Hahahaha...it was running something like OS6, and the version of MS Word looked like that parody that was done of it some years ago...
Hahahaha...brought back memories...Word...Clippy...
Posted on 09/18/2019 5:59:05 PM PDT by beaversmom
People are losing the brain benefits of writing by hand as the practice becomes less common
Not so long ago, putting pen to paper was a fundamental feature of daily life. Journaling and diary-keeping were commonplace, and people exchanged handwritten letters with friends, loved ones, and business associates. While longhand communication is more time-consuming and onerous, there’s evidence that people may in some cases lose out when they abandon handwriting for keyboard-generated text.
Psychologists have long understood that personal, emotion-focused writing can help people recognize and come to terms with their feelings. Since the 1980s, studies have found that “the writing cure,” which normally involves writing about one’s feelings every day for 15 to 30 minutes, can lead to measurable physical and mental health benefits. These benefits include everything from lower stress and fewer depression symptoms to improved immune function. And there’s evidence that handwriting may better facilitate this form of therapy than typing.
A commonly cited 1999 study in the Journal of Traumatic Stress found that writing about a stressful life experience by hand, as opposed to typing about it, led to higher levels of self-disclosure and translated to greater therapeutic benefits. It’s possible that these findings may not hold up among people today, many of whom grew up with computers and are more accustomed to expressing themselves via typed text. But experts who study handwriting say there’s reason to believe something is lost when people abandon the pen for the keyboard.
Psychologists have long understood that personal, emotion-focused writing can help people recognize and come to terms with their feelings.
“When we write a letter of the alphabet, we form it component stroke by component stroke, and that process of production involves pathways in the brain that go near or through parts that manage emotion,” says Virginia Berninger, a professor emerita of education at the University of Washington. Hitting a fully formed letter on a keyboard is a very different sort of task — one that doesn’t involve these same brain pathways. “It’s possible that there’s not the same connection to the emotional part of the brain” when people type, as opposed to writing in longhand, Berninger says.
Writing by hand may also improve a person’s memory for new information. A 2017 study in the journal Frontiers in Psychology found that brain regions associated with learning are more active when people completed a task by hand, as opposed to on a keyboard. The authors of that study say writing by hand may promote “deep encoding” of new information in ways that keyboard writing does not. And other researchers have argued that writing by hand promotes learning and cognitive development in ways keyboard writing can’t match.
The fact that handwriting is a slower process than typing may be another perk, at least in some contexts. A 2014 study in the journal Psychological Science found that students who took notes in longhand tested higher on measures of learning and comprehension than students who took notes on laptops.
“The primary advantage of longhand notes was that it slowed people down,” says Daniel Oppenheimer, co-author of the study and a professor of psychology at Carnegie Mellon University. While the students who typed could take down what they heard word for word, “people who took longhand notes could not write fast enough to take verbatim notes — instead they were forced to rephrase the content in their own words,” Oppenheimer says. “To do that, people had to think deeply about the material and actually understand the arguments. This helped them learn the material better.”
Slowing down and writing by hand may come with other advantages. Oppenheimer says that because typing is fast, it tends to cause people to employ a less diverse group of words. Writing longhand allows people more time to come up with the most appropriate word, which may facilitate better self-expression. He says there’s also speculation that longhand note-taking can help people in certain situations form closer connections. One example: “A doctor who takes notes on a patient’s symptoms by longhand may build more rapport with patients than doctors who are typing into a computer,” he says. Also, a lot Berninger’s NIH-funded work found that learning to write first in print and then in cursive helps young people develop critical reading and thinking skills.
Finally, there’s a mountain of research that suggests online forms of communication are more toxic than offline dialogue. Most of the researchers who study online communication speculate that a lack of face-to-face interaction and a sense of invisibility are to blame for the nasty and brutish quality of many online interactions. But the impersonal nature of keyboard-generated text may also, in some small way, be contributing to the observed toxicity. When a person writes by hand, they have to invest more time and energy than they would with a keyboard. And handwriting, unlike typed text, is unique to each individual. This is why people usually value a handwritten note more highly than an email or text, Berninger says. If words weren’t quite so easy to produce, it’s possible that people would treat them — and maybe each other — with a little more care.
I still have my two :-)
Yeah, I have a touch of arthritis in both hands. Probably from banging on a computer keyboard for 25 years. I still use old-fashioned snail mail. I fact, I think I’m the only one in my family and circle of close friends and peers who still bother to actually sign and send Christmas cards anymore. It was always tradition, and it was always nice to get something personalized during the holidays from someone you knew, someone you may not have seen for quite a while, but it as a way of feeling like you still stay in touch one day per year. It wasn’t too far in the dim past that there would be cards taped around inside the living room door, like parade confetti. Now, even my 80 year old mother doesn’t even bother with them anymore. I used to keep a two page list of everyone’s addresses for just that one occasion; now, so many have passed away, moved off to parts unknown, or have just dropped off the radar screen, I only send a half dozen a year, out of courtesy and tradition. Computers have ruined everything.
