Life or Machines?

Loren Eisley, author of The Bird and the Machine, believes in life. Machines evoke less wonder, he says, because they can only change when a human changes it first. But all forms of life, from birds to humans, are unpredictable and therefore have incredibly more power and potential. Birds, like all life forms, yearn to be free and unrestrained by society. They are able to. But, what Eisley argues is the main difference between life and machines, forms of technology like computers and robots have no desire to be free. Because they have no spark. No passion for change and never knowing what will happen to himself next. That excitement for change, which resides in every being, cannot be in computers.

The discovery of the cell changed a generation's way of thinking. Before, when the cell remained unknown, "man, whether he was conceived as possessing a soul or not, moved and jerked about like these tiny puppets. A human being thought of himself in terms of his own tools and implements. He had been fashioned like the puppets he produced and was only a more clever model made by a greater designer" (Eisley 602). Science's effect on this issue completely changed a common thought. When the cell was discovered, it restored a sense of wonder. The fact that scientists didn't know everything about the cell excited them all the more. With a machine, there is little wonder to be found because it is man-made.

So, life or machines? Eisley says life. Many respected others say machines. If you have a wager, leave your response in the comments section.

Outstanding TED Talk

In Aaron Koblin's "Artfully Visualizing Our Humanity", he transforms staggering amounts of data into personalized, human creations. When he sets up his sheep experiment, Koblin sifts through thousands of sheep, and each one is specific to the personality and mood of the artist. His revolutionary technology focuses on community. Technology is full of what Koblin calls "personal contribution", and he varies the contribution levels through his experimentation, surprised by what he sees.

The idea of "personal contribution"- I know I already mentioned this, but it just amazes me how technology can bond us together through a personal Johnny Cash video. People all over the world were able to watch this "living, breathing memorial" for Johnny Cash. This technology was visually stunning, and it showed a humanity that we often don't think of when we think of technology.

"The Interface Is The Message"- At the beginning of his video, he mentioned that our generation is changed by interface. Our communication and the way we interact with one another is completely altered. Dictionary.com gives this definition of interface: "a thing or circumstance that enables separate and sometimes incompatible elements to coordinate effectively." That is truly how digital technology can work with people.

Beautifying data- The way he presented his data humanized it to me. Instead of methodical charts, which seem so computer generated, he presented them in a way that showed rises and falls, spikes and declines in natural flowing lines. In the natural world, people are not without flaws and this was shown through the presentation.

In terms of clarity, Koblin's ideas flowed very well and there wasn't really anything I questioned or wondered about. My biggest question during the video was, "How did you collect all of that data?" I would definitely recommend this video to anyone interested, but especially those who think technology dehumanizes people.

Bridging the Communication Gap

Growing up in an intensely digital age, I know that connecting with other generations is tougher than ever. Since the creation of websites like Twitter and Instagram, words have new connotations and new meanings and in some cases, new words are in the dictionary due to these inventions.

 I was talking to my grandmother the other day, and I was about to say something along the lines of, "Isn't that funny? Hashtag awkward." Luckily, I stopped myself just in time. But after thinking about that for a while, I was puzzled how that particular phrase had made its way into the vocabulary. 

The interesting part about that is this: I don't have a Twitter account. I was actually proud of that fact too, proud of my restraint in not giving in to technology, especially what I considered "dumb" technology. When, in fact, I just did. 

Technology has such a profound effect on this digital generation, and yet, earlier generations do not seem to welcome this new technology. Communicating has become so different, which is why there is tension between the generations. We are used to an instant response, emoticons, and distance between the communicators. We are used to writing 140 characters or less, not thoughtful letters to the editor, which my grandmother told me she and her friends did if they had a complaint.

This change in communication affects all of us, even those unwilling to use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram. If we do not learn to talk to and understand earlier generations, their voices will be lost. Our communication gap must be bridged through interpersonal relationships, which can be strengthened by technology, but can only be formed through love. We need a relationship to work with or without technology, but the key is INDEPENDENCE FROM TECHNOLOGY. 

As people, our mission is to love people well. Love, unlike many people's actions, is not passive. It is easy to like someone from afar, but making a point to get to know someone and loving them anyway is actual love. We show our love for others by communicating with them, and obviously, communicating with them well. 

Technology can either be a detriment to relationships or it can strengthen them; it depends on the user. However, show your love for others by attempting to communicate with them well in whatever way that you must. People deserve to be treated like people, not machines.

