on the paper. The thought process has been replaced by a predetermined set of guidelines.
What is being lost here? Well, at some point in the future, man may lose the ability to think abstractly. Society, and especially educators, must replace predetermined outcomes with the requirement for unknown consequences.The danger in technology lies in allowing it to do our thinking as opposed to allowing technology to help us think.The real question is how to best use the technology of today and in the future. Do we betray our own intellect by creating products, such as virtual worlds and digital toys, that foster less abstract thought? Or do we reverse the trend and use technology to the benefit of future man?
There may be some hope on the horizon.One technology trend that fosters abstract thought and even advances creativity is beginning to emerge. Visual technology seems to be one of the most promising of the new technologies; such a trend may alleviate an otherwise inevitable Orwellian moment we may encounter somewhere down the road. Visual technology is designed to take complex data and place it into three-dimensional imagery. This technology, which emerged at Tufts University's Center for Scientific Visualization, has the ability to enable "researchers to translate the most abstract, complex scientific concepts into clearer, more precise 3-dimensional images than conventional visualization" (Visual Technology Enables Brain To Learn In New Ways, 2008).As the author states, quite correctly, "[v]isualization is built on the age-old premise that pictures say as much as, or even more than, words" (2008):
The human brain has a powerful, often underutilized capacity to process visuals, noted Robert Jacob, computer science professor and co-principal investigator on the project. A large portion of the brain processes visuals, and visualization technology puts that ability to work. "The brain absorbs a lot more information when it's presented in pictures rather than in stacks of data from a computer," Jacob said.This, he says, enables researchers and students to recognize things more quickly and also develop insights about what's going on with the data. (2008)
This ability to develop insights through visualization is a key component of abstract thought and could be a real benefit as we move to lessen the impact of the technology negatives on abstract thought.
There are other movements afoot as well. In 2000, Semir Zeki "theorized about the 'visual brain' and development of spatial awareness, abstract thought, and what he called 'neuroesthetics'-the study of the neural basis for perception, creativity, and achievement" (National Education Association, 2001). The development of neuroesthetics is based on stereotyping neural processes of individuals. From my own perceptions of teaching, I can see differences in a classroom of technology students and a classroom of visual art students. As the NEA columnist described, "[t]heir thought processes and sequences are distinctly different.The presentations that are effective for each group differ markedly" (2001).
Another intriguing technology product that could help swing the technology pendulum deals with abstract thought within the rudimentary PowerPoint presentation system used in college classrooms nationwide. Technology is taking the PowerPoint presentation to another level-one that can increase a student's ability to be more engaged in learning. Tests have been conducted using experimental software that enables a professor to mark up PowerPoint slides from a tablet during a presentation while, at the same time, students can watch the presentation to write on the slides or mark answers using a wireless tablet. Lectures can be imported into the software in a wide variety of formats, including PowerPoint, Word, Photoshop, and many others. Other material can include textbook contents from a CD, a typed document, or an Internet site.The software converts the content into pages, then presents it in scrollable windows, allowing the instructor to add notes by drawing on or marking up any screen. (Briggs, 2008)
The academic world is not the only area of society that is being impacted by positive innovations in technology that will help to foster abstract thought processes. MIT professor Mitchel Resnick is working to engage students in hands-on technology projects.
Professor Resnick believes that technology can engage children in thinking through difficult topics. [He] has developed new "computational construction kits" that children use to build and program their own robotic "creatures." As children work on these projects, they learn about feedback and control concepts that are normally considered advanced [abstract thought processes]. "If you give kids the right tools and toys, they can start exploring these concepts immediately," he says. (National Science Foundation, 1998)
Likewise, in a project called Beyond Black Boxes, children design not only their own science experiments but also the equipment needed to run the experiments. "The idea is for children to investigate personally meaningful questions,not just follow some recipe" (1998): Resnick's research group has developed"programmable bricks" (LEGO bricks with computer chips) to help children build scientific instruments. One pair of girls (10 and 11 years old) decided to investigate the eating habits of birds. They built a new bird feeder equipped with sensors, a camera and programmable brick.When a bird lands on the feeder, the sensor sends a signal to the brick, which turns on a LEGO mechanism, which presses the camera shutter to snap a picture. (1998)
Technology is morally ambivalent, capable of good or evil depending on how it is used. It may be self-serving to consider the potential loss of abstract thought as the evil side of technology. Yet the creation and use of technology figures prominently into our evolution and what and how we use the technology will have implications as far-reaching as we can imagine. No one envisions a scenario like The Matrix actually happening to mankind (well, almost nobody), yet, to avoid this, we must manipulate the technological path and nurture the social conscience to foster abstract thought with innovations.We are the keepers of our future and the preservation of abstract thought must be an integral part of that destiny.
References
Briggs, L. L. (2008, March 19). Homegrown Software Boosts Interactivity at Community College. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from Campus Technology:
http://campustechnology.com/articles/59947/Cornwell, J. (2008, April 27). Is technology ruining children? Retrieved April 28, 2008, from Times Online:
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/to1/life ... 805196.eceMartins de Oliveira, J., & Rocha do Amaral, J.(2001). Abstract Thought. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from
http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n12/opin ... ento_i.htmNational Education Association. (2001, December). Thriving in Academe: A Rationale for Visual Communication. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from National Education Association:
http://www2.nea.org/he/advo01/advo0112/feature.htmlNational Science Foundation. (1998, January). Playing with Our Future: High-Tech Toys as Teaching Tools. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from National Science Foundation:
http://www.nsf.gov/news/frontiers_archi ... chtoys.jspOxford University Press. (1997).The Oxford Desk Dictionary & Thesaurus:American Edition. NewYork: Berkley Books.
