ARTICLE RESPONSES
George E. Brown, Jr.
(1993)
Technology's Dark Side
Main Ideas
In this article Brown talks of a "dark side"
to technology. This dark side refers to the point that as technology
increases so does inequity between the haves and have nots. He states that
those who are benefitting from technology are those who can afford it, and
the market is driven in that direction because the is more money to be made
in paying for technology instead of using more "equitable - and cheaper"
routes. An example he uses for education would be the implentaion
of computers in elementary and secondary schools. A greater benefit
is achieved for the wealthier communities who can afford computers while
poorer communities are having difficulties buying books for the library.
The inequity between the classes grows.
Brown states that " a nation's capacity to provide
food and nutrition, education and literacy, clean water, decent housing,
and basic health care does not correlate with technological sophistication,
great wealth, or operation of market economies." Brown says that little technology
is needed in order to obtain good health and education. The key to
good education lies in the training and dedication of the teachers. This
is one of Brown's ideas for a socially oriented technology plan. This
plan would lessen the control that large companies have over us and reduce
injustice and inequity. Brown states aht "Science and technology can
and must be advanced in concert with the search for more justice in our
society."
Gut Reaction
My gut reaction to this article was not a favorable
one. There are several parts of the article that I disagree with. Brown
gave me the impression that advancements in technology were bad unless everyone
could benefit. It's not technology that is the problem. The problems
he has with technology aren't with the technology but are because of people.
A technology that can reduce infant mortality can't be bad. The
problem lies in a money hungry society. Better prenatal care may be
needed, but a lot of prenatal care can be achieved by the mother and taking
care of herself or from friends and families. As far as computers
are concerned in the schools, it is unfortunate, but don't deny students
the privelege of having computers. Work harder to get computers in
the poorer communities. I grew up without computers in the classroom,
but still managed to an adequated education. Brown says that advanced
technology is not needed to meet our basic needs and makes references of
other countries that are less advanced but still meet the needs of their citizens.
This is true, but then why are so many people fleeing those countries
to come to ours? Brown later talks about us focusing on extremely
destructive weapons and seeing the world as a "chess board" that we
play how we want and that we uplift murderous countries and provide dictatorships
with advanced weaponry. I don't feel we see the world as a chess
board. We don't condone murder, but we are also not world dominators. We
let countries govern their country how they want until they start trying
to pick on us. We give countries supplies becuase they supply with us. We
do not want to get on the bad side of a country. We focus on high-tech weapons
so that we can protect ourselves because other countries are trying to create
the same stuff. We are trying to keep our country free.
I do agree with his comment about a good education
coming from training and dedication. If teachers have good training
and dedication, they can be just as effective without advanced technology.
Questions
1.) If these less technologically advanced countries
are meeting their survival needs, then why do we have an overflow of immigrants?
2.) Brown talks about us letting other countries be
murderers and create weapons of mass destruction, but how are we suppose
to stop them if we did not focus on weaponry?
Back To Top
Neil Postman (1992)
Invisible Technologies
Main Ideas
Postman refers to our society as being a "technolopy"
where technology is itself and end instead of a means to an end. Postman
considers language to be the greatest invisible technology where its agend
is usually hidden from view. Language is so embedded in us that we
don't realize that other languages don't perceive the world as we do. The
biggest example of hidden agendas in language comes in the form of questions.
How a question is percieved can dramatically change the answer. Postman
talks of the zero as being the clearest example of an invisible technology.
It brought about easier thoughts that were mostly inexistent before
its creation. Postman also talks of stats and polling. Postman feels
that the reason we use statistics such as IQ tests is to have numbers to
back up our reasons for accomplishing our agendas. Polling is another way
to do this. It is designed to gather opinions but has several problems. The
first is in the form of the question. Yes and no questions don't gather
an opinion. Also, opinions are processes of thinking and cannot be exactly
gathered by poll questions. Also polling doesn't ask for background
knowledge of the subject being asked about. Postman's fourth problem with
polling is that it shifts power to voters who may not know what their talking
about or are confused on the direction of the question. Candidates start
making decisions that following the polling instead of what they think
is best for the country.
Disquised technologies in education come in the way
of IQ and placement tests, as well as academic courese themselves. Postman
says courses are "technologies for learning," but the reasons for having
a course are sometimes different from what we are thinking they are for. Postman
states that these reasons and the course's origin are kept from us.