Embrace the Technopoly: It's Not a Bad Thing!

Technology can be either an advantage or a major problem. If we completely depend on technology, then we will become a "technopoly". Or so Postman claims at first. However, we kind of already are one. Inventions are technology, and our day-to-day lives involve all kinds of technology, from iPhones to laptops to pencils to books and so on. True, inventions can change the way we think. But it seems so gloomy to immediately assume that those inventions will control or try to harm us. It is worth considering the risks and possible societal differences this invention will create. However, keep an open mind. "As for change brought on by technology, this native optimism is exploited by entrepreneurs, who work hard to infuse the population with a unity of improbable hope, for they know it is economically unwise to reveal the price to be paid for technological change." The argument Postman brings up here is worth mentioning, however, entrepreneurs are without a job without societal problems. So it is safe to assume that entrepreneurs focus more on helping to solve these issues than "infuse the population with an unity of improbable hope." So embrace the technopoly: it's not necessarily a bad thing! Not to say that we should observe no caution, but the question is not "Are we living in a technopoly?", but "How do we live in this technopoly in a way that honors ethics?".

Touch Screen Babies

In her article, "The Touch Screen Generation", Hanna Rosin writes about the effect of digital technology, such as TV and iPads, on toddlers and young children. Different methods of handling technology worked well for different cases. For example, many people limited their child's use of technology to special occasions or small increments of time daily. However, Marc Prensky, mentioned specifically in her article, allowed his children unlimited access to technology on the basis that, "who says that books are better than screens?" Following this logic, Rosin tried this experiment, and eventually her child got bored with her iPad and left it alone. Achieving this desired outcome through a sort of reverse psychology, Rosin is curious on whether this "books are better than screens" is a worthy reason for withholding technology from young children.

"If they treat screen time like junk food, or 'like a magazine at the hair salon'—good for passing the time in a frivolous way but nothing more—then the child will fully absorb that attitude, and the neurosis will be passed to the next generation" (Rosin). ---This quote is particularly interesting because it compares screen time to fast food: addictive, fun at first but unsatisfying later on.

"And all my kids, including Gideon, play Cut the Rope a lot, which is not exclusively marketed as a kids’ game. I could convince myself that the game is teaching them certain principles of physics—it’s not easy to know the exact right place to slice the rope. But do I really need that extra convincing? I like playing the game; why shouldn’t they?" (Rosin) 
--- Games can be fun without needing to be educational. What exactly is worth learning in educational games, in comparison to non-educational games?

"Some educational apps, I wouldn’t wish on the naughtiest toddler. Take, for example, Counting With the Very Hungry Caterpillar, which turns a perfectly cute book into a tedious app that asks you to “please eat 1 piece of chocolate cake” so you can count to one" (Rosin).
--- Like we had discussed in class earlier, why market something specifically as an "kids' educational" game? This can be ineffective and sends the wrong message to the child playing the game.

In terms of confusion, this article was relatively straightforward. I don't have any major or pressing questions.

Stupid Googlers, Part II

James Bowman's article is a critical response to "Is Google Making Us Stupid?", written by Nicholas Carr. He dismisses the idea that the problem is the lack of "deep reading", as suggested by Carr, and even rejects Carr's notion that he needs to feel guilty about going online. Instead, he proposes and defends the idea that the problem is teachers thinking that they need to make learning fun, which immediately sets listeners on guard and unresponsive to the teachers. This method, not the tool, is the problem.

Because the article is titled so similarly and directly referenced, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" is clearly connected to Bowman's "Is Stupid Making Us Google?". Marc Prensky's "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants" supports the idea of teachers needing to make learning fun, of which Bowman is highly critical. While Prensky emphasizes the differences of "immigrants" and "natives", Bowman focuses on the result of "learning must be fun", which is bad for all parties involved; the "immigrants" watch their culture become oblivious and unimportant, and the "natives" do not receive the benefits of reaching outside of their cultural bubbles and truly expanding their horizons and minds.

In twenty or thirty years, this computer that I'm typing on will be ancient history and culture. How do you think that my grand- and great-grandchildren should learn about my experiences, or should they? Just a thought.

Are We Stupid Googlers?

Nicholas Carr's article, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?", brings up an important point on the discussion of the effects of technology on its users. He references HAL, the dangerously powerful supercomputer in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the scene when the astronaut, Dave Bowman, unplugs him. He compares his brain after dealing with technology to the reaction of HAL when he was unplugged.

