What impact does Carr’s hook have on you (I ask because I think many of you have not seen 2001)?
Carr spends a lot of time casting doubt on his seeming thesis. Does this mean he’s just bad at making arguments (spoiler: no it doesn’t)? Assuming he’s doing it on purpose, and that it may not be a bad thing, what is the purpose of him regularly questioning his own arguments? Does it demonstrate specific, academic values? Does it help with his credibility? Is it about trying to be fair on an issue he feels is important, but that even very smart people can’t really clearly understand?
What is his most reliable or convincing evidence? Does he have any that isn’t? Does he make any rhetorical moves that you recognize with regard to his evidence?