HI 100 / WR 100 R. S. Deese Boston University Fall, 2009

Cast your vote NOW in BEST PARAGRAPH SMACKDOWN!!!

Monday, September 28, 2009

Video Upload





Noam Chomsky is an authority in the field of globalization. It is interesting to discuss technology in this context. When Chomsky says that the poor complain, he makes reference to the criticism that globalization destroys local economies. He then says, "the system brings rewards to all." His statement may sound oxymoronic but in reality highlights a fundamental point: in the long run, integrating into the world economy brings fruits to all. Nye talks briefly about outsourcing and the income inequalities it produces. I favor Chomsky, in that globalization facilitates the exchange of technology and favorably shifts an agricultural-based economy to a service oriented one.

e-portfolio for Santiago Roel

ROUGH DRAFT ASSIGNMENT # 1

In the discussion of technology, one controversial issue has been whether human beings control their technological creations, or vice versa. On the one hand, Emerson laments that “Things are in the saddle / And ride mankind.” On the other hand, Nye believes that “no technology is, has been, or will be a ‘natural force’.” My own view is that technology controls only those who gamble with it, those who become obsessed with a machine and put all their spirits and hopes in it.

Emerson believes that technology is in control and therefore mankind is subject to its power. There is a fallacy in this logic: correlation does not imply causation. Certainly there is a correlation between the aggressive evolution of technology and the misuse of it. However this is not to say that mankind is not conscious of it, or - for that matter - that technology has acquired some sort of intelligence. Fire did not reach the Earth by itself. Prometheus brought it to mankind. Fire by itself does not exert any power on mankind.

Nye refutes Emerson on similar grounds. He puts forth an interesting example that proves that cultures can make “self-conscious technological choices” (p.19). The Japanese rejected the gun, and the Mennonites reject modern faming equipment as well as many other forms of technology.

Those who discover and develop technology hand it to the rest of the world. Contemporary Prometheus’, Einstein and Nobel, felt betrayed by humans themselves when they saw their inventions be put to harms way. “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity,” lamented Einstein. Essentially he regretted having played with fire for too long. That his research on nuclear energy was distorted to develop the nuclear bomb was not a process where the technology itself radicalized. Someone made that choice quite consciously.

Emerson takes Einstein’s thought even further as he writes “But it runs wild [technology], / And doth the man unking.” However Nye brings up an interesting point: “The tool often exists before the problem to be solved. Latent in every tool are unforeseen transformations” (p.2). Indeed, this process of technological distortion further proves that humans control their technological creations. What they do not control, is in what hands the creation ultimately falls into.

Nye cites Edward Tener’s book Why Things Bite Back to illustrate “the revenge of unintended consequences.” Tener demonstrates how technology can backfire and generate inefficiency. He references a study by the American Manufacturing Association that indicated that “only 43 percent of the firms that tried” optimizing time by computerization raised profits, “and 24 percent actually suffered losses” (p.21). A contemporary example to supports this underlying idea is the Blackberry “smartphone” phenomenon. Research in Motion Limited markets its product as a mobile office platform: Internet connectivity on the go, easy sync with office servers, etc. Millions are sold as a portable secretary that reminds you of meetings and keeps you connected with the business world. Nevertheless, it also generates similar inefficient processes where people are constantly looking down at their phones and replying more-than-not to a non-business text or email during meetings. In short, technology is a tool that does not promise anything and “it appears more reasonable to assume that cultural choices shape their uses” (p.21). Paradoxically, most of the world chooses to become dependent on technology.

While Nye and Emerson dispute on the grounds of technological determinism, they never touch on the idea that humans can be slaves of it.

While technology is a symbol of human imagination, it also tends to contain it. Nowadays, most humans cannot envision a social interaction without Facebook facilitating it. People are spending more time on their computers writing something on another person’s wall than going out to the real world and experiencing social interaction. Whenever people do strike a conversation it starts to sound a lot like an Facebook or MSN chat; monotonous and ruptured. People feel distressed and awkward when they do not have the time to think their responses. Spontaneity goes to die. Although this technology may limit our scope of imagination it does not, and never will acquire the power to control it.