Just as unsettling as the idea in a science fiction movie of artificial intelligence responding emotionally, Carr notices that Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the creators of Google, have spoken of their interest in connecting artificial intelligence directly to the brain. It re-defines the word intelligence, that is, it makes intelligence something that can be complete. "Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive."

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?" is a more negative take on the same issue that Marc Prensky sheds light on in a much more positive way. Prensky, in his article, "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants", celebrates the wonders of new technology in order for students to learn, because he, in agreement with Carr, writes that students' brains are adapting to this incredibly digital age. But how do you think older adults', or "digital immigrants'", brains are being affected by the technology overload? Leave your response in the comments.

A Second Look at Free Information

Both the FFII and the FGI use strong ethos-centered arguments. On the organization's website, the FFII promises to "defend your right to a free and competitive software market and informational freedom." The authority of this European nonprofit is firmly maintained through its mentions of award winnings, continual statements to the public through press releases and similar mailing lists, and numerous action and research groups in which the public may participate. It keeps up-to-date on recent changes in copyright and patent legislation throughout Europe. A unique aspect to the website allows a viewer to look over several studies and research regarding patents in one of twenty-nine languages, and then choose sign a petition  as an individual, company, association or separate company group.

The FGI website includes an archives and library section, which directs the viewer to further articles, podcasts and speeches given by members on the subject. This is especially important because it delivers supplemental details on the topic of free information for an audience to read/listen to. While not an exhaustive list, it provides additional links that generates even more for an audience to soak up. The website also has a list of tags in the upper left corner for easy access to the controversial and popular topics relating to free information.

In conclusion, these websites argue for the protection of free speech and contact with information. Their user-friendly navigation is a strength to the arguments themselves. The multitude of resources offered by both sites shows a willingness to accept both sides of the argument. Though the question of free information remains in great debate, these sites can provide a deeper look into the issue itself.

Free Information

The question of "free information" has grown to a much larger scale in this day and age. Copyright laws have reached gray areas, which makes it difficult to distinguish what is legal and what is not. The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) and Free Government Information (FGI) are both effective websites at making claims and sustaining them through various rhetorical strategies. The most important strategy to both agencies, in order to convince their audiences, is ethos, or a claim of authority. The FFII establishes this by explaining that the organization is non-profit, has spread across twenty European countries, and has won numerous awards for the protection of citizens and their rights.

The FGI takes a slightly different route to prove its authority. Its website celebrates the fact that an article written by members of the organization is being published in a magazine. Another person affiliated with the FGI was honored for his acceptance of the James Madison Award, which "honor[s] individuals or groups who have championed, protected and promoted public access to government information and the public’s 'right to know' on the national level."

The right to free speech and free information can be a tricky matter. There is a fine line between use and abuse of the right to free speech. Finding that balance is a delicate issue and requires significant thought to achieve.

Unexpected Things

It’s funny how amazing things happen when you least expect them. When I went for a run the other day, I didn’t expect anything out of the ordinary to occur. It was drizzling at the beginning, but since I was armed with a sweatshirt, determination, and two friends to distract me from it, we jogged along anyway. After a while, we had run out of things to talk about and were continuing down the road quietly, thinking about what to talk about next. We went on our usual route, which circled a football field. Suddenly, right in front of us, was a deer, grazing on the football field. Looking up at us, she quickly scampered off into the trees, gone.

When we finished our run, I was still thinking about the deer. The deer was so impressive in itself, but even more so because I wasn’t expecting it. If I went out running expecting to see a deer, I wouldn’t have found one. But there I was, focusing on trying not to trip and fall in front of my friends, when I saw a deer.

I think it’s like that with most things. Beauty is most thrilling when it’s something you never anticipated seeing. But that’s what’s so exciting. Seeing something beautiful, especially in nature, can take you where you never thought you were going. 

Windy Days

Truth can be found in the smallest ways.

I discovered this while in lacrosse tryouts. Though it was chilly and slightly misting, my coach sent everyone outside to stretch and warm up. As soon as we left the comfortably heated gym, the wind stung my cheeks and ears. My teeth chattering, I followed the seniors in our dynamic stretches. While we stretched, a couple of girls were talking, singing and some were even dancing to distract themselves from the painfully cold weather. Almost everyone else was comparing how numb their fingers and legs were, or restating the already stated fact that it was cold outside. However, I zoned out, as I usually do when I am in large groups of people. Then, briefly, for just a moment, the wind stopped. The weather became immediately bearable without the biting and stinging of the wind.