Gut Reaction
I agree mostly with Postman. Language is a big
ideological instrument that has different hidden agendas from culture to
culture. What we relate to in our language could be totally different
in another culture. Questions are a big example of this. It's
all in the question and how it's asked. The same question can be asked to
different people of different economic, cultural, or racial status and the
answers can be dramatically different. This could be a major obstacle
in education where you are giving a test and one student looks at the question
and sees what your are trying to ask, and another students sees something
totatlly different.
Agendas are greatly visible in statistics and polling.
Pollsters can get stats to go in the necessary direction by asking certain
questions in the right way. People then see the stats and take them for the
truth, but don't ask how they were obtained. I agree with Postman in
saying that true opinions cannot be located through polling questions.
Questions
1.) Is it possible to create a clear question?
2.) Is it possible to create true and accurate opinion
polls?
Back To Top
Witold Rybczynski
(1983)
Controlling Technology Means Controlling Ourselves
Main Ideas
Rybczynski refers to technology as being a human activity
where inventions stem from previous discoveries and skills. Technology
is a part of culture. Technological invasion doesn't exist. Technology
didn't just spring itself upon us. Evidence of this comes from the
points that there is a lag between creation and application. An invention
isn't immediately thrown into application. There are factors controlling
this such as public acceptance, economic incentives, if the invention fits
into a technical activity that has already been established, and the level
of trust that is given to the technology.
To Rybczynski "technology begins not with the tool, but with the human
imagination, and the acts of imagining, inventing, and using tools and machines
are human acts." If technology is to be controlled its human nature
must be taken into account. Rybczynski relates us to technology by
saying that "different as people and machines are, they exist not in two
different worlds, but at two ends of the same continuum."
Gut Reaction
Rybczynski is right in saying that an invasion of technology
doesn't exist. We create technology, and we controll technology. If we are
getting too technological then we need to control ourselves and stop creating
new technology and work to improve what we have. He is also right in
the aspects that controll a technology's application. Useless technology
may be created, but if it doen't fit into a technical activity of the time
then it won't be accepted. Technological growth runs on supply and demand.
If it's not bought it won't be sold. These aspects apply to the world
of education as well. There has to be a need for a technology in order
for it to be implemented. It also has to be accepted and trusted by
the teachers. No matter how many inventions that occur a chalkboard
or dry erase board and projectors will always be around because they are
trusted.
Questions
1.) Our we strong enough to controll ourselves and not let technology
get out of control?
2.) Is it possible to become too technological?
Back To Top
Robert J. Samuelson
(1992)
Technology in Reverse
Main Ideas
In this articl Samuelson talks about "retarded technologies."These
are " new and expensive ways of doing things that were once done simply and
inexpensively." They are creations of things that don't need to be created
and are wastes. Examples he gives are book-reading computers, video-press releases,
and Apple Computer's Newton, a "personal digital assistant". He also
feels that technology is "misused" because of the reasons that people get
them. Reasons of social status, for play, or just because it's there.
Retarded technologies do away with real thought and are supported by
ego and money.
Gut Reaction
I agree in the most part with Samuelson. There
are many technologies out there today that just support laziness and create
thoughtless drones. As we advance in our technology we become less
active because we sit around watching 500 channels on our big screen satellited
T.V., play video games, talk endless hours on the internet, or other mindless
activities. Of course some inventions, while they make most people lazy are
helpful to others or a great advantage in a desparate situation. This
is where misuse comes in. Sure, cell phones are annoying and people
start talking on them all the time, raking in money for phone companies,
but they're a big help when you're stranded somewhere. Some inventions
may be a lot more expensive than old-fashioned ways, but make things a lot
easier. Apple's Newton may be overpriced but is a lot handier to use.
I would love to have a handheld organizer, but they are too expensive for
me. So I don't use an organizer at all because I don't feel like carrying
around a bulky one all the time. Plus writing on paper can become a
mess. My mom's address book is so messy because of all the address and phone
number changes she has had tom make. Digital organizers, while expensive,
can store a lot of information that is easily accessbile and neater.
Questions
1.) How lazy will we let retarded technology make us?
2.) Is it possible for our society to overlook the appeal of a new technology
that only promotes laziness?