Jan 10 Assignment:
1) Please read the following book introduction (only the intro):
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=WWztFfsA-QEC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=technological+determinism+culture+and+technology&ots=aEinLIWfjP&sig=OJSc-2GfgoA5Ee8KqUT31SLGHkw#v=onepage&q=technological%20determinism%20culture%20and%20technology&f=false
2) Think about the article and what type of international situation it is describing in regards to media.
3) Please post your thoughts below. You may want to discuss your perspective on technological determinism. Are you a "hard" determinist or a "optimist?" How does technology affect communications (or vice versa)? What are the consequences of the technology we employ?
I found the theory of technological determinism interesting. Perhaps before looking at these examples closely I would have sided with the idea that technology by itself in fact does cause social and cultural change in a rather predictable manner. After a closer examination though, I feel that technology still plays an integral role in our future but as the introduction states to think it is the only ingredient in societal change would be ignorant to ignore people's own freedom of choice and other key factors that in turn determine history. For me personally I believe I agree mostly with an "optimistic" or soft form of technological determinism.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am in a optimist. After reading the introduction, I see how both sides have a good argument. However, I think the most substantial evidence is the fact that "no technology, no matter how ingenious and powerful, ever has initiated an action not preprogrammed by human beings." This leads to reason that humans are in control of technological advancement. They see the effects but continue to develop and utilize technology. Human beings want to progress and, it is that human desire that is fueling technological advancement.
ReplyDeleteTechnology has had a huge effect on communication in every aspect. It has shaped how we communicate, to whom we communicate, how fast we communicate, and everything else. I think technology has been the driver in communication transformation.
Technology creating change could be seen as positive or negative. Someone could say that the internet has caused all sorts of negative consequences such as cyber bullying, increased gambling, created easier access to pornography, illegal downloading, and much more. Or you could look at the all the positive consequences of technology such as faster communication, more efficient business practices, creating opportunities to learn, or even spreading the gospel. All technology has been a two-edged sword in some way or another, but that is what fuels the progression. The flaws in technology make room for more technological advancements, so people can continually satisfy their innate desire to evolve. In that regard, I think technology advancement is made a necessity by human nature, and therefore will always continue.
I thought technological determinism was an interesting idea. It made sense that it took hold in the United States. As Americans, we are always interested in moving forward and finding the best technology available. I agree with the optimist view on the subject because technology can definitely cause social change, but it is subject to the actions of humans as independent beings.
ReplyDeleteTechnology has a large effect on communications because it changes the ways we communicate. An example of this is text messages. Phone calls and face to face used to be main forms of communication. When text messages were introduced, they were a new form of technology which eventually changed the way we communicate.
In the world today, technology advances faster than we can even imagine. While would be nice to fully understand the effects technology has on the world, it is very difficult to do so. With that said, I find it hard to identify with the "hard" determinist point of view. I believe that society must adapt to each substantial invention but that the agency is still in the hands of the people. New technology typically creates new opportunities for good and. The new technology may present the option for an alternative future, but does not dictate the events that actually take place. In the end, individuals decide how they will act and are responsible for the consequences that follow.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very fascinating concept about the evolution of technology and history. I'm feeling like I fall into a medium category of belief about technology determinism. I do think that technological advances have had a huge affect on the events of society, however, I also think that many of the outcomes we have experienced in history are also affected by social evolutions in our culture. Yes, the cotton gin must have been a factor in facilitating the continuance of slavery, but so were the mindsets and cultural norms of the people during that time. I guess what I'm saying is that technology definitely introduces a new social advancement, but then we, as humans, are the ending factor when it comes to how that technology becomes integrated. Texting didn't force a decline in communication skills, the human tendency of lazy or constant business did.
ReplyDeleteI think that the main point of the article centers on how technology affects society, and if technology itself drives people to change. In regards to international situations, I think that the argument made in the article could be applied to countries that are highly developed, and those that aren’t, and discerning who is better off and who will be better off ultimately.