Almost as quickly as it left, a big gust of wind picked up and continued, in varying degrees, for the rest of our warm-ups. Thankfully, we were able to return inside and finish the rest of our practice in the gym relatively soon afterwards. When the wind stopped, I saw that the wind is just completely unpredictable. But getting upset over things you cannot control, like the weather, is pointless.

Instead, I remain positive and willing to persist through all situations. It’s the only way to go. Not only is it much less frustrating, it is rewarding to experience pain and remain in control by staying upbeat. American author F. Scott Fitzgerald summed this up quite nicely: “Never confuse a single defeat with a final defeat.” 

On Walking

Though I love how fast-paced sports can be, I have come to really appreciate going for walks. After taking a break from homework, I decided to take a little walk outside. Breathing in the fresh air, I visibly relaxed. Nature can be incredibly calming and therapeutic, which became even more evident to me throughout the stroll.  As I walked, I couldn’t help but notice how quiet it was. It gave me plenty of time to enjoy the peace and quiet, but it mostly just allowed me to think of nothing at all. I returned to my house with the serenity that only comes from not thinking for a while.

As I entered my house, I became distracted almost immediately, thinking about math and when is our next test and what did I get on my history test and what are we having for dinner and do I still have to clean my room and how much more homework do I have and what time is it and what time do tryouts end tomorrow and will I make varsity and what kind of flower is that and--

Suddenly, I realized how quickly nature’s peace had left me. The impermanence of the thing which had so impressed me just a few moments ago shocked me. I sat down for a second. How could I keep the serenity of nature with me? At that moment, I was asked to take out the trash, so I went back outside without thinking about it much. But before I came back in, I noticed how relaxed I felt again. The peace and quiet of nature had returned, and I felt strengthened, even though I had only been out for a few seconds.

The best way to unwind by not thinking and enjoying peace and quiet is to go outside. The best way to remain serene with nature is to keep going outside. Taking that walk made me realize how important it is to take time away from the hustle and bustle and distract myself from further distractions.

Overcoming Challenges

I have always been in love with the outdoors. Biking, hiking, winter sports, spring, summer, you name it, I’ve probably tried it. So, in order to get into shape for the spring sports season, I chose the most deceptively simple sport out there: running.

Lacing up my shoes, I took off down a lovely path near the local elementary school. Passing a few joggers who were enjoying the nice day just as I was, I smiled to myself. So far, so good. Not only was I somehow remaining persistent through the run, I had yet to fall flat on my face. Slightly clumsy, my awkwardness manages to make an appearance at the most ill-timed of moments.

I stopped short. The path, which continued into the woods, had been blocked off. Because life is nothing without new challenges, I decided to take a new, backcountry route. Darting off of the path, I began to run with fresh vigor. At least, for a few steps, which reminded me of the rain we had had recently. The ground squishy and wet, my poor tennis shoes were taking a beating. But, for some reason, I didn’t want to go back to the trail and take the easy way out.

Finally making it back to my starting point, I stretched and thought about my journey. What if I had stayed home instead of going to run? My shoes wouldn’t be soaking wet, but then I wouldn’t have able to enjoy (and conquer) this new challenge. I am a firm believer in accepting life’s challenges as they come, and presenting new tests for yourself, for the chance to overcome them. I see problems not as crises, but more as puzzles posed for me to find solutions.

It could just be that I am incredibly optimistic. However, I prefer to think of it as the best way to look at difficult setbacks. Perseverance is absolutely essential to experiencing nature. So when your path is blocked off, find a new way to get around it. It will teach you something new about yourself and the importance of challenges in your life.

The Responsibility of a Teacher

Chris Lehmann's An Open Letter to Natalie Munroe writes that when Munroe wrote about what she did on her blog, her students do not need to treat her with respect. He reminds her that each student has value and worth and she ignored that when she disrespected them on a public blog. He criticizes her cruelty towards the teenagers and the fact that she did not apologize. Munroe failed to take the "moral high ground" and instead responded in a rash, inconsiderate, and even childish manner.  Encouraging her to rethink her decision to be a teacher, Lehmann's main argument of his letter is the responsibility of a teacher. A teacher is trusted to educate his/her students, while treating each one with equal respect and valuing their identity as human beings. It is essential that a teacher be humble and genuinely care about the students. He writes that the job of a teacher "should demand the best of you."

