Technology Under Attack!

Most criticisms of technology are shallow. Technology is not like a natural disaster. In and of itself, it can do nothing to people. Society as a whole and individuals have the ability to decide how much they let technology do to them. Three main things that technology is accused of are declining the quality of education, isolating people from society, and conflicting with popular morals. In each of these situations, technology can be pardoned as much as the handgun that could not pull its own trigger.

It is a teacher's responsibility to teach in a variety of ways. In Mr. Clifford Stoll's essay, On Classrooms, With and Without Computers, he states that it is better for students to learn from the actual outdoors than for them to learn about the outdoors from a computer (263). Is there any reason why students can't learn from real experiences and from the computer? It is actually best for teachers to use a variety of teaching methods. Richard M. Feldar of the Department of Chemical Engineering at North Carolina University seems to think so. In his analysis of teaching posted on the Internet he had this to say.

Students have different learning styles--characteristic strengths and preferences in the ways they take in and process information. Some students tend to focus on facts, data, and algorithms; others are more comfortable with theories and mathematical models. Some respond strongly to visual forms of information, like pictures, diagrams, and schematics; others get more from verbal forms--written and spoken explanations. Some prefer to learn actively and interactively; others function more introspectively and individually.

So we see that Richard M. Feldar agrees that it is the teacher's responsibility to teach students in a variety of ways. This means that if a teacher does not take their class out to nature to learn about nature, it is the teacher's fault and not technology's

In addition, more technologically advanced methods of learning may grab the attention of students when other teaching methods could not. Take, for example, a political comic character's quote from Doonesbury's mock Presidential debate. When asked how he'd improve education in this country, Mr. Duke's response was this.

The first thing I'd do is streamline it. I'd hire one teacher for every subject, give them their own cable channel, and let the kids watch from home. I say let our kids get their education from an institution they actually respect - TV(Trudeau)!

While this exact suggestion might not be a good idea, it illustrates the point that kids are usually more willing to learn from technology.

Computer games have been accused of distorting reality for players (Stoll 265), but after consideration one can see that computer games are only new ways to do old tricks and that how much reality is distorted for the player is directly related to the extent that the individual can be distracted by a game of any kind. Some people just get more engulfed in a game than others. Board games, like Monopoly, can have the same effect of distortion as a computer game. No one ever worried about Monopoly so it's silly to worry about computer games. Computer games are the same games we've had all along, only on a monitor now.

A computer and the Internet, which are probably the spokespeople of technology, can replace a lot of old tools. Email and chats can be used instead of written mail. People can talk to people from long distances over the Internet through microphones much cheaper than by telephone. With a word processing program, students can produce neatly typed assignments that can be saved and modified with much greater ease than a paper typed on a typewriter. Researchers can access the Internet's numerous sites to uncover information that they would previously need a dictionary, encyclopedia, almanac, magazine, newspaper, or thesaurus to find. Microsoft PowerPoint has replaced the traditional overhead projector slide show and made these projector-type presentations much neater to make. No more do presenters need to construct transparencies and fumble to put them on an overhead projector.

Technology may help people avoid being social, but it is their tool and not the cause of their isolation. There have been shy people much longer than there have been computers. Since computers give people something they can do alone, it is easy to blame them for causing people to be shy and keeping them that way. However, in a cause and effect relationship, the cause must be present before the effect. Some may still argue that computers help people avoid being social, but if it's necessary for someone to be social then they will become social whether they have a computer or not. As far as when it is not necessary to be social, the opinions of people who think it is healthy or normal to be social can be ignored since they are no more than opinions.

In some cases, technology may actually train introverts to gradually become more social. If this seems unlikely, it may be a good idea to think about being social in public like participating in a major sporting event or playing in a concert. Athletes and musicians will both practice many hours before they perform in front of an audience. The sharpening of their skills gives them confidence that they will do well and not look foolish in their respective events. When quiet people enter a chat room, they are unseen physically. They can speak out in hopes of receiving their desired reaction. If they succeed in doing this, their confidence increases, which can lead to carefree face-to-face interaction. The quiet people who enter chat rooms don't fear rejection. If they fail to win the crowd, they can always back out without anyone ever knowing who they were and go to another chat room where they can try again. Dr. Steven Shaban, a doctor who treats infertility, agrees that chat rooms can help prepare people to publicly talk when they are hesitant to do so because it makes them uncomfortable. He said, "Overall, yes, I do think that chat rooms help people come out and talk about it, and it might get them out of their living room and into our offices for real professional advice." While he is talking about infertility, this applies to any subject which people are uncomfortable talking about in public. To extremely introverted people, talking about any subject in public can make them uncomfortable.

Technology can also help people who aren't social for other reasons. Some conditions, like cerebral palsy, make the sufferer's speech difficult to understand. Machines now exist that can aid suffers in communicating with a clear voice. Bill Asselstine of Turlock gave his testimonial.

My name is Bill. I use this machine to talk to you. I was born in Turlock. I was born with cerebral palsy. Some people think that because I can't talk, I am retarded. There is nothing wrong with my mind.

There is a distinct difference between advancements in human abilities and "playing God." "Playing God" is impossible. Nature has its way of doing things and human beings have made some similar ways of doing things. The sun is the natural source of light on this planet. While human beings have made artificial lamps for light, they have not constructed a new sun. Different is not always bad. Besides, human beings are natural and their natural brains are what constructed these "unnatural" technological things that receive criticism. This reconciles technology with nature and pronounces all things in existence as natural.

Society is not ready for computer brains, but the reasons society is not ready are dishonest people and imperfect technology, not because the brain should be sacred. According to moral beliefs, the eternal soul is something separate and removed from the human body. If this is so, then clearly any part of the body should be replaceable, including the brain. In Jeremy Rifkin's essay, The Age of Simulation, he discusses downloading human consciousness into a computer and replacing the brain with this computer (291-292). There are a few examples that show why this would not work yet. Imagine the Windows operating system running a person's body. When exception elist error is out of bounds on port 394wz5 and a person's computer brain freezes up for 3 days, they may have trouble functioning. Hackers are feared already for what they can do to an individual's computer. With computer brains, society would see a whole new breed of hackers who put virus bugs into people's ears that would modify their behavior, possibly making them a slave or brainwashing them. The companies that make these computer brains may be very well off in sales of their other products. If they can construct a brain, they can include a program that causes the person to prefer the their products as well.

From all of these things, one conclusion can be made: people are the real culprit. It's okay to make the general statement that everything that goes wrong is one or more person's fault. The misuse and abuse things like guns and drugs have received from people have made these items considered bad. Technology is quickly receiving the same treatment, and the result is the beginning of the familiar shallow criticism.


Written: February 6, 2001