ReplyDeleteI myself fall in between hard determinist and an optimist. I feel that people in developed societies are addicted to their technology. We will continue to be more reliant on technology as it improves. I do not however think that it takes away our agency at this time. We will always have the opportunity to participate in or purchase technology or the opportunity to abstain. We are at a point right now though where new technology has forced us to adapt and buy in to new technology. The United States has adopted a policy where you need a credit card to check in to a hotel, you need a computer to gain an education, and you need a cell phone to combat increasingly shrinking land lines. To be competitive in most job markets, you not only need the internet, but you need to master it.
Technology has lowered channel richness in highly developed countries across the board. It also has made things instant and has spread information in ways we’ve never seen before.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI used to think of myself as an optimist. However, after reading this article introduction, I found myself leaning more towards "soft" determinism. Where
ReplyDeletehard" technological determinism leans in the idea that the power to affect change is attributed to technology itself, they believe that the advancing of technology will only lead to dependence and an "inescapable necessity." These hard determinists believe that technology is an independent entity, "a virtually autonomous agent of change." Yet what piece of technology has been programmed by itself? None, it has all been done at the hands of human intelligence. However, I do agree with the fact that once a new technological innovation has been created, it is hard to move backwards in time. Every technological advance we have made leads us to a greater one. But it is not the technology itself that is advancing, but the humans and generations who are creating them. So in some ways i do believe that new technologies help lead to other innovations, but they are made by the people not the computers.
Technology has definitely had an effect on the way our society is run, and it will only keep advancing. However, as many see it as a toxin and something infesting the minds of our youth, there are so many benefits. It may be affecting the ways the younger generations learn, but these new technologies are improving the way information is sent and received around the world.
While reading the article, I found myself thinking that there was no way to escape the changes technology has made. The book's introduction gave numerous examples of technological advances that helped change the course of history. But as I was about to write this comment, I thought a little bit more about what was also said in the text that people have their own free will. I like to think that we all have that free will and that technology does not have complete control over the future. However, it does impact it. I guess I am part determinist and optimist.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the effect that technology has on communication today, I feel it is good and bad. Instead of writing letters and speaking face to face as people did a hundred years ago, we text, tweet, email, and instant message each other. The richness of the communications channels we use is being lost from what it once was. While these technologies are great in allowing us to communicate quicker and from farther away, even internationally, those who choose to only use these modes of communication may be losing their ability to develop rich communication skills.
I would say that I am an optimist because I do believe that technology can change society, however, we as humans choose to make the changes. While I currently cannot think of any specific technological inventions, I am sure there are some that society has not accepted because they didn't like it. I do think that as humans we are too reliant on our technology, but we can function without it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that technology has affected communication in both positive and negative ways. Because of the advancements in technology individuals can stay in contact easier and messages can be sent quickly. No matter where in the world people are, individuals can quickly communicate. With this comes some consequences though. Because of the availability of technological information, people are constantly on their devices and lose some personal communication skills. Also, messages and information can be incorrectly transmitted because it is getting quickly passed along and there is not also a credible source because anyone can create news. Overall though I do believe the increase of technology has been good for the world and will continue to improve over time.
I think this idea is displayed perfectly in western society, especially in the United States. Technology has influenced every aspect of how we function individually and in groups of people. I think there are definitely extreme positives and negatives to these changes. We watched at TEDTalk in one of my classes today where the speaker was discussing her thoughts on a topic similar to this and she said something that I've been thinking about today. She mentioned that has a society, we've become so accustomed to technological connections with the people around us that we see being alone as a problem that needs to be solved. I don't think it comes as any surprise that technology can definitely help influence society for good, but if it is used in excess the effects can be less than desirable. I think technology can still be improved, but there is the fear that people are beginning to become completely reliant on technology to function.
ReplyDeleteAs technology advances at an ever-increasing rate so does societies reliance on it. I agree with the fact that technological advancements have helped shape the course of history but that’s not to say that the revolution would not have taken place without Gutenburg’s printing press or the Civil War wouldn’t have happened without Eli Whitney’s cotton gin. I disagree with the argument that technology advances itself. I don’t think that technology has effects on society that are innate, technology is the result of people socially conditioned to create “the next best thing”. Technology doesn’t develop, adapt, or multiply without human influence.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to see how technology has influenced every aspect of our lives. We’re posting our homework on a blog for heaven’s sake! We’re able to communicate faster and with more convenience than ever before. Because of the international reliance on all facets of media the world has become a much “smaller” or more connected place. But just like everything else in life I think the advancement in media can be a double-edged sword. While businesses work more efficiently, and communication is more convenient it has also caused negative issues that are unique to our generation.