Lehmann's argument contains many rhetorical strategies, including appeals to logos, ethos and pathos. He addresses her cruelty to the students and that no student deserves to be treated with such disrespect, which appeals to her emotionally. When discussing the ethical obligation of a teacher and failure to take the "moral high road", Lehmann uses ethos, or ethical appeals. He uses logos when describing the frustration of teaching (especially kids) and how, as an adult, she should have handled the situation. Also, Lehmann uses syntax to drive his main point, such as using one-sentence paragraphs to emphasize emotional appeals.

Do you think Lehmann was correct in his idea of the responsibility of a teacher? Let me know in the comments.

The Power of an Image

This emotional argument combines the use of a visual and verbal claim. Showing an adorable and cheerful little girl, this shows the joy that adoption can bring to a child rather than a parent. In this way, the child strengthens the argument by encouraging its viewers to think of the child's happiness rather than their own. Generating a loving empathy, this image is powerful enough for the reader to consider adoption and yet not so shocking that the viewer must do so. It is especially persuasive because it does not use shock value to promote adoption, and yet it gently reminds observers of the power of adoption for a child.

The Effect of the Internet on People

As an intensely technological world, we are connected to people everywhere we go, using the Internet. However, what people say on the Internet has consequences, just like what people say in person. The Internet gives the impression that because the world is so big, people can write whatever they want and no one will ever read it. But the Internet itself shrinks the world and connects everything. It connects people to people, words to people, and most importantly, ideas to people. Someone may write or say something online just to vent, when really that outburst has been sent to hundreds if not thousands of people through social networking, and maybe those people send it to more people. Eventually that thought will reach people who don’t know the writer, and those people will judge him/her only according to one comment.

Because the Internet promotes angry outbursts, it is infinitely more important to refrain from doing so. Technology has reduced the size of the world, and the Internet especially endorses that a small comment has minimal effect. It gets angry people to ignore fellow Internet users, and see them only as the devices they use. This is wrong: people are your audience. Computers/cell phones are not responding to your comment; people are. Beyond that, there is an audience. Saying something on the Internet which you may regret does not come without consequences. Regardless of whether you know that person or not, someone will see your comment online. This cannot be avoided.

In conclusion, it is best to be cautious about what you post on the Internet. Your attitude and tone of voice cannot be deduced from anything on social networking, only your words can. If something you say may be misconstrued as something different, either do not post it or find a better way to say what you mean. 

The Fall of the House of Usher

Roderick Usher writes a letter to the narrator of The Fall of the House of Usher, asking him to visit after the death of Usher's sister, Madeline. The narrator, who is never named, arrives at the house and immediately notices that it feels haunted and bleak, referring to it as a "mansion of gloom." During his meeting with Usher, he cannot help but notice that living in the house has been taking a toll on Usher. He looks ghostly pale and "cadaverous", and his personality jumps from talkative to silent. The two bury Madeline in the dungeon of the mansion. Eventually, the narrator tries to calm Usher down by reading him a favorite story, which completely backfires. Usher begins talking to himself, murmuring about Madeline and the story and that he has been hearing her. As if he is possessed, he points at the staircase, and Madeline of Usher appears. The narrator runs away from the house, which collapses in his wake.

First published in a gentleman's magazine in 1839, The Fall of the House of Usher represents Edgar Allen Poe's signature Gothic style. Characterized by curious and complicated characters, haunted and sinister houses, and the suggestion of the supernatural, Gothic literature is essentially romanticism with a few twists. Gothic literature invokes the Enlightenment belief of chaotic nature and also that the supernatural  realm was attractive yet intended to scare and harm you. The text argues that the world (especially the metaphysical) is inherently chaotic and unpredictable, and therefore cannot be trusted

A swift departure from the Enlightenment, Poe's writing shows no belief that the physical world can be manipulated in any way, let alone controlled. Benjamin Franklin, who was famous for his belief in living in complete independence from the supernatural realm, would not have particularly supporting him.  But Poe also would have had difficulty agreeing with early American writers, such as John Winthrop, Anne Bradstreet  and Mary Rowlandson, who believed nature was a gift from God and praised God in both blessings and curses.