The reading discussed how technology has changed us and brought about problems based on the progress we have made. This section definitely stood out to me the most. Watching the Frontline documentary showed positive and negative outcomes of technological progress and made them more understandable. What all of this shows is that we must begin to focus more on both the positive and negative outcomes to see if certain progress is really worth what it will do it our culture.
The authors of the text define progress, "...In it’s cultural use, [as] not just movement forward, but movement toward something: a goal or endpoint" (Slack and Wise 10). With each technological innovation, we try to achieve an endless amount of goals, but one of the main ones is to achieve what Slack and Wise call "the good life." Have we really achieved this good life with all of the technologies that surrounds us today? Sure, they may look nice and make us feel better about ourselves, but the negative side effects of them should outweigh the positives. In the documentary, we viewed Korean students who were severely addicted to online gaming. It has affected their social skills, their vision, and their hearing. Some students have even died from spending 50 hours or more on the computer. They are referred to as addicts.
Clearly, this is not the good life. In 2012, PLoS One Magazine studied several men and women who were diagnosed with Internet Addiction Disorder. They found that these addicts have the same problems as addicts of cocaine and other drugs. If we try to prevent addictions by making certain drugs illegal or by regulating them, should we not do the same for technology? I would suggest regulating the use of an online gaming system to prevent more deaths or addictions from occurring. That could be a way to progress positively and help end some of the negatives.
In the same section as progression, Slack and Wise discuss evolution. One interesting point they bring up is how various species have evolved differently. They state, "Consequently, evolutionary theory resists the notion that humans are necessarily better or more advanced than other species. We have merely evolved differently" (Slack and Wise 17). Certain areas in our culture have let technology advance so rapidly that they have failed to keep up, specifically in education. By this, I mean that we have not evolved to handle these technologies since we have examples of students in Korea dying from misusing technology. One way to correctly evolve is to properly educate students on how to use technology. An example of this was the I.S. 339 school that was featured in the documentary. The school was on the verge of collapsing until a new principal came in and let the students use technology. With the correct education and use of beneficial websites and programs, the school has turned around. Violence is down, daily attendance is up 90 percent, math scores went up 40 percent, and reading scores improved by 30 percent. This shows that if we evolve correctly, technology can benefit us.
In terms of development, technology separates us. "The progress story thus discriminates among different cultures, promotes a particular version of technological development for those 'less civilized,' and generates problematic dependencies among nations" (Slack and Wise 22). America would be considered more civilized than a country like Iraq due to our creation of drones. In the documentary, American pilots who fly the drones use them to shoot potential threats in Middle Eastern countries. An issue arises when innocent civilians are injured or killed. The problem with this is the pilots have no idea if they kill innocent people. A Huffington Post study found that about three percent of those killed by drones were civilians. While this number is low, it still gets across a message that these lives are meaningless because we are still using drones. It relates to the 'Progress for Whom?' point that the authors conclude the first chapter with. Clearly, this progress benefits the United States. There is no progress for those in the Middle East, and because civilians are being killed by technology that they do not have, it seems as though they are being punished for not developing as quickly as the United States.
Jordan, I really enjoyed what you wrote for your blog response.
ReplyDeleteFrom the CBS article you posted, I found this quote particularly strong: ‘"The majority of people we see with serious Internet addiction are gamers - people who spend long hours in roles in various games that cause them to disregard their obligations," Jones told The Independent. "I have seen people who stopped attending university lectures, failed their degrees or their marriages broke down because they were unable to emotionally connect with anything outside the game."’ When I was in high school, I had a friend who was in Yale as a freshman. He was so addicted to World of Warcraft that he dropped out of college because he wasn’t keeping up with his work. I think this speaks to the problems that having unlimited access to internet gaming can cause. The Korean kid from the documentary couldn’t even hold a conversation with his mother because he wanted to go back to the game as quickly as possible. The camp wasn’t even going to help him; he still wanted to go back to his gaming. I think that parents need to be more involved in moderating the time that their kids can game and surf the internet.
I also agree with you about the negative aspect of technology involving drones. In the documentary, American pilots who fly the drones use them to shoot potential threats in Middle Eastern countries and they don’t have any idea if they killed innocent people while they were working. You’re right in that this progress benefits the United States but it also hurts them. The documentary told us that these pilots still experience PTSD even though they aren’t in danger. It is traumatic experience to kill people, especially innocent people for the ordinary human being. I would agree with you that countries we are attacking like the Middle East are being punished for not developing as quickly as the United States because they cannot protect themselves.
Thanks, Caroline!
DeleteThat's a really interesting point you made about your friend from Yale. I also remember a woman from the documentary that had to quit her job because she was too busy playing the game. I had always heard that one clear sign of addiction is when it affects your daily tasks, so I think putting a limit on how long they can play these games for could prevent decisions like these to be made in the future.
I completely forgot about the PTSD part of the documentary. I think that just goes along with the whole idea of progress. Are we really progressing if there are such negative side effects? I would have hoped that something as serious as PTSD would have been taken into account when making the drone technology, but it seems like it wasn't since drone attacks are still occurring and soldiers are still getting this disorder.
Great post Jordan and I wholeheartedly agree with your idea about using technology correctly. Progress and efficiency have gone hand in hand when it comes to technological advances in the U.S. and while technology could benefit the school systems if used correctly, it could also be used in the Middle East to improve drone functions and capabilities in order to protect innocent civilians. The first thought that comes to mind when thinking about the situation in the Middle East in relation to technology is that technology causes countries with advanced technology to adopt cultural imperialist views due to their superior technology.
ReplyDeleteOne point in your blog that stood out to me was when you stated that, “Certain areas in our culture have let technology advance so rapidly that they have failed to keep up.” This made me think of how this relates to technological determinism. In other words, the pace at which technology is advancing is so rapid that we can’t keep up causing us to fall behind and become subject to technology. Consequently, falling behind and becoming subject to technology causes us to experience major problems with the technology we use as well. For example, because the U.S. army sees the benefits of using drones in the Middle East to search for “threats,” they feel that there is a real need to use the drones due to the benefits of using the drones instead of soldiers. Because the idea exists that we need a product, tech advancement, etc., to get a leg up on the competition (our enemies), we focus on speed and efficiency instead of accuracy.
Using drones is good for the army because they’re able to assign troops and drones to areas which could allow them to perform missions quickly. Also using drones in place of soldiers means that drones can be used in situations that would be dangerous to the average soldier. But of course, on the other hand, the drones are nowhere near perfect because they aren’t good enough to distinguish “threats” from innocent people which is a real problem. Instead of asking whether the progression is positive or negative, I often wonder about the relationship between technology and hierarchal relationships between countries and within societies.
Thanks, Keon!
DeleteI definitely agree with your point that we should be able to use technology to protect more innocent civilians. The reason why I believe that we have not done this yet is because we were probably too worried that one of our enemies would produce this technology first and use it on us. We, most likely, had to be first so we could make the first attacks.
While I do think the idea of drones is a good one, I think more work needs to be done to know just who we are really harming because there is really no way to know for sure how many of the people who were killed from drones were actual threats.
I like your point about the relationship between technology and hierarchical relationships. I think it goes along with the 'Progress for Whom?' part of the reading. Technology can be used to only benefit a certain group of people for a variety of reasons, including the cost of the technology. If people can't afford a new technology or they live in a country where it is not available, they fall behind and would have difficulties finding an alternative to this technology.