I found the reading thought-provoking, and was more toward the "hard" end of the spectrum. The author gives the Gutenberg press, the atomic bomb and computers as examples that support technological determinism. I think these all do a successful job at supporting the idea that technology is something that you cannot escape. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing can be debated, but the fact that even if I left all my belongings tomorrow and went out to live the rest of my life in the woods alone away from modern computers and technology it would not take away the effects that these have already had on my life. Humans want to grow and progress and will continue to innovate new ideas to help us with our everyday tasks. Sometimes, our ideas are so brilliant and efficient that they change the world radically whether that is our wish or not.
ReplyDeleteJennifer Riggs
Reading about technological determinism was really quite interesting. I really thought about whether I was on the hard or soft end of the spectrum. I think that I am sitting on the border between the two. I feel as though people do create technology with the power to create change, but I don't think it will lead to an inescapable necessity. The freedom of choice for the soft side is what will keep the hard side from completely succeeding to completely change the world. I found it interesting though that certain inventions led to major events in history. These inventions led to new ideas and opportunities. I believe that they created these opportunities, but that the effects of these inventions were still chosen by the people. The invention of the compass didn't inherently make Christopher Columbus want to explore, but it did make it much easier for him to do, and maybe that is why he set sail.
ReplyDeleteTechnology greatly affects the way that we communicate. As it said in the second paragraph of the introduction, even those who do not regularly use technology have to accommodate it at some point. Technology is now integrated into most everything that we do. And most everything that we do is communicate with someone or something. In fact we communicate with technology itself.
The consequences of technology can be good or bad, depending on what point of view one is taking. For example, the contraceptive pill. For someone who does not wish to get pregnant, that is a great invention. However, for somebody who does, then it is not the most important thing in life. In fact, some may argue that it is a detrimental thing. Technology is always evolving and always has some type of ambiguity to it. There will always be the good and the bad to each side.
Something that stood out to me as I read this passage was when this book was written-1994. This book was written at a time when one of the greatest technological tools in the world’s history was just in its infancy. I remember first using the internet in school in 1995 when I was in the third grade, but now kids enter elementary school with an understanding of the internet. I am sure the internet was around when this book was written but it wasn’t as dominate in culture as it was later in the decade or in the 2000’s. Without this perspective, it is interesting to see how the internet mirrors the way that other technologies have influenced the world. You can see that the internet has changed how society works today. It started off as a place to gain information and send e-mails, to a place where commerce could be done, to a place where you can connect with anyone in the world, to a place where you can greatly multi-task by looking up bank account information or get movie tickets from the internet on a cellular phone. People today are much more capable of reaching their needs and desires due to the advances of this medium.
ReplyDeleteI think I tend to look at technology as an optimist and that it can change a society in a positive way. It seems to me that some may have a negative view of technological advances or blame technology for societal problems. The text questioned, “How can we reasonably think of this abstract, disembodied, quasi-metaphysical entity, or of one of its artificial stand-ins, as the initiator of actions capable of controlling human destiny?” I think what needs to be studied is what these technologies tell us about the societies that use them. Maybe the reason that the internet became so popular was due to its ability to get things quickly. This may be due to other past technological advances that made things like fast-food so popular. Ideologies so popular today such as getting things when you want it and doing things how you want it have made the technologies of today so popular. This reflects more on the culture than it does on the technologies themselves.
I thought that both arguments were interesting, but I think that I side more with the determinist perspective. Technology will advance as we discover it and will build upon the technology that came before it. Technology will progress whether or not we as humans are necessarily ready for it. Because we embrace new technology so readily in our Western culture, we become shaped by the flow of new technology. It not only shapes our behavior, but our communication patterns and our society. For example, in our society I don't have the freedom to simply decide to stop using my cell phone or email. It is not acceptable socially and it is impossible to be successful without utilizing technology. With the advent of email and texts, we are expected to respond to messages much more quickly, and we are also able to communicate with people around the world instantly and communicate with people we have never met face to face.
