These two articles stand in
opposition to each other but, because of that, are clear counterpoints to each
other’s arguments. Having spent a large part of my life in English departments
hanging out with writers, medievalists, and a wide variety of bibliophiles in
general, I found the Postman article relevant to a degree I wish I didn’t,
especially considering it’s a decade old at this point. The points he presents, specifically saying
that technology will do away with school and that our problems are “social and
moral” problems that technology can’t solve, are not only frustrating but also
familiar. This fear and distrust of technology is pervasive even today.
However, when reading as a counter-point, Reigeluth and Joseph’s article, acts
as a kind of diagnosis for Postman’s problem. While Postman expects technology
to solve a problem that can easily identified as already existing, Reigeluth
and Joseph suggest that the key point to understanding technology is finding
ways to use it that we haven’t even thought of as problematic yet.
Postman begins my using a metaphor that is innately problematic for considering the larger ramifications of technological evolution, his preferences for his car. He says ultimately, that technology has limited his options by discontinuing the use of older technology. However, living a decade in the future, we can see where technology has also lived to answer Postman’s own problem. While the desire for newer technology may eliminate some older technologies, it has also created new ways to search and find your older technologies that are being produced less. In other words, Postman may say that you can’t buy a record anymore but (in addition to the record store down the street from me) a quick Google search shows otherwise. Again, if Postman is disappointed he has less options easily available to him, he now has more options in how to find his own solution for his own unique need. The problems being solved may not appear to be problematic to him because he is focusing on a problem particular to himself.
In addition to this, technology is helping to support a vast community of those who are returning to hand-crafted objects. Websites like Etsy allow for people all around the world to sell their products, whether they’re handmade, vintage, or some re-purposed combination of both. More important though that the commodities and products we can find online are the people themselves. Online geek communities allow for people who might be embarrassed of their interests to connect with others across the world who care about the same things they do. So, arguments that criticize the desire or necessity for technology often feel short-sighted, in the way that Reigeluth and Joseph describe they feel as though they can’t see out of their own paradigm. It’s not just that people have a wealth of quickly available resources it’s that we become each other’s resources.
No matter how amazing a computer is, we all know that it has yet to reach comparability to the human brain. However, when computers are used to crowdsource, to combine the efforts of hundreds, thousands, or maybe millions of people, we have the ability to think beyond what are the problems we are inventing solutions for. Instead, we can foster a sense of discovery for the sake of discovery, which is priceless.
Postman begins my using a metaphor that is innately problematic for considering the larger ramifications of technological evolution, his preferences for his car. He says ultimately, that technology has limited his options by discontinuing the use of older technology. However, living a decade in the future, we can see where technology has also lived to answer Postman’s own problem. While the desire for newer technology may eliminate some older technologies, it has also created new ways to search and find your older technologies that are being produced less. In other words, Postman may say that you can’t buy a record anymore but (in addition to the record store down the street from me) a quick Google search shows otherwise. Again, if Postman is disappointed he has less options easily available to him, he now has more options in how to find his own solution for his own unique need. The problems being solved may not appear to be problematic to him because he is focusing on a problem particular to himself.
In addition to this, technology is helping to support a vast community of those who are returning to hand-crafted objects. Websites like Etsy allow for people all around the world to sell their products, whether they’re handmade, vintage, or some re-purposed combination of both. More important though that the commodities and products we can find online are the people themselves. Online geek communities allow for people who might be embarrassed of their interests to connect with others across the world who care about the same things they do. So, arguments that criticize the desire or necessity for technology often feel short-sighted, in the way that Reigeluth and Joseph describe they feel as though they can’t see out of their own paradigm. It’s not just that people have a wealth of quickly available resources it’s that we become each other’s resources.
No matter how amazing a computer is, we all know that it has yet to reach comparability to the human brain. However, when computers are used to crowdsource, to combine the efforts of hundreds, thousands, or maybe millions of people, we have the ability to think beyond what are the problems we are inventing solutions for. Instead, we can foster a sense of discovery for the sake of discovery, which is priceless.
