Echoing the thoughts of Hubert L. Dreyfus the last week of the course dealt with fear – fear of the new, the different and in general fear of change. In the history of mankind this is not a new theme – during the course we have been reminded of it over and over again: from Socrate's times when fear of the written word was key (quoted in Dreyfus' “On the internet”) to today's threat of video conferencing. In most cases the fear of information overload is in the shadows.

As an example we start with Dreyfus' view of Socrates as a supporter of the disembodied though. However, Socrates believes that writing would: "create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories." Centuries later, when the written word became common (thanks to handwritten books) scholars once again were worried about the advent of the printing press - different mechanisms were devised to deal with this threat. Similar concerns were raised when newspapers were becoming common, in his book “on the Internet” Dreyfus quotes Søren Kierkegaard – a 19^th century philosopher – as saying: “Europe will come to a standstill at the Press and remain at a standstill as a reminder that the human race has invented something which will eventually overpower it” (Dreyfus, page 74). Near the end of the 19^th century (1883) a weekly medical journal the Sanitarian discussed the subject of schools for children, it reached the following conclusion that schools will: “exhaust the children's brains and nervous systems with complex and multiple studies, and ruin their bodies by protracted imprisonment.”

Concerns were raised again with the introduction of radio: “This new invader of the privacy of the home has brought many a disturbing influence in its wake. Parents have become aware of a puzzling change in the behavior patterns of their children. They are bewildered by a host of new problems, and find themselves”. By the time television became common the radio was legitimised, the new technology, however, was different: “questions were raised about how it would affect children: Would it debase their tastes? Distort their values? Teach violence and crime? Cause withdrawn and addictive behavior? ” (both quotes were taken from “Children and Computers: New Technology - Old Concerns”, Children and Computer Technology, Volume 10 Number 2 Fall/Winter 2000).

One can only imagine the criticism when man first used fire – “it will make us lazy and weak since our stomachs will no longer be able to digest raw meat and fancy, cooked dinners will become the norm!”. There is no doubt that new technology has to be tested in the context of what it is intended to be used for (or new manners of usage should be introduced) however, it is VERY surprising to see the academic community jumping to conclusions about the applicability of technology instead of conducting the appropriate research first. Technology is an enabler - we can choose to become a mindless crowd as claimed by Kierkegaard or not, in the same way that we can decide to use the atom for its destructive power or to provide cheap energy for millions. Surely, this is all down to education...

One of the issues raised in the discussion forums of the course was the silence and contemplation required from religious believers. It is important to note however, with all due respect to religion, that the amount of information involved means that Jewish scholars need to study the Torah “night and day” and devout Muslims pray seven times a day... Other examples exist in most religions demonstrating how believers need to dedicate their whole being to deal with information intake required by religion. The main problem with the religious intake of information is the singularity of the source – by studying the religious sources one can only reach conclusions which are derivatives of the data provided in those sources.

In our history we have been repeatedly limited to what is known, what is acceptable, what has been published etc etc... for the first time in human history we have access to the raw data and the possibilities are mind-boggling. We can finally move from the need to collect the data to using and contextualising it. In a previous blog post I have mentioned the technology of mash ups as can be found on the Internet, this short presentation given at TED is a good example of what can be done when raw data is available:

http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_berners_lee_the_year_open_data_went_worldwide.html

In light of this and in the context of past fears it seems as if once again human beings are plagued by the fear of losing control: control of thoughts, control of knowledge, and control of raw data and where it might lead individuals to. Perhaps what we need is not time for silent contemplation but a better way to get from raw data to wisdom? A better way to contextualise and apply the opulance of data and information. Could something like the DIKW model provide us that?

I have previously mentioned a research commissioned by Hewlett Packard and conducted by Glenn Wilson which identified a 10 point drop in IQ as a result of “infomania” (also mentioned in “the university of google”, Barbazon). This demonstrates the fact that some of the challenges that we are currently facing as a result of information overload are real (and therefore the fear justified to an extent) but rather than dismiss the benefits that current, and new, technology offers us I believe that it is our responsibility as educators (both in the education and corporate sectors) to provide learners with the tools to make the best of what they have. This includes – the ability to define what is urgent and what is not, how to prioritise, how to identify 'real' (i.e. valid and relevant) information versus redundant and irrelevant and so on. Internet-based technology is here just like writing, schools radio, television and many other technologies were introduced to us in the past... we now need to respond, adapt to existing reality and, to quote one of my fellow students:

“I would argue that adapting is precisely what people do best. ”