ReplyDeleteTechnology is the agent of progression. As we continue to develop new technologies our lives will change to adapt to whats new and suddenly necessary. Take for example the smart phone which now seems to be in every pocket causing a change not only on marketing, business, etc but also causing a cultural phenomena where us "millennials" have the desire and need to always be connected. However this does not mean it has a life of its own, it only lives because we breath that life into it. There is still someone behind the machine pulling the strings or typing the code that makes these machines tick. I believe that as we develop more machines, they will not be limiting our alternatives but rather expanding it to new unforeseen horizons.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this introduction I have realized I can relate more to an optimist perspective or to the soft determinist perspective. I do believe that technology absolutely shapes our culture and guides our evolution but I also believe we have a choice to make certain decisions with regards to the outcome of any situation. I believe as new technology comes around we adjust ourselves to fit that technology in that most people do not let it rule them, they instead control the technology. This may not seem like the case when you look at so many people who cannot go even a minute without checking their smart phone, however this is the stance on technology that I wish to take. While communication now is so much different than it was even ten years ago, I choose to see the good in this evolution, that it has made communicating long distance so much easier and has expanded our knowledge as we progress. Change and progress is inevitable in our futures and I believe we can control how it affects the way we live.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI would call myself an optimist, and a soft determinist. I understand technology is changing the world and created inventions that have cause negative results. However, it has brought positive results such as the computer. The invention of the computer has made possible that people all over the world can connect, and have a wider knowledge of what it is out there. If I want to know something I go to Google, and learn about it.However, I believe technology has decreased people's personal interactions. Today human beings send text messages or emails, they do not call as much as they text. Moreover,we depend on technology to achieve or daily tasks. I have been in rooms full of people just texting or checking their cellphones and not talking to each other.
ReplyDeleteAs an optimistic I want to believe in a brighter future of imaginable advances in technology, but as a
soft determinist I am afraid that with the great positive results of this advances, we become a technologized humans with limited options in a world humans understand more technology than each other.
Technology improves and inhibits communication. Technology improves mass communication. Information, such as news, is spread faster than ever before. According to my grandparents, technology inhibits close communication. They believe it's a shame we spend so much time texting, but can't talk on the phone. My grandparents would argue that this technology is an inescapable necessity and could be viewed as hard determinist.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am more of an optimist. Yes, some of the younger generation lack the typical people skills, but they are given better at communicating in other ways, such as email and texting. In addition, they are able to communicate with more people from around the world. This technology brings the world together, but also drives it apart. Information can be shared easier and easier, but the North-South Divide grows larger and larger. However, the negative side effects definitely do not outweigh the positives and can never replace the human mind. Technology does change the way we communicate, but people are the ones who make decisions, thus changing history.
After reading the introduction I wanted to read more!
ReplyDeleteNot sure what type of international situation the introduction is describing in regards to media. Not even sure what that question is asking us. The introduction mainly spoke on how the advancement of technology has caused something of historical proportions. If we're looking at how technology has affected how we interact with media as a whole, than it brings to mind what Clark Callahan shared with us in class, Garbage Imperialism. Westernizing the world is an international situation best brought upon by media.
I would have to say I'm an optimist. Sure new technology has empowered dictators to repress their people, has informed the masses about the rich and turned useless information into news, has warped reality, and brought on hundreds if not thousands of psychological illnesses, addiction, and so forth. But it has all been controlled by humans. Humans have invented it, developed it, programmed it, given it a name, branded it, and put it on shelves or in our homes, schools, and governments for us to enjoy. It opens doors that were closed when it comes to communication. It sometimes opens doors that should remain close, but breaks down others that should have been broken down long ago. The consequences can be positive and negative. Its a tool, you can use a hammer to create or destroy. It comes down to this fact. "no technology, no matter how ingenious and powerful, ever has initiated an action not preprogrammed by human beings."