Does this technology called Facebook control human beings? Emerson would agree that this technology is controlling the social sphere. Nye would cite Ogburn who asserts that “a social change is seldom the result of a single invention” (p.26). Regardless of whether Facebook controls humans or not, or whether it was a process of evolution in social behavior, many people are indeed becoming “addicted” to Facebook. It is not that Facebook controls their life. The fact of the matter is that because people feel more lonely now it makes Facebook - a practical social tool - extremely popular.

When we are obsessed with technology, we are automatically enslaved by it. Take for example the Iphone. People entrust so much power in this device that all of a sudden it will make them more efficient, increase their productivity, and enhance their ability to make money, network and access information. Not only that, it soon becomes the only way to do so. The Iphone is simply a tool and not a necessity. The moment we put all of our chips in a tool like the Iphone we risk loosing our power. When the Iphone falls and shatters, we feel we have lost a fundamental component to our success; we fall with it.

Lesson be learned: Prometheus brought light to a dark world. Humans experienced light during night. Also, they distinguished the absence of such light at night. Over time, many humans would suffer from the darkness at night. It must always be remembered that in the beginning, the night was always dark.



e-portfolio for Dev Sethi

��ÿ�� �� �� �� ��$ ��% ��+ ��, ��K ��Q ��R ��S ��Z ��h ��óêáÕͼ°ÕÍÕÍÕÍÕÍÕÍá¥™Ž†~rŽi™~r`i`X�������hdÎ�CJ$�aJ$��h5VÕ�>*CJ$�aJ$�hÜ)�>*CJ$�aJ$�hÝ!n�h?Xý�>*CJ$�aJ$�hÝ!n�CJ$�aJ$��h?Xý�CJ$�aJ$��h?Xý�h?Xý�CJ$�aJ$��h?Xý�h?Xý�>*CJ\\\\



¡±á����������������>��þÿ ���������������>����������@������þÿÿÿ����=���ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á�5@ ��ð¿������0�������Ü���bjbjÏ2Ï2������������������ �"*��X��X��Ü������������������������������ÿÿ���������ÿÿ���������ÿÿ�����������������ˆ�����6������6��6������6������6������6������6�������������J������Ò������Ò������Ò������Ò�����î��L���J������¼��ò���F������F������F������F������F������!������!������!������;�����=������=������=������=������=������=��$���®��R��� ��N���a���������������������6����������������������������!������!������������������a��������������6������6������F��������������F��Û���v�����¹������¹������¹��������’��6������F������6������F������;��������������¹������������������������������������������������������������;������¹�����¹��������������Ç������6������6��������������������������������������������������������������Ç������F������:��
��� ž¦÷XÊ��������Ò������±��‚���Ç��������������G��ô���Œ��0���¼������Ç������N ������3��p���N ������Ç��������������J������J������6������6������6������6��������������Ç�����N ��������������6������Û��l���!��Z���{��@���¹������»��4���ï��0����������������������������������!������!������!������a������a������J������J��„��Î
������������£�����J������J������Î
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������SHARES

