Disagreement with David Brooks

David Brooks, the author has particularly concrete points he is giving. I can agree on some, but not on all. He does not directly say that crystallized intelligence is preferable than fluid, but it is implied. Brooks claims fluid thinking is immensely in the moment, that the online subject of thinking is a distraction to the person. My views on the online matter is that yes, it can become a distraction, only if you allow it. The online world can expand your way of thinking and the materials for reading, opening people to a new subject to pursue in learning. Brooks thoughts towards fluid thinking are more of a negative feeling as shown from his statement that fluid thinking "undermines the ability to explore narrative". Even though this is a negative statement he does say some things to praise fluid intelligence. Brooks states that "interacting online nurtures fluid thinking", he believes this "interaction nurtures mental agility", which is not a substandard thing when you have to make quick decisions in the real world. The way he describes fluid intelligence is what I rely on as well as crystallized, in my experience I use more of a fluid way of thinking due to my life and the decisions I have had to make. That is what makes me lean to fluid more, but I still believe they both serve an important role. Brooks praises crystallized intelligence more than fluid, he seems to believe that it is the superior form of thinking. Brooks believes that crystallized intelligence "accumulates over the years and leads ultimately to understanding and wisdom". I am not saying that this is a false statement or that understanding and wisdom are atrocious, but from what I can tell Brooks does not believe that fluid and crystallized both play an important role. In this article you can find a few if any negative statements he proclaims to have about crystallized intelligence.