The introduction had impeccable imagery regarding the effects technology has played in America's society. From inventions like the computer, atomic weapons and contraceptive pills, our lives have been changed dramatically by the concept of technology. I used to pride myself in not being too heavily dependent upon technology (i.e. not habitually checking Facebook, reading hardcopy books, rarely using my cell phone as a communications device, etc.), however, after reading this article, it is very apparent that my life has been changed whether I like to admit it or not. I am heavily dependent on these new technological devices because that is the way Americans communicate. If I choose not to participate, I will be left behind or excluded. Everywhere we go, the environment (store, supermarket, etc) has accommodated for technology.
ReplyDeleteI love how Marx and Smith incorporated narratives that have changed the course of living such as Gutenberg aiding the Reformation by making the Bible accessible to many or Eli Whitney's cotton gin invention, creating an environment suitable for the Civil War. It is amazing to see worldwide events that have occurred throughout history and track the modernized inventions book-casing those events. Many times, as Marx and Smith point out, the event is a consequence of changing the culture's narrative.
Technology has become the agent for change. Just in my lifetime, technology has changed tremendously. I can remember when cell phones first came out, and I often wonder what technology will be like when my kids are college-aged. What new invention will take hold, or how we will communicate. I am an optimist. I do feel that technology can rule your life if you let it. Your smart phone can become the center of your existence and the only way you communicate if you let it. But it is the individual's choice of how he/she uses it in their lives, and how much of a role technology plays. I am excited about communication. Yes, some say that texting, emailing, and social media has lowered our social skills, but it has also opened up a whole new world. We are now about to learn and see the news worldwide. We are exposed to other cultures, not just the ones we live in. We are able to communicate with others on the other side of the globe, and keep in touch instantly. If the human race chooses, technology can be used for good. It is those that use it to oppress people or use it as the only form of communication that shed bad light on to these new technologies and discoveries that are happening all the time. Technology will progress, it is what we do with the technology that matters.
ReplyDeleteA quote from the book introduction that really resonated with me and seems to make a lot of sense is as follows: "...advancing technology has a steadily growing, well-nigh irresistible power to determine the course of events." Based on my acceptance of this statement, I would classify myself as a "hard" determinist. I think that the impact of technology on the development of our world and society is undeniable, unbelievable, and inescapable. An example of this could be the way technological advances have changed basic media outlets, such as the newspaper or magazine. Printed reading materials used to be very relevant and popular, but with continuous improvements in technology, a lot of these sources have been forced to only release content online because the old-fashioned way is no longer profitable. As a consequence of technology, the way businesses operate and the manner in which we receive our information has been completely altered. Our lives get busier and busier, and I would argue that these technological advances encourage and reflect a more fast-paced lifestyle by making information more readily available, instantly, and all over the globe.
ReplyDeleteThis article's description of a world where technology advances to unbelievable highs, but "calls for no more comment than the human penchant for breathing" adequately describes our society. Technological innovations are surrounding us, but we have an attitude of entitlement toward them that is disturbing to me. This attitude reminds me of a youtube clip called "Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy" where the comedian describes how we fly on planes and don't think twice about it, even though we're subjecting ourselves to a technology that puts our chair in the air and takes us somewhere at insane speeds. Things like this make me want to call myself a hard determinist because it seems like we're simply allowing technology to rule our lives, but there is an optimism inside of me that's bigger than that feeling, especially in regards to media. Look at the communication tools of the twenty-first century: facebook, instagram, twitter, face time. Now, look at what we've done with them. We've connected with people around the world and shared ideas. Revolutions have happened in places that needed change. People in Asia are loosening up because of Gangnam style. These are all good things. Yes, advancing communication technology is a trade off of developing certain social skills on our own, I believe we have enough intelligent, self-motivating people in the world that will only use it if it benefits them. While this generation will have to consciously engage in face-to-face communication, I don't think the issue is to the point that we need to worry technology is running our lives and taking advantage of us. Like the reading said, "No technology, no matter how ingenious and powerful, ever has initiated an action not preprogrammed by human beings."
