The precautionary principle states that we should take action now in order to avoid any possible catastrophes or damage that may occur due to a lack of satisfying scientific evidence. While searching the internet regarding this topic I have found that there are many people who oppose the principle because they say it goes too far. People oppose it because in the "most recent application of the doctrine it is proposed that innovation should be prevented even when there is just a perception of a risk among some unspecified people." This infuriates many because it only takes a small number of people claiming something could be harmful and backing that claim up with no further evidence to bring innovation to a halt. The burden of proof is left to the innovators to prove beyond reasonable doubt that something is not harmful. Proponents of the principle believe that we should always assume something to be dangerous or harmful until it has been definitively proven otherwise.
In the 1900's paint was being recognized as a leading cause for lead poisoning in children living in Australia. Despite this finding lead was not banned in the United States until over 70 years later. The ramifications of the failure to act have resulted in learning deficiencies and behavioral problems in people. The current annual cost to treat lead poisoning in children is over $54 Billion.
There are countless examples where the precautionary principle was not applied and as a result the lives of people are affected. As humans I believe that it is our obligation to prevent harm to others by making sound and safe decisions. Yes, using the principle may mean a slow-down in innovation, however it may save us from finding mistakes in the future and its always better to be safe than sorry.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Chicken Little
For any of you convinced of a consensus on anthropogenic global warming, I thought I'd post a neat little link to a petition where over 30,000 American scientists have flatly rejected the idea of anthropogenic (man made) global warming. Over 9,000 of these scientists have PhD's. As this is an ethics class, I thought that academic and scientific dishonesty would be an appropriate subject to discuss. The idea, to me, that any credible person would try to pass off the idea of a consensus on this subject to be disturbing in itself, and a great example of technology being utilized to spread an agenda, via mass communication(technology). I'm not giving my opinion about global warming, but would just like to see if anyone out there feels it ethical the way advocates of anthropogenic global warming spread their message. Al Gore refuses to debate anyone on the subject, and has deep financial ties to the issue.... Ethics??? I don't think so. Scare tactics utilizing technology as a medium, maybe.
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php
Either way, the idea of a consensus on anthropogenic global warming is a scam, whether or not anthropogenic global warming occurs or not. THERE IS NOT, AND NEVER HAS BEEN, A CONSENSUS. I suppose it is a decent example of the device paradigm, as mass communication systems have not only allowed us to be brought together on a global scale, but duped on a global scale as well. A few decades ago leftist environmentalists said we'd have mass starvation within a generation. Never happened. Another good one from a few decades ago was that we were entering another ice age that would ravage everyone... Didn't happen. What will the next critical emergency be??????? Again, I'm not trying to push anyone's opinion either way, just thought it would be an interesting subject to put out there.
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php
Either way, the idea of a consensus on anthropogenic global warming is a scam, whether or not anthropogenic global warming occurs or not. THERE IS NOT, AND NEVER HAS BEEN, A CONSENSUS. I suppose it is a decent example of the device paradigm, as mass communication systems have not only allowed us to be brought together on a global scale, but duped on a global scale as well. A few decades ago leftist