Friday, March 18, 2011

Response to the column "Does more information mean we know less?"

  As the society was industrialized, people became able to get an access to numerous books and encyclopedias. Thus, the modern age became the age of information and knowledge. However, the writer of the column “Does more information mean we know less?” asserts that incessant amount of knowledge actually is not something important. It seems that his logic makes sense to most of us. However, his column has two drawbacks: first, the column does not say anything about what people actually should do, and second, it is very difficult to connect the titles of separated passages with the passages’ content.

First of all, the column “Does more information mean we know less?” does not urge people to do something and change themselves. What it keeps saying is that people nowadays acquire great amount of knowledge and information, but people are forgetting the important values that the religions promote. Yes, it is true that people easily forget about those virtues, since they always pay attention to new information. However, then what should the people do? The column talks about the problem that people have, but it does not provide any kind of solution for it. Thus, this column is not very effective and powerful in conveying its central message to the readers.
Moreover, the titles of the separate parts of the column cannot be easily linked to the content of those parts. For instance, the title of the third part of this column is “Fasting.” However, the content of the part does not discuss anything about fasting. In this kind of situation, readers have to make a guess about what the title really means. Then, some readers may misinterpret the meanings of these titles. Thus, it could be considered that this column has a problem in accurately transferring its message toward the readers. It is certain that the writer must have explained how the titles are related with the content of the passages.
To sum up, very column has its own message. However, there are effective ones and ineffective ones among those columns. For this column, I think it is an ineffective one, since it does not request any kind of change in people’s behavior, and moreover, it does not give any kind of concrete explanation of the titles of the sections of the column. If these two weak points were strengthened, I guess this column could be a very effective one with a strong message.

1 comment:

  1. 'As the society was industrialized,'...As society
    'people became able to get an access'...people were able to access
    'that incessant amount'...that an incessant amount
    'actually is not something important.'...rephrase
    'It seems that his logic makes sense to most of us.'....most of us or you?
    'acquire great amount of knowledge'...acquire a great amount
    'but people are forgetting'...but people forget
    'then what should the people do?'...what should people do?
    'The column talks about the'...The column discusses
    'the meanings'...the meaning
    'very column has its own message.'...???
    'I think it is an ineffective one, since it does not request any kind of change in people’s behavior,'....does it have to?
    'strengthened, I guess this column'...strengthened, this column

    You raise some very good points in this essay which begin to make an effective critique of de Botton's argument. Although you begin to, I would like to have seen more of an analysis of how particular aspects of language are used in the article. Why, for example, does de Botton use words like entice, gadgets and fasting? What is the significance of refering to things like Ephesus or the Edinburgh Festival?
    Also, be careful of your grammar and phrasing.
    Grade: B

    ReplyDelete