In this week's reading from Kline & Pinch, there is a deep discussion on
the impact of social groups on a certain technology. In this particular case,
the topic was the automobile. Farmers protested cars and went to extreme
measures to deter the technology (car) from penetrating their world. As I began
to think about something to write about in this blog, I wanted to find
something that shows that is both historical in nature but also shows that
protest or fear of technology tends to be misconstrued and mismanaged. The
topic that I found to be most similar was the Luddites and their fear of the
rise of "the machine".
I found it to be particularly similar because when you look back on both
situations, the protests were against some of the biggest upcoming technologies
and still have some sort of reign today. In other words, they were protesting
some of the most important technologies in our history. In an article on
Luddites released by the Smithsonian, you can see that we historically have
protests on the “newest technology”.
This brings me to my point. As irrational as it sounds, I believe there will
always be a share of protestors because with any technology there is fear. I
also believe that this type of fear is a way of self-regulation and a way for
our culture to push technology in the right direction. In many ways, it is
essential for protestors to be around because it will always raise a question.
One modern example I can think of is the use of drones. As with cars, people
feel that this type of technology can alter our cultural, daily life. People
fear privacy issues as well as issues with physical air space. This type of
protest or question that is raised allows us as a culture to reflect on what
type of impact it can have. The car had obvious technological benefits, as well
as the drone, but people still have a fear. Historically, we have this tendency
and historically we tend to push a technology in a reasonable, usable manner.
Farmers were forces to adapt, and I believe those “modern luddites” will adapt
to drones once they hit the market.
My question to everyone is, do you believe we need those people who stand
against technology in order to further its capabilities or uses? Is this just a
historical trend?
I think it is definitely necessary to have people who stand against technology in order to further its capability. While I acknowledge that the Luddites were a bit extreme they played a purpose in the development of the technology. Those who protest against a technology understand its power and just want to make sure it is not abused. Like you commented about drones, the Utopian idea of drones are great they keep our soldiers safe without sacrificing our national security. They also have ulterior aspects such as surveillance and a disconnect with the severity of the missions they accomplish, that make them highly controversial. Without the protesters we would not give as much thought as to how humanity could be negatively affected by them. I think it is important to consider how humanity as a whole changes with the introduction of a new technology, which is exactly what the anti-automobile, and Luddites were doing. (just with a harsh method)
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you, Keith. This could be comparing two extremes when you consider the luddites and farmers (against cars). But as you said, it is necessary protest. You could probably argue that protestors may be looking further into the situation and being amplified because of extreme actions. Either way, there is some sort of benefit that comes from protestors and history has proven that.
DeleteI think we need more people who are willing to work and flow together in this technology-growing world. I don't know how necessary it is for someone to be completely against technology and try to work around it because it's not going to go away and it will never go away. It is all around us and it is going to continue to grow more. We might as well figure out of a way to work well with it. Although new technology may not always thrive, it is still going to be forever present. However, there can be negative consequences to technology and how far it will go in our society. I think people need to be more aware of how technology controls us and our every day lives. People need to realize the dependence we have on technology and to realize how much we take it for granted. Some may not even realize that the toaster we use in the morning is technically a form of technology. The electronic field of technology is definitely flourishing and this is the field that I think our generation devotes most time to which can be a scary thought. A lot of us can relate to being a part of these sites, but how many more social media sites can be invented?!
ReplyDeleteI like your input here because it actually touches upon another one of my posts on here. I think at some point we do hit a limit and I believe social media may be coming close. I also like that you incorporate something like the toaster. Something so simple in our eyes, yet it is something that is 100% a technology. It is funny though that we don't really have people fighting over toasters and the impact it will have on other breakfast foods.
Delete