Second Draft For PAPER 4
How would the world look like in a decade from now? Or how about on 2064? Will the world be depleted with resources due to overpopulation? Will the technology dominate the human population? No one knows about the future of our world. Our imaginations about the future can be different from person to person. Our futures may seem very different from what we imagine from now. Some people like David E Nye predicts our future to be determined by how much the human population depend on the technology. Whereas some people like Carolyn Merchant predict our future to be miserable due to our trend of following air pollution with green house gases. Some like Garrett Hardin, discussed in his article, “Tragedy of the Commons,” would say that our limited resources would ultimately deplete due to the individuals’ rotational and greedy self-sufficiency. (Hardin) As I gaze at the Earth rising slowly above the lunar horizon, I would predict that the Earth would face dangerous destruction with depleted resources, and this would be the safe bet for the world in 2064, due to the current trend the world is following.
In his essay, “Sustainable Abundance, or Ecological Crisis?,” David E Nye discusses about the carrying capacity of the biosphere. Nye states, “The world’s carrying capacity is not a scientific fact but a social construction.”(Nye, 108) David E Nye believes in the increasing dependency upon modern technology due to the technological advances that would comfort people’s lives. (Nye, 88) He is also aware about the problems like air-pollution that may be caused by constant usage of technology. (Nye, 90) He believes that such problem can be easily solved when the society cooperates to bring changes to their usage of technology. Instead of using gas and coal, Nye believes that using renewable resources would decrease the amount of air-pollution by dramatic amount. (Nye, 92) Yet, if such social change would not take place, he believes the world would suffer from resources depletion, global pollution, and the world war. In such way, Nye would predict that by 2064, the world would have adopted to bring simple social changes to live away from the fear of resources depletion due to overpopulation.
Unlike David E Nye, Carolyn Merchant has a highly negative view upon the world and the future of the world. Through her novel, “Ecological Revolutions,” Carolyn Merchant discusses about the miserable nature of our world due to the humans’ unlimited greed and self-sufficiency. Merchant states that we, humans, are abusing the Earth’s resources to fulfill our unlimited needs and wants. For example, Merchant gives out the example of cutting down forests for agricultural lands. (Merchant, 152) She also mentions about the ozone depletion due to constant usage of chlorofluorocarbons, also known as the CFC. (Merchant, 262) Merchant has a strong stance on that humans are destroying the world and huge change is necessary in order to prevent the world from destroying. Thus Carolyn Merchant would predict that in 2064, the world would face serious destruction unless enormous change in people’s behavior towards the biosphere occurs. Yet, Merchant believes that such change is unlikely to occur and she would expect the world to be depleted with resources and destroyed due to massive pollution. In Merchant’s view, the Earth in 2064 does not have a bright future.
Garrett Hardin, the author of “The Tragedy of the Commons,” has a similar view with Carolyn Merchant in the sense that humans will lead to the world into a situation where individuals, acting selfishly, will ultimately deplete limited resources. Just like the title of the article, Hardin focuses mainly on the overuse of the common resources by the people. Hardin strongly believes in that individuals are very selfish and would act in a self-sufficient way just as he says, “The individual benefits as an individual from his ability to deny the truth even though society as a whole, of which he is a part, suffers.” (Hardin) In this way, Hardin predicts similar future of the Earth as that of Carolyn Merchant. As he says, “Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush,” Hardin expects the future to be destruction caused by individuals’ selfishness that would ultimately deplete the limited resources. (Hardin)
Just like what Merchant and Hardin might predict, I also expect similar future in 2064. As what Merchant and Hardin discussed, I strongly believe that the humans are extremely greedy and would act in a way that would benefit them the most. In this way, humans will use up the limited resources of the world due to their unlimited needs and wants. As resources are limited and wants are unlimited, resources will ultimately deplete. I do not expect a bright future for the world in 2064. Not only would the resources be depleted, but also the world would be dead due to all kinds of pollutions. Air pollutions caused by constant usage of vehicles and CFCs would ultimately kill the Earth’s atmosphere. Water pollution would also kill marine organisms and sometime later, there no longer would be drinkable water in the planet. Soil erosion caused by deforestation would lead to desertification of the lands in the biosphere. The future of the world isn’t very bright in my view.