I will say, I was an advocate and early adopter of many of these things (though oddly, I resisted cell phones until I literally could no longer find pay phones!) but I regret advocating for it.
There is something deeply disturbing to me when seeing this mass of humanity oblivious to the world around them, heads bent at a 45 degree angle while hypnotically bonded to their smart phone screen.
It is a little scary, to be honest.
I have always been a huge early adopter and technology advocate. But over the last 10-15 years, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong, I was enthusiastic without considering the possible negatives.
It isn’t just going to breakfast at a hotel and seeing an entire family, all on their phones at the same time, nobody talking.
It isn’t the obsessive practice of watching a car you pass (that is a bit too close to your lane) with your hand on the horn, then seeing the person is talking on their phone and not watching their lane.
It isn’t getting together with people you haven’t seen in a while, and having several of them constantly looking at their phones, or unable to stop texting.
It is the constant feeling that people just aren’t there. They are somewhere else, anywhere else, and not in the moment.
My wife and I were driving home from Boston a couple of years ago, and a particular event stuck with me. It was a wonderful early spring evening, and we were crossing over the Massachusetts Turnpike at the end of Newbury Street near the Tower Records building (now defunct)
As we passed the Tower Records building, there were perhaps 30 people standing there, probably waiting for a bus. Every single one of them stood with one palm up cradling a phone, their anonymous faces reflecting the faint light of their phone as they gazed down at it. Their heads were all inclined at the same angle. They could have been mannequins. All of them nearly completely motionless in a trance-like state of immobility.
Just gazing down.
What really struck me in a sad and negative way was...it was a beautiful night. You know that time of night when the sun has gone down, and the horizon has that orange, to pink to cobalt blue gradation, and the trees, not yet bearing leaves, are starkly silhouetted in black against that beautiful sky? That time of night. To the left, the giant Citgo sign was lit up, doing its characteristic light show.
There was so much going on. So much beauty. So much life. So much happening. But these 30 people were completely and totally oblivious to it all. They saw nothing but that rectangular screen in their hand.
There was something very, very sad about that, and it has stuck with me.
I find I can barely write any more! Not used to it!
“So are music in schools, matching pitches,”
I’ve noticed that the kids in Sunday School can’t sing even the simplest melody. Everyone is a one-note Johnny. And they scream it. I chalked it up to rap “music”, but don’t know for sure. When we were kids in church, even in third grade, we were singing parts.
Hahahaha...it was running something like OS6, and the version of MS Word looked like that parody that was done of it some years ago...
Hahahaha...brought back memories...Word...Clippy...
I could expound on that with a tome of my own; needless to say, if there’s an Internet to be won for tonight, the prize is yours. Personally, I’d rather be standing silently around a campfire at this moment with a few fellow travellers, sipping a beer and listening the the frogs sing to me.
This cartoon captures something of it:
So...yeah...I'm with you on that.
LOL, all that said...I do indeed Freep!!!!
So there’s that!
I am thinking of possibly taking a ride on a B-17 this weekend...if I do, I will not take one single picture or record a second of video.
If I do, I am just going to experience it. Kind of the opposite of what seems to happen today.
I keep wondering if something will happen to take down the Internet and most cell services without damaging our main power infrastructure. You know, one good little weak EMP that leaves your A/C and fridge running, but makes you actually have to say hello to your next door neighbor once in a while.The older I get, the more I realize the Internet was a bad idea, and it’ll only get worse. Why? Because people will give in to their baser instincts, and it won’t end well.
I’m the same. It’s difficult to do penmanship.
bookmark
That’s rayciss!
I know this is a long answer, but you got me to dwell on this...so bear with me!
The Internet isn’t in and of itself a bad idea...it’s a great and wonderful thing. The problem is, it was an agent of change so vast and rapid that nobody could reasonably comprehend in advance what was going to change in culture and society, and that change happened in a head-spinning rapid way.
Very quickly.
What...thirty years? Astonishing. There has never been anything like it that has effected such change in such a short amount of time. The Industrial Age, mass production, I don’t even think the invention of the wheel rivals it for profound change in a short time.
Perhaps television. (Funny, I don’t watch television at all. I watch movies a lot, but...television? I simply cannot stomach it. I don’t have cable.)
That the Internet has vast potential good is undeniable.