ReplyDelete(Lizzy Early)I like to think I'm an optimistic determinist, however I am a realist. Yes, technology is completely changing how we live out lives. We used to have to drive around with a horse and buggy, but now we can just sit in a car that will drive itself and there are countless other examples. We are in control of the social changes we make, but it only takes a select few to cause a lot of problems. Obviously a lot of people think there is a strong connection to what happened in Sandy Hook to the shooters video gaming. It's a video game. It seems like it should be harmless, but maybe not. It only took that technology having a bad effect on ONE person to cause a lot of death and heartache. Now, I understand there was a lot more going on with this kid than just gaming too much, but no one can know how much of it may have been provoked by the violent video games.
ReplyDeleteReading in the book about how even people who aren't tech savvy need to learn basic skills about computers to function in today's world made me laugh. My father has had a phone for about 10 years for work, but he still doesn't really know how to do anything but answer, check his voice mail, and dial. He carries around a little index card in his pocket with my mother's, mine, and my brother's phone numbers on it. He doesn't know how to make contacts or pull up his contacts after I forcibly put them in for him. And don't get me started about him and a computer, once I tried to explain to him how to use iTunes... I said "You double click this icon right here that say's iTunes" then he said "Wait, wait, what do you mean a 'double click'?"
This introduction articulates an argument and describes different views that society holds of technology. I think the topics discussed are common thoughts, just put into clear, concise words. After reading the article twice I definitely felt that I lean towards the view of the optimist. It is an interesting thought that hard determinists hold that, "In the hard determinists' vision of the future, we will have technologized our ways to the point where, for better or worse, our technologies permit few alternatives to their inherent dictates." As the introduction later points out, and as is obvious to me, humans create technology. While the invention of, say, a computer, makes that technology a vital part of our lives that we may never again function without, it does not then control our lives. Technologies don't create more technologies. They may lead to a human being advancing the technology, but they cannot dictate the course of our lives. We have the creativity and brains to decide how technology effects us. Technology definitely affects communications as well. Because he have the internet, satellite, etc., we are able to increase communication throughout the globe. But the desire for better communication in turn leads to the invention of even higher quality and new technologies. It is not a one-way street. Communication affects technology and technology affects communication. While technology is an inevitable part of our lives and futures that we don't live without, it does not dictate future inventions, even if it does impact them.
ReplyDeleteNothing can ever lead to an action being inescapable. Part of being human is making choices. In this regard I believe that I am more of an "optimist" or a "soft determinist." Technology merely opens the door for more opportunities and more choices. Now if you want to get in contact with an old friend there are more options available. Computers are a good example of how new technology provides more choices. You can do things varying from family history work to gambling. This technology did not make it so we have no choice but to do either of those; rather, it made it possible for people to make choices they were already inclined to make. There are just more options on how to act on those choices.
ReplyDeleteIn a way there are elements of "hard determinism" in the way I think. I see how technology would make it seem as though you have to learn how to use a computer, social media, or other tools for communication. Do we really have to? No. Is it impractical not to go along with some of the new technological advances. Yes, but nothing says that you have to. Cars are generally accepted as a the mode of transportation to get to work but many people still bike if they want to. The key is human choice. This isn't saying that the technological choices of others won't have an effect on us or limit us. That is not limited to just technology though.
In a large way our desire for human connection and communication has affected technology. If people did not want to communicate quickly things like the telephone, email, and social media would not have been invented. In reverse, technology has made people realize a desire to communicate. I would not be nearly as interested in my old friends from high school if Facebook had not made that information readily accessible. New technology also effects how we communicate. I would prefer to talk on the phone however many of the people I communicate would much rather text. I've changed the way I communicate because this technology is available and I am sure that other technologies cause this sort of change in behavior in other people. This is not necessarily a bad thing. It is just different. There is no denying that technology has made communication faster, but it is hard to tell if it is having a negative effect. I've seen it go both ways. It all comes down to choice and the specific person involved.