How would the world look like in 2064? No one knows about the future of the world. David E Nye, as discussed in his essay, would predict that the world still would be able to live in as long as people make social changes. There are others like Carolyn Merchant and Garrett Hardin who would predict the world to be depleted with resources and would not see a bright future from this world. Just like Merchant and Hardin, I also predict the dead Earth in the year 2064 with depleted resources.
Three Quotes From "The Tragedy of the Commons"
1. "The population problem cannot be solved in a technical way, any more than can the problem of winning the game of tick-tack-toe."
2."Reaching an acceptable and stable solution will surely require more than one generation of hard analytical work--and much persuasion."
3. ""Freedom is the recognition of necessity"--and it is the role of education to reveal to all the necessity of abandoning the freedom to breed."
ROUGH DRAFT FOR PAPER 3
What would it feel like if the world were just crowded with people? What if all the cities are filled with people that it is hard to walk around? Experts believe that our world is limited with the number of people it can carry, which is the carrying capacity. However, David E. Nye doesn’t agree with the popular belief. In his essay, “Sustainable Abundance, or Ecological Crisis,” Nye states “Ultimately, the world’s carrying capacity is not a scientific fact but a social construction.” (Nye, 108) He is referring that the world’s carrying capacity is not a measurable unit, but a formulation of cultures and the environment, which I totally agree with. I believe that the world’s carrying capacity is not as simple as what we humans can measure, but determinant of technology, culture, and nature.
David E. Nye gives out ample examples to support his belief of world’s carrying capacity as a social construction. Nye emphasizes on the effect of industrialization on the carrying capacity. Nye starts his essay by exemplifying Robinson Crusoe as an inherited generation with technical experience. (Nye, 87) Robinson Crusoe was popular fictional figure that clearly demonstrated the effect of technical experience on human survivor with his 26 years on a deserted island with only few materials to survive with. The revolutionary improvement and dependence on technology, commonly called as industrialization, aimed to comfort people’s lives and to increase productivity and efficiency. The widespread view believed that “advances in technology bring greater efficiency and prosperity for all in the form of higher wages, less expensive goods, better transportation, and shorter working hours.” (Nye, 88) This may be true as mechanization allows easier work, higher productivity, and furthermore better life-style. Daniel Webster and Edward Everett, effective spokesmen for manufacturing, agree as they urge that “more mechanical power leads to a higher level of civilization.” (Nye, 91) This eventually leads to population growth, as people would want to expand their families. This is why during the time of industrialization, population growth showed rapid exponential growth in the United States.
Nye also mentions environment and landscape as an important factor to technology and the carrying capacity. J.B. Jackson, one of the founders of landscape studies, defines landscapes as “a composition of man-made or man-modified spaces to serve as infrastructure or background for our collective existence.” (Nye, 88) He claims that landscapes and technology are inseparable as people use lands and shape lands with technology. (Nye, 89) This is completely correct as people use up lands to build factories and other investments; as more properties are built, more lands are used. Henry Ford once said the machine was “the symbol of man’s mastery of environment.” (Nye, 92) Mechanization and industrialization however affects environment hugely through pollution, erosion, and deforestation. Nye states that “technologies also affect the air, which carries traces of smoke, microscopic particles, pollen, carbon monoxide, and the dust raised by travel.” (Nye, 89) Even in the past when the United States was industrializing, air pollution was a big issue. In fact the city itself was polluted that diseases were spread easily through rats. When industrialization was meant to bring comfort for the mankind, it in fact caused disadvantages through diseases and pollution, which may lead to decrease in population. Technology, people, and environment is not separable as the Progress and Freedom Foundation’s cyber libertarians assert that “computerization signaled a fundamental shift in the relationship between people and the natural world…” (Nye, 95) This proves that the carrying capacity is a social construction with the determinant of environment.