I like to tell the story that illustrated it for me. When I was in the US Navy, the squadron I was in was called “The Clansmen” and our officers wore kilts and glengarry hats for formal occasions such as change of command, etc. They wore the MacDougal Tartan, a traditional mix of red, black and green that was specific to the MacDougal clan. One of our ports of call in 1976 was Edinburgh in Scotland, and our officers were greeted and feted by representatives of the MacDougal clan IIRC.
Back in the late Seventies, after I got out of the Navy, I wanted to reproduce our squadron logo but I didn’t have an accurate color picture of it. I couldn’t remember exactly what the MacDougal tartan looked like, the pattern, the mix of colors. I could have gone to a library, but I doubt I would have found it. I might have been able to find a Scottish or genealogical society, but...how would I even find them? Ask someone at the library? A friend who was into genealogy? (I didn’t have any friends like that!) I might have written to an embassy or something. Or I might have even written a letter to the squadron, but...what was the address? It was a dead end, and I simply forgot about it.
Just a couple of years ago I thought about recreating the logo again (the squadron is defunct now) and I went online. I found a sample of the MacDougal tartan in literally 10 seconds! Ten seconds.
And that is just one example of the access to information that is possible with the Internet. The access to information is vast and immediate, and there are many, MANY positive things about that to a curious and engaged mind.
Let me digress quickly: If you have never read it, I highly recommend “As We May Think” ( Link: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/ ) and yes...it is a relative of George H. W. Bush, his uncle in fact. During WWII, Vannevar Bush headed the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), through which almost all wartime military R&D was carried out. This article came out in July 1945, and is unsettling in its uncanny foretelling of the future. Read this passage below, and I defy the reader to visualize the Personal Computer (Memex in the article) and hyperlinks (”trails”)
********************************************
********************************************
********************************************
(Excerpt from Vannevar Bush’s “As We May Think” from The Atlantic in July 1945)
Consider a future device for individual use, which is a sort of mechanized private file and library. It needs a name, and, to coin one at random, “memex” will do. A memex is a device in which an individual stores all his books, records, and communications, and which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility. It is an enlarged intimate supplement to his memory.
It consists of a desk, and while it can presumably be operated from a distance, it is primarily the piece of furniture at which he works. On the top are slanting translucent screens, on which material can be projected for convenient reading. There is a keyboard, and sets of buttons and levers. Otherwise it looks like an ordinary desk.
In one end is the stored material. The matter of bulk is well taken care of by improved microfilm. Only a small part of the interior of the memex is devoted to storage, the rest to mechanism. Yet if the user inserted 5000 pages of material a day it would take him hundreds of years to fill the repository, so he can be profligate and enter material freely.
Most of the memex contents are purchased on microfilm ready for insertion. Books of all sorts, pictures, current periodicals, newspapers, are thus obtained and dropped into place. Business correspondence takes the same path. And there is provision for direct entry. On the top of the memex is a transparent platen. On this are placed longhand notes, photographs, memoranda, all sorts of things. When one is in place, the depression of a lever causes it to be photographed onto the next blank space in a section of the memex film, dry photography being employed.
There is, of course, provision for consultation of the record by the usual scheme of indexing. If the user wishes to consult a certain book, he taps its code on the keyboard, and the title page of the book promptly appears before him, projected onto one of his viewing positions. Frequently-used codes are mnemonic, so that he seldom consults his code book; but when he does, a single tap of a key projects it for his use. Moreover, he has supplemental levers. On deflecting one of these levers to the right he runs through the book before him, each page in turn being projected at a speed which just allows a recognizing glance at each. If he deflects it further to the right, he steps through the book 10 pages at a time; still further at 100 pages at a time. Deflection to the left gives him the same control backwards.
A special button transfers him immediately to the first page of the index. Any given book of his library can thus be called up and consulted with far greater facility than if it were taken from a shelf. As he has several projection positions, he can leave one item in position while he calls up another. He can add marginal notes and comments, taking advantage of one possible type of dry photography, and it could even be arranged so that he can do this by a stylus scheme, such as is now employed in the telautograph seen in railroad waiting rooms, just as though he had the physical page before him.
All this is conventional, except for the projection forward of present-day mechanisms and gadgetry. It affords an immediate step, however, to associative indexing, the basic idea of which is a provision whereby any item may be caused at will to select immediately and automatically another. This is the essential feature of the memex. The process of tying two items together is the important thing.
When the user is building a trail, he names it, inserts the name in his code book, and taps it out on his keyboard. Before him are the two items to be joined, projected onto adjacent viewing positions. At the bottom of each there are a number of blank code spaces, and a pointer is set to indicate one of these on each item. The user taps a single key, and the items are permanently joined. In each code space appears the code word. Out of view, but also in the code space, is inserted a set of dots for photocell viewing; and on each item these dots by their positions designate the index number of the other item.
