George Will, as you likely know, is a conservative political commentator, mostly for the Washington Post. He is an excellent and articulate writer and usually provides food for thought, whether I agree with him politically or not.  I also give him high marks for maintaining a strong sense of balanced sanity during the troubling times our nation has been through.
A recent (4/14/21) column of his had some interesting perspectives on technology, which I think can have pertinent connections in education.  Allow me to lay some groundwork.
The column refers heavily/often to a book called “Lincoln on the Verge:  Thirteen Days to Washington”, by Ted Widmer, a historian at City University of New York.  The book is apparently a detailed record of president-elect Lincoln’s 1861 journey by train from Springfield, Ill to Washington, DC. 
 
I’m regretfully omitting fascinating background here, but in a nutshell, Will concludes (with Widmer’s help) that the two 19^th century technologies of the railroad and the telegraph were as socially and culturally transformative as the 20^th century technologies of the internet and social media are today.  And that the uneasiness about these changes was as great as the distress many feel about how our technologies are shaping society today.  (In 1858, for example, the first transatlantic cable connected New York with London.  The New York Times wondered if this might make the velocity of news “too fast for the truth”. Hmmm . . . )
Two of Will’s closing thoughts stand out:  1. “Technologies are giving velocity to stupidity, but not making people stupid”.  2. “Like railroads and the telegraph, today’s technologies have consequences about how and what we think.  They do not relieve anyone of responsibility for either.”
As they relate to the political spectrum, I’ll (also regretfully) leave those thoughts without further comment.  But let’s connect them to the educational arena.
We’ve talked before about the controversies surrounding technology and education.  (Depending on how you define ‘technology’, this controversy is really not new.)  Pick your topic – calculators, cell phones, internet, social media, etc, and there is so much debate about the ‘appropriate’ use of such items in the classroom.
This discussion can lead in two directions, it seems.  I’ve likely said this before, but when it comes to the use of technology in the classroom, I’ve often thought we tend to ask the wrong question(s).  The important question really ISN’T “should we use (fill-in-the-blank) in the classroom?”.  The really pertinent questions are “what do we want our students to know (at any level)?” and “how can we effectively get them to learn it?”.  If (fill-in-the-blank) doesn’t demonstrably help, why use it?  But if it does help, why avoid it?
The other direction of the discussion is similar to one of Will’s points.  Technology in the classroom does NOT make people stupid.  This is ridiculous.  That is wholly different, however, from the ‘stupid use of technology’ outside the classroom, which many think is happening at an alarming rate.
The final question, then, is this: “What is education’s role in teaching technology-related responsibility, and in preventing ‘stupid’ use of technology?”  This is a much deeper question than it may appear.    Should this be a role of education?  What is the role of parents and society?  Is this the same as teaching critical thinking?  And if so, who gets to decide what’s ‘stupid’ and what’s ‘responsible’?  And how do we ‘teach’ it?
We adapted to railroads and the telegraph, and indeed, have gone beyond both.  We will likely do the same today, but it will call for awareness and perspective.  And education?