But surface plausibility is not always a good guide to truth.īaroness Susan Greenfield speaking at the National Press Club in 2010. Her claims that digital culture may cause negative changes in the brains of users – reducing attention spans, lowering empathy, and so on – sound plausible.

But because the internet is transforming the world in ways that are unprecedented, a feeling of unease might arise in any of us. Because she is not a digital native, she likely finds these technologies more threatening than do younger people. When we hear Baroness Susan Greenfield talk about the dangers of the internet and of social media, we should recall these facts, and alter our responses accordingly. The unease generated by the strange causes us to think that it’s risky, and the reasons we offer are often rationalisations of that feeling. But bearing in mind Plato’s warning should help us recall that fears concerning new technologies are a natural response to the unfamiliar. Today, of course, we rightly think of literacy as essential to education. If we rely upon writing to preserve our knowledge, our memory will weaken, and we will begin to mistake the living truth for its shadow, Plato suggests. But the wise king refused the gift, arguing that it would allow people to substitute the appearance of knowledge for its substance. In the Phaedrus, Plato recounts a myth, according to which an Egyptian god approached King Thamos and offered him the gift of writing. Whenever I hear dire predictions concerning the social impact of new technologies, I recall a similar prediction made nearly 2,500 years ago.

Mind change susan greenfield