Thereafter, at any time, when one of these items is in view, the other can be instantly recalled merely by tapping a button below the corresponding code space. Moreover, when numerous items have been thus joined together to form a trail, they can be reviewed in turn, rapidly or slowly, by deflecting a lever like that used for turning the pages of a book. It is exactly as though the physical items had been gathered together from widely separated sources and bound together to form a new book. It is more than this, for any item can be joined into numerous trails.
The owner of the memex, let us say, is interested in the origin and properties of the bow and arrow. Specifically he is studying why the short Turkish bow was apparently superior to the English long bow in the skirmishes of the Crusades. He has dozens of possibly pertinent books and articles in his memex. First he runs through an encyclopedia, finds an interesting but sketchy article, leaves it projected. Next, in a history, he finds another pertinent item, and ties the two together. Thus he goes, building a trail of many items. Occasionally he inserts a comment of his own, either linking it into the main trail or joining it by a side trail to a particular item. When it becomes evident that the elastic properties of available materials had a great deal to do with the bow, he branches off on a side trail which takes him through textbooks on elasticity and tables of physical constants. He inserts a page of longhand analysis of his own. Thus he builds a trail of his interest through the maze of materials available to him.
And his trails do not fade. Several years later, his talk with a friend turns to the queer ways in which a people resist innovations, even of vital interest. He has an example, in the fact that the outraged Europeans still failed to adopt the Turkish bow. In fact he has a trail on it. A touch brings up the code book. Tapping a few keys projects the head of the trail. A lever runs through it at will, stopping at interesting items, going off on side excursions. It is an interesting trail, pertinent to the discussion. So he sets a reproducer in action, photographs the whole trail out, and passes it to his friend for insertion in his own memex, there to be linked into the more general trail.
********************************************
********************************************
********************************************
Astonishing. To read it. I am going to start a thread tonight on this (there have been many, but I am going to focus on the issue you and I discuss-the effect on all of us caused this rapid and dramatic upheaval caused by the instantaneous access to an enormous amount of information.
What thinking person could possibly think this is a bad thing in any way? (that is rhetorical, by the way...not directed at you. You are obviously a thoughtful person, and we agree!)
But that stupendous access to a curious humanity is also the lure and the trap.
There is also so much information on every subject imaginable that it takes a careful and discriminating mind to winnow through it. If you did a search for “treatment of boils on horse’s hindquarters” what you get back is mindboggling in volume, deep in variety, and ranges from snot-spurting hilarious to deeply offensive and disturbing.
And it appears in front of your face with just a few keyboard strokes and a click of a mouse.
And yes, to a curious mind, it is addictive. Factor in social media, online purchasing, pornography, news dissemination, and the door is open for a type of cultural upheaval both good and bad not seen before in history.
The potential for evil is profound.
Think: Google.
Google has become the defacto source of information by humans. And access with queries for that information via Google is being shaped, modified, and fed back to unknowing people who simply accept it without understanding that things don’t just appear at the top of the list of returns by accident. Money can put them there which is fine if you understand it, but far worse, ideological shaping by dedicated Leftists at Google put them at the top of the first page returned too.
And Google fully understands that few people dig beyond the first page of returns, and even fewer beyond the second page. I’ll bet if you did a graph of Google returned pages viewed per query, it falls off exponentially past the first page served up by Google. But even more perilous, they accept the Google answers to queries as unbiased or oddly, truthful, and there is NOTHING further from the truth.
When Socrates was asked a question, his questioner might expect to get back an answer from Socrates that would drive him or her to find the truth on their own, with their own thought process, using their own mind.
When an Internet user asks Google a question, Google does not answer as Socrates did. Google answers as Joseph Goebbels would have if he had the technology, not by helping the questioner find the truthful answer, but by attempting to give the questioner the answer that Google wants them to have.
Oh, yes. I am going to start a thread on this tonight. It is old hat, but still worth bringing up again.
My thumbs are so sore I can scarcely write any more.
Then these psychologists will be happy to note, via visible evidence on YouTube, that the Pagan sector of society touts their recording by hand, in their bullet journals, dream journals, shadow work journals, their grimoires and Book of Shadows, all in their own hand!
I started using fountain pens to increase my writing. HP 32 lb copier paper is the best for fountain pens
I don’t think I’d even try a fountain pen. I would probably end up with ink all over the place.
Still, I read that calligraphy is great therapy. Probably won’t try it, but the idea is intriguing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