My main criticism of technological determinism lies in the tendency to make technological advancements a scapegoat. Technology does not in and of itself cause behavior. It merely enables behavior that stems from pre-existing attitudes. For example, one criticism of smartphones is that they have "ruined education and the traditional classroom" because students use them to text, go on Facebook, etc. in the classroom. However, this behavior is not caused by smartphones, they merely enable them. The cause of the behavior is a pre-existing attitude. The same principle applies to the examples in the text (the sexual revolution, civil war, etc.). The behavior did not spring into existence because of technology; technology enabled -- and in some cases accelerated -- pre-existing behaviors and behaviors that stemmed from pre-existing attitudes. However, I do think that a consequence of advancing technologies is our increasing dependence on them. In this regard, our behavior does become controlled by our societal dependence on technology. For example, the traffic light is a technological advancement that initially made life better and more organized. Now, it is a technology that our society cannot function without. Because of these simultaneously existing realities, my personal opinion lies in the realm of soft determinism.
ReplyDeleteThis was an interesting and intricate introduction. The ideas of determinism are those I've never really heard of or considered much. I can see both an optimistic determinist's point and a hard determinist's point of view. On the one hand, respectively, technology is helping to move our world forward in progression. On the other hand, different sins and deterrents are also produced or made available because of our infatuation with technology. I mostly agree with the optimistic point of view though. It always feels better to be optimistic anyways. There have been so many advances in the world which were only possible through the advances of technology. Mass communication is only really possible through technology (unless you want to wait for the Pony Express to get to your house) and the world is more informed because of it. I'm glad the author brought up the Gutenberg press because that was a revolutionary breakthrough that helped the spread of Christianity. I feel like technology has helped the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to be able to come forth, and the church continues to use technology today.
ReplyDeleteWith the rise of technology, we have subjected ourselves to technology and its advancements. Whenever the new generation of a phone, computer or television is released, we, as consumers, need to own it. Whenever a new software update is available, we need to download it. This consumption has subjected us to the will of technology. This perspective in mind, a hard technological deterministic world is not difficult to believe. The reading states a hard deterministic world can only exist if technology used agency to influence our world, which is not possible because man builds them. I would argue that this is not necessary. When humans build technology they do not know what the outcome will be on society. Naturally, as the technology evolves, we submit to it our agency and become subjected to it. I am not suggesting we are slaves to technology but I cannot go a few hours without checking my email, social media websites or news. When I traveled this Christmas break, the airports and cities were filled with people glued to technology. This rapid change in our society has drastic consequences. Scientists have found face-to-face communication has decreased since the rise of technology. A consumer’s attention span decreases and they began to expect everything in life must be instantaneous. If it does not offer instant gratification then it is not of value. These consequences are problematic, however, I am optimistic. I believe in due time people will change their ways if they begin to act responsibly. When we take responsibility for our actions, we can fix our social problems.
ReplyDeleteOf the two options given, I have to think I am a hard determinist. Watching the advancement of technology I have seen the idea of necessity trump choice time and again. Take for example the cell phone. You'd be hard pressed to find a simple cell phone without expensive data plans and all the bells and whistles if you wanted one; instead the smart phone has forced all users purchasing new phones to advance to what is the norm instead of what is available. The intro mentioned that technology has a life of its own and as it is introduced to the market it changes and evolves with new features and uses as they are discovered. This is what I believe to be the technology driving innovation and not choice or agency. People see potential uses for technology and to succeed in the market you are demanded to make those potentials realities.
ReplyDeleteConcerning technology and communications, what we do is more or less unaffected (communicating with key publics, representing organizations and distributing information); however, how we do is radically affected. With new technologies and forms of communication we are met with increased responsibility and new skills needed to master and use as communications professionals. What we do stays the same, but how we do it and the level of expertise and incredibly heightened.
Technology has a way of shrinking our world. This can be both good and bad. I personally believe that technology has a way of making the world more difficult ot live in instead of easier. In this way, I am a 'hard determinist'. I believe that the manners and habits of old are disappearing as the younger generations become used to speaking through texts, social media outlets and emails... and little else. Perhaps I am so hard on technology in this aspect because I see these changes in my own life as I have moved from a tiny rural community without internet to an electronic driven existence. I wish I was more comfortable having a conversation face to face instead of resorting to pulling out my phone in an awkward moment.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am an optimist for technology when I see others use it for their benefit. For example, when the campaign, 'I'm a Mormon' came out, I was doubtful. I thought it was trying to communicate on the world's standards instead of the church's by demeaning us to our nickname of 'mormons' and trying to compete with lingerie billboards in time square. Now that I have seen the good that this campaign has brought I have recognized the method behind the madness.
