Inquiry plan


This assignment has three steps:

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Inquiry plan
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Step 1. Copy your “Entering the Conversation” assignment into this discussion board.

Step 2. Below your initial quote and response, ask the questions that occurred to you, which require research to answer. You may have more questions for some quotes than others.

Step 3. After you have asked the questions and considered them, come up with an inquiry plan. This will be a statement of what you will research and why. It doesn’t have to be exact, and it can ask questions you don’t quite know the answers to yet. There is no set form for this plan. It is primarily for your use in thinking about your overall project.

Inquiry Plan

Article: Steven Johnson: “Why Games are Good for You”

Quote #1: “So it is with games. It’s not what you are thinking about when you’re

playing a game, it’s the way you’re thinking that matters” (493).

I found this logic a little dubious. Surely, what you are thinking about when

playing a game matters. For example, what about reductionist types of thinking in a

game like sexist, racist, or homophobic sentiment? Isn’t what you are thinking and how

you are thinking linked? I feel like his separation between these two terms is


• Are there sources that talk about the detrimental content of some video games?

• Should I explore the idea of video game addiction? Is that relevant to my main

point? Are there articles on this?

• Can we really separate how we think from what we think?

• Are there philosophers that discuss this distinction?

Quote #2: “But almost all the standards we use to measure reading’s cognitive

benefits—attention, memory, following threads, and so on–the nonliterary

popular culture has been steadily growing more challenging over the past thirty


When I read this quote, I noticed that Johnson focuses mainly on “cognitive

benefits.” But what about content? I agree that video games require more cognitive

skills, but this eschews the idea of what we learn. Do, for example, children get a sense

of literary technique, writing style, or character building? It would be hard to argue that

video games can convey the complexities and nuance of great literature.

• What benefits does literature provide that video games can’t?

• What cognitive benefits does the difficulty of reading provide?

Quote #3: “The question is why kids are so eager to soak up that much

information when it is delivered to them in game form.”

I felt that this statement held an assumption with which I disagree. Johnson

assumes the goal of education is to “soak up […] information” and the easier this is done

the better. To me, the benefits of reading are exactly because it is a more difficult task,

one that draws more attention to how knowledge is create d and less toward receiving it

unquestioned. In his example about Sim City, the child learns that lowering industrial

taxes helps spur business, but this is a model built to stress one particular ideological

truth, that growth and industry are de facto public goods. If we were to look through

another lens, say environmental, or religious, then the choice becomes clouded.

• Do video games promote passive learning?

• Do video games help children question the “lens” of the game itself?

• Do video games promote dangerous or one-sided ideology?

Inquiry Plan

I plan on arguing against Johnson’s article. Since Johnson’s main distinction is a

separation between the action and content of video games, I plan to research some

articles that discuss the negative impact of the content of video games. There are two

articles I know already, “The Wonder Woman Precedent” by Julie D. O’Reilly and “Two

Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt” by Jean Kilborne. These articles might help me make my

argument about sexism and implied “lenses” and ideology in many video games,

though the aforementioned articles don’t write specifically about video games. I plan to

look in academic journals that might cover the cognitive benefits of reading so I can

dispute or complicate Johnson’s points on the cognitive benefits of video games.

Journals in psychology, cultural studies, or even neuroscience (if I plan to bring up

addiction) might offer critiques of the content of video games. I also plan on doing

internet searches to figure out which philosophers have discussed the differences

between the content and structure of thought, for if I can prove that the two cannot be

separated, Johnson’s argument falls apart. My point will not just to be to tear down

Johnson’s article but to suggest that there is no easy way to separate ideological

assumptions from any kind of media.


Calculate the price of your paper

Total price:$26
Our features

We've got everything to become your favourite writing service

Need a better grade?
We've got you covered.

Order your paper