Friday, September 25, 2009

e-portfolio for Abdulaziz Al-Awadhi

September 14, 2009 Abdulaziz Al-Awadhi
Section: I4

Technology: Controlee or Controller

No one can deny that technology is heavily intermeshed into every society. We are all affected by technology even when doing the simplest things like driving to work or having a cup of coffee. Recently, there has been a hot debate over technology and the methods through which it continues to grow. In the discussion of technology, one controversial issue has been whether or not technology has grown to control us. In his poem, Emerson sends a message that is quite familiar to the public. Emerson chooses to take the conventional deterministic point of view on technology. On the other hand, Nye strongly refutes Emerson’s argument in his essay. Nye chooses to argue that technology is not at all deterministic; it is our culture and attitudes that shape technology and its effects on society. I believe that Nye is oversimplifying the issue by choosing to argue an extreme side of the argument. I believe that the answer to this issue lies closer to Emerson’s point of view. Although our cultures shape technology, we really have no control over the collaborative effects of cultures. Thus I believe that technology does indeed control us.Both Nye and Emerson believe that economy is important to mankind and that it is an essential part of technology. The writers begin to differ in their opinions when it comes to the way this technology is used and the ways through which it comes to exist. In his poem, Emerson makes it quite clear that he believes that mankind is controlled by technology. He conveys this in his quote: “things are in the saddle, and ride mankind”. Emerson claims that things are predetermined, and that mankind is to be controlled. By Nye’s words, Emerson would be a believer in technological determinism. Nye holds a very strong view against determinism. He believes that technology is a “tool” and not a “force”. He goes on to state that technology will never be a force. It is for this reason that statements such as, “the internet will create peace” are absurd. Although it is true that the Internet is not a force and will never create peace, I think that Nye has failed to understand the objective of the Internet. The Internet’s, means was to spread information across the world. Nye confuses information with understanding. Just because the Internet spreads information, does not entail that it must spread understanding. Understanding comes from the people that are receiving the information, not the medium through which they received it. Thus, Nye’s argument that the Internet is not a force because it does not spread understanding and peace is really not a valid one because this was not the goal of the Internet to start with.

In his essay, Nye mentions the Japanese and their ability to block out the technology of guns due to cultural clashes. Nye uses this example to show how much power culture has on technology. However, Nye later admits that the technology of guns eventually made its way into Japan. In a sense, Nye is contradicting his own argument. He states that a culture can shape technology and choose to reject it all together. His example, however, shows that technology will eventually make its way into a society regardless of the culture. I agree that culture has the power to shape technology. The mistake Nye makes is viewing the world as a single entity with a single culture. From his example, one may see that the culture of a single country cannot dictate technology, at least not for too long. This is because the cultures of countries around that single culture also have some power over technology. So, a single culture can be forced into a technology by the cultures surrounding it. So, although cultures have a definite effect on technology, no single culture has sole control. The control is shared between so many cultures, that it is ultimately lost. If we choose to look at technology like a ship, culture would be the captain of that ship. However, if the ship had hundreds of captains, no one captain is really in control. The control is lost.
In his essay “Does Technology Control Us?” Nye also talks about the possible consequences of technology. He depicts an example of this in computerization. Computerization was attempted by many companies in an effort to save money by making the system more efficient. However, computerization actually caused some companies to lose profit, when it was “sculpted” to increase profit. This again goes against Nye’s argument. This example shows that technologies can have unprecedented consequences and this goes to show that we do not control technology to the extent that Nye argues. This may even imply that technology controls us. Nye also makes references to Marcuse and Roszak who state that technology is the “machine of the state” which is used to enslave the people. And that it was the government that was making all the decisions on the route that technology would take. These decisions made by the government would be concealed by “technocracy”. There is, however, no coherent evidence presented to support this extreme statement. This, I think, is another loophole in Nye’s argument.
In conclusion, it can be seen that Nye and Emerson choose to argue opposite ends of the spectrum. Nye chooses to argue that technology is groomed by society and culture, and that its control over humans is limited. Emerson on the other hand, argues that technology and the “law of things” dictate what we do, and that we have little or even no control over our lives. My own view is closer to that of Emerson’s. Although technology is great influenced by cultures, we have no control over cultures as a group. We can thus only exert a very small amount of influence on technology. Sometimes, we may even be controlled by it.


Word Count: 987

















Works cited:

Emerson, Ralph W. Early Poems of Ralph Waldo Emerson. New York, Boston: Thomas Y. Cromwell & Company, 1846. Print.

Nye, David E. Technology Matters Questions to Live With. New York: The MIT, 2007. Print.

Search This Blog

Followers

By 2050, the world will:

"Science is not a process of discovering the ultimate truths of nature, but a social construction that changes over time." Carolyn Merchant. Radical Ecology (Routledge, 1992) pg. 236

"Money, which represents the prose of life, and which is hardly spoken of in parlors without an apology, is, in its effects and laws, as beautiful as roses." Emerson

RATE IT: "Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end. . ." Henry David Thoreau

RATE IT: “Once a new technology rolls over you, if you're not part of the steamroller, you're part of the road.” Stewart Brand