Culture also takes a big role in carrying capacity of the world. J.B. Jackson states that even landscape is not natural, but cultural. (Nye, 88) My personal knowledge about East Asian cultures prove why culture takes a big role in the world’s carrying capacity. For example, in the past East Asians families wanted to have large family. My grandparents prove such tradition. My grandparents had 11 children, including my father. This is mostly based on the Korean tradition of having a lot of children to make them help in agricultural field. This may be true for China and other East Asian countries. In fact Chinese population would clearly explain such phenomena.
David E. Nye stated “Ultimately, the world’s carrying capacity is not a scientific fact but a social construction.” (Nye, 108) By this he meant that world’s carrying capacity is not a measurable unit. I believe that the world’s carrying capacity but an establishment of culture, technology, and nature. I always wonder what the world’s carrying capacity would have been like if the world didn’t go through industrialization.
Bibliography
Nye, David E. Technology Matters: Questions to Live With. Cambridge: The MIT Press,
2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, September 13, 2009
e-portfolio for Michael Park
This video illustrates the relationship between technology and workers. Joel Benedict, the maker of this video, describes the relationship between technology and workers as not separate. Benedict argues that development of technology increases productivity, creates new jobs, and benefits the users of technology. The impact of technology is huge upon the workers and work it-self. Benedict describes that development of technology creates new jobs. Although technology eliminates specific jobs, Benedict argues that new technology does not eliminate work it-self. He presents that development of technology increases jobs through recycling of new jobs. Benedict also describes negative impact of technology on work and workers during the technological development.
Michael Park (Chang Hyun)
Can people live without the Internet or cellular phones? Most people would probably think that they can’t live without modern world technologies, and would believe their absence to be “unimaginable.” (Nye, 17) Late 17th century poet, Ralph Waldo Emerson, claims through his poem that technologies dominate people and its society with his lament “Things are in the saddle /And ride mankind.” (Emerson) David E. Nye claims such dominance of technology over humans and their societies as technological determinism. (Nye, 18) However, unlike Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nye complicates technological determinism through presenting both left and right sides of technological determinism with various historical events, arguments, groups, and figures in his essay, “Does Technology Control Us?”
Through out Nye’s essay, there are myriads of examples that refute technological determinism. The Japanese samurais, the Amish, and North Americans are some examples Nye presents as the rejection to the influence of technology. When the world gave up the traditional weapons such as the bow and the sword, the Japanese government restricted gun ownership and production as traditional weapons had much important symbolic values to their warriors. (Nye, 17) Like the Japanese, the Amish in the United States resisted dependence on technologies through rejecting automobiles, telephones, and other farm utilities. (Nye, 18) Rather than depending on technology for living, the Amish tried to preserve community by refusing the outside interference. Nye claims that both of these groups demonstrate that “communities can make self-conscious technological choices and can resist even very powerful technologies.” (Nye, 18) David E. Nye also brings up an important idea that such rejection technological determinism could be resulted from culture and geography. For example, the North Africans, even when the world though the wheel was inevitable, they preferred using camel as means of transportation. (Nye, 20) As North Africa didn’t have roads, but the desert, it was more rational for them to use camel to reduce other expenses that may result from using the wheel. These three groups, presented through Nye’s essay, refutes Emerson’s lament “And ride mankind,” through their rejection to powerful technologies for their self-sufficient choices. (Emerson)
Even though Nye presents some counter-examples of technological determinism, he illustrates myriads of other models that affirms Emerson’s lament. As how people would believe television as inevitable, Nye illustrates change that television had caused in the American history. Nye claims that television has “helped change the deferential Negro into the proud Black,” and has “given women an outside view of their incarceration in the home.” (Nye, 19) Such enormous change television has brought demonstrates the huge impact technology may bring to the society. Nye also argues that technology created in order for people to benefit, in fact, brings involuntary costs, which Edward Tenner claims, “the revenge of unintended consequences.” (Nye, 21) As examples, Tenner notes about how computers are created to improve office efficiency, yet people spend time adjusting to the software, suffer eyestrain, back problems, and cumulative trauma disorder. (Nye, 21) Nye also argues that computerization has diminished highly skilled workers from having their specialization. (Nye, 21) Question that may rise from such argument would be, “Then why wouldn’t people stop using computer.” This is where Nye was able to prove technological determinism; such technology, computer, has became too essential for today’s society that people have to keep using it even when they would have to suffer body pains and lose their specializations. This notes how technology intended to bring benefits and convenience for people are actually controlling human societies today.
