The class consensus seemed to follow the logic that this information spreading is ultimately detrimental to the knowledge of society as a whole. I would like to take a moment to argue against this decision.
In this new age of information spreading, we often assume (correctly) that there is a wealth of information at our fingertips, and that we can gather answers to any given question in an incredibly short period of time. Websites such as Wikipedia have given us an unfathomable advantage over our predecessors (even those with physical encyclopedias) had at their disposal. These websites, and many others like them, provide a quick glance understanding of any number of topics. Typing nearly any topic into a search engine such as Google supplies the searcher with a look into definitions, overviews, and communities around said topic that they would never have dreamed existed moments prior.
This ability to quickly dive into a subject breeds a new generation of curiosity into the users of these services. It creates learners and teachers alike on the Internet on a scale that was never dreamed of only a few generations ago. We have at our disposal a bottomless well of intelligence.
This sets the stage for the class discussion: does this new generation pose a threat to others when they pass their (lack of) information around the web and others gobble it up as fact?
I believe that it does not. When people searching for information on the Internet, they must understand that this is the playground and classroom of the world. The internet, in general, should not be treated as fact, but rather as a springboard. When you jump into your search engine of choice to look for a piece of knowledge that has eluded you, it is your duty as a searcher to understand what you are looking at. Learners and teachers alike exists as peers on the Internet. And that, in my opinion, is the most substantial change in thought that has occurred in thousands of years.
To demonstrate this, see this example question of a 'boolean' in the C++ language from Stackoverflow. Stack overflow is a community driven Q and A for computer science. looking at this site, we see that there are multiple answers to the original poster's (OP) question. In this discussion, there are multiple answers from members of various backgrounds. To the left of each question are votes up and down for the best answer as chosen by the members of the community. It is entirely possible that the first answer that the OP received was inaccurate (or not the best implementation of the concept).
However, it shows that others have encountered similar problems and considered the solution. These other posters are both the teachers and the students. They have attempted to help the OP find a solution to his problem, and have in turn been taught by other users who answered the question a new way to approach the problem.
If a searcher were to search for this question and accept one of the answers that is not the best as the definitive fact, it is the fault of the searcher for not continuing to seek out solutions after their first answer was returned.
This is an important distinction. It is not the fault of the information propagators that the answer was not up to standards - they have done what they could to aid in the spread of information.
This is true across the Internet. If the searcher is not interested enough in a 'good' solution to do their research, it is their own fault. They are in the world's meeting room looking for solution. They should not feel that they are talking to teachers, but rather to peers.
The ability to learn about new topics, to expand ones horizons, and to become a 'Renaissance Man' - learning about topics that have never been taught in a classroom environment - is invaluable. We are all students of the world around us, and to deny a wealth of information that is infinitely vast is to give up unimaginable advancements for mankind. We all have to be students, and the first lesson we must learn is how to use our tools.
No comments:
Post a Comment