Basically, I just wish we could go back to the 1890s when small business was key and people sat on their porches waving to their neighbors instead of hiding in their basements posting on forums and 'liking' their neighbors activities. Is there a balance between both? I hope so.
This article poses an interesting point regarding technology and the effects it has on a culture’s development. I do support the theory of technological determinism. I think it is inevitable that some amount of our future, be it war or cultural revolution, will be determined by technology. I tend to look at technology optimistically but can understand where the hard determinist stands. There are obvious benefits and disadvantages to technology. It is difficult to hypothesize what the future might hold when linking our understanding of technology and the historical affects it has had, with studies of sociology or psychology. Any first-world country so attune to technology and its advances can’t help but think that it will only continue on this path. Will wars be fought between firewalls and computer bugs? What would happen if something like Y2K actually crashed every piece of technology we so willingly submit ourselves to?
ReplyDeleteWe “millenials” try and understand what it might have been like to have forms of communication that do not require technology. I often hear how this generation, and every one after it, will have communication/social handicaps because of the amount of technology we are subjected to/we subject ourselves to and therefore will never know the art of true communication. The idea that we have lost this illusive “art of communication” is only sustained by the nature of this assignment.
I think it would be more interesting to hear the thoughts and conclusions of someone who may have once lived without any form of technology; long enough to have an opinion about his/her perspective on life. Then take that person and allow them to live where technology is more prevalent. After 5 years or so, find out what their thoughts are about the consequences of technology. This book was published as the internet was being introduced, before cell phones became so mainstream it seems silly not to have one (let alone one with internet capabilities). The validity of this book is a testament to its title.
Okay so I'm late. But I just wanted you to know I read it. :)
ReplyDeleteI would have to say I'm by far an optimist. Even with the many struggles we face with the use of technology. I still find it useful, and overall good. One of the most interesting sections was where he noted all the technological advances that have been harped on for causing disaster. "The pill produced a sexual revolution" I'd have to say to this. No. I think what has been done most with technological advances in a general greater knowledge. Used for good or bad, but either way I think the knowledge is good.
Technology affects my communication in generally a positive way. I can connect with so many people that I would have otherwise never seen again.
Chandler Anderson
ReplyDeleteTechnology changes the human mind. It alters how we think, how we feel, how we communicate, and how we live. It's nearly impossible to grow up, nowadays, without computer access in your home or at school. Even if you don't want technology to influence your life, it is almost unavoidable. Technology, specifically the printing press has provided people with mass dissemination of information among all countries and cultures. With this mass dissemination of information, people across the world have the opportunity to quickly relay information and communicate in a business or personal aspect at all times of the day. I agree with Smith in his statement that technology is the driving force of this century. I have seen both extremes in regards to technological impact in my own life and in the lives of my peers. I am generally optimistic about the effects technology has on society. It provides me to keep in touch with old friends or people I have met while studying abroad. Technology enhances people's freedom of expression and provides quick and efficient news gathering and reporting.
It is up to us, as media professionals, to shape the way technology impacts the world. We must be sure to use technology for good and influence others to do the same. In the BYU community we should set the standard for the world and use the christ-like attributes we try to adopt, in our communications throughout the world.
I am most definitely an optimist. i am a firm believer in the fact that technology brings forth change and this it is positive. Of course there are exceptions. It is up to us as the users to determine how it will effect us.
ReplyDeleteI know that without technology, my communication skills would be limited. Dont get me wrong, I can communicate in the real world, but technology just expands the possibilities and horizons. Being from overseas, it is amazing to know how well i can still stay connected.
There are of course consequences. I feel the biggest pitfall is relying on it too much. i went without my phone and laptop for two days and couldn't handle it. I feel this could be a rather large consequence of technology - too much dependence.