Nye presents socialist Karl Marx as an important historical figure who asserts technological determinism that Emerson writes about on his poem. Marx argued that “technology determined the general character of the social, political, and spiritual process of life.” (Nye, 22) Marx believed that technology’s impact characterized civilization’s social, political, and spiritual life. He also claimed that industrialization brought huge negative effect for the working class as skilled artisans lost their specialization through subdivision of labor. (Nye, 23) In fact after the Industrial Revolution, myriads of factories with machinery were built, reducing skilled labors. Mass production was enabled through division of labor in factories and machinery that would do work for the people. As skilled jobs were reduced dramatically, wages and employment dropped radically as well. Industrialization also broke the communities and widened the gap between social classes. (Nye, 23) Marx also claimed that industrialization caused huge economic crises as supplies outran demands. (Nye, 24) Evolutionary socialists argue that new technologies can be basis for utopia; however, they would cause violent class conflicts, which may result in revolution. (Nye, 25) These portray how technology shaped the human society when it was supposed to be vice versa. Marxists and evolutionary socialists embraced the inevitable historical development based from the technological changes, proving the technological determinism. (Nye, 25)
Karl Marx wasn’t the only person who affirmed technological determinism. Marshall McLuhan argued that innovations in communications such as the printing press, radio, and television brought immediate effect on society. (Nye, 27) McLuhan believed electronic media linked humanity together in a global network. (Nye, 27) In fact what McLuhan argues for is completely true; without the inventions in communications, the world would not have been globalized. Printing press enabled people to read news papers and increased global awareness. Radio and television allowed people to hear about other countries much efficiently and quicker. In such manner, Alvin Toffler states how technological advancements bring autonomous forces that compel society to change. (Nye, 27) Another figure, Theodore Roszak defines Western society as “technocracy,” meaning that society is governed by the technology. (Nye, 29) After all, David E. Nye sums up technological determinism by saying “Technical progress tends to act, not according to an arithmetic, but according to a geometric progression.” (Nye, 28)
The controversy of technological determinism is still unsolved. Ralph Waldo Emerson argues technological determinism by saying, “Things are in the saddle /And ride mankind.”(Emerson) Believer of technological determinism like Leo Marx would say, “the idea of the domination of life by large technological systems; shrunken sense of human agency.” (Nye, 30) Whereas someone like Werner Sombart rejects such determinism by arguing that “cultures often shaped events more than technologies did.” (Nye, 25) Like what many would think some technology would be inevitable in our lives now as their impacts are too huge on our lives. But before relying on our technologies we should deeply think about whether technology built for our comfort is controlled by us, or vice versa.
Bibliography:
Emerson, Ralph Waldo. “Ode, Inscribed to William H. Channing.” (1846) Early Poems of Ralph Waldo Emerson. New York, Boston, Thomas Y. Crowell & Company, 1899
Nye, David E. Technology Matters: Questions to Live With. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2007.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 Questions
ReplyDelete1. RE: "However, unlike Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nye complicates technological determinism through presenting both left and right sides of technological determinism with various historical events, arguments, groups, and figures in his essay, “Does Technology Control Us?”"
Are 'left' and 'right' the best terms to use here?
2. RE: "As how people would believe television as inevitable, Nye illustrates change that television had caused in the American history. Nye claims that television has “helped change the deferential Negro into the proud Black,” and has “given women an outside view of their incarceration in the home.” (Nye, 19)"
Whose opinion is Nye citing here, and does he agree with it?
3. What is your own thesis re: technological determinism?