Chad Allen
English 101
14 September 2012
One Step Forward, Two Steps Back?
In Dan Sperber’s article, “The
Future of Writing,” Sperber addresses the issue that people have slowly moved
away from writing, and are moving toward a new way of life using speech-to-writing
technologies. With his knowledge on the topic, Dan Sperber argues that the
advancements in technology will sooner or later diminish the importance of
writing in our society. Sperber believes speech-to-text technology is not as
amazing as it first seems, and that it could overall bring more harm to the
world rather than good. Sperber uses many different points of view in his
writing to back up his claims
Sperber starts out his article by
questioning the claim that, “both writing and reading will soon be things of
the past . . . a mere parenthesis in human history” (Sperber 3). The whole idea that writing and reading could
be ending is such a bizarre thing to even bring up. While I was reading, I had
to stop and think about a world where reading and writing would be unnecessary
to normal life, and the idea really boggled my mind. Everything we do as human
beings really revolves around reading and writing. For instance, I am writing
this paper now, and reading Sperber’s article, at the same time. Sperber brings
up a good point by stating that, “with a less frequent use of writing and
reading, there would be fewer written texts to read, and fewer people disposed
to read them. As a consequence, the benefits of writing and reading would be
smaller, and might not compare favorably with the costs” (Sperber 5). I believe
that Sperber makes a good claim here because there really is no benefit to
removing writing and reading from society, there are just many consequences.
Another idea Sperber brings to the
table is that in our world today, most of us would much rather just write
instead of dealing with speech technology, which is not 100% reliable. Sperber
reminds the people of today that, “if given the choice, most of us would rather
write than dictate. The main reason, I presume, is that when you dictate you
have much less control over your text than when you write” (Sperber 5). By
making this comment, Sperber believes that while speech/writing technology
seems like a cool idea at first, there are many observations that have to be
made about the accessibility. When you talk, you have much less control over
what you say, rather than when you physically write out what you are saying.
A strong point that really stood out
to me is when Sperber states, “Writing allows one to express one’s thought in a
richer, subtler and more controlled way than speech” (Sperber 8). Sperber’s
claim here is that by writing, a person can really shape what they want to say,
and make it more unique than that of just verbally talking. I 100% agree with
this idea because from personal experiences, I love having the option of
rereading my text and spicing it up, making it overall better.
Sperber also looks at the
counterargument which states that speech is better than writing by addressing the
problem that, “however used we may be to moving a pen over paper or to pressing
keys, speech is much more natural” (Sperber 9). By making this comment, Sperber
is digging deeper into the aesthetics of the situation by providing the readers
with something familiar, the fact that speech is more natural, but on the other
hand, he discusses how life would be worse of if we were limited to only using
speech-writing technologies. I agree with Sperber’s claim; even though speech
is more natural, writing is much more sophisticated and intelligent. Most
people can speak well, but not everyone can write well. Even though Sperber
addresses some positives for his opposing argument, he advocates for reading
and writing much more.
In conclusion, I believe that Dan
Sperber gives very accurate opinions on the benefits of writing, and how
writing will always be an important part of society in the future. Sperber’s
article was very convincing because he was very knowledgeable on the topic, and
was very relatable to the readers. I was hooked on his writing style and fully
understood his argument. Sperber demonstrates a very realistic writing style
and shows his readers many alternate views that can be thought of as
unsatisfactory opinions. I would definitely recommend this article to any
technological person out there who believes that writing is unnecessary to
life, and that speech technology will be the new standard. I would also
recommend this article to anyone who is curious about the importance of writing
and reading in society. Overall, Sperber makes excellent claims on the
importance of writing, and how advancements in speech technology might not be
as amazing as they first seem.
Works Cited
Sperber,
Dan. “The Future of Writing.” Dansperber.fr.
International
Cognition and Culture Institute,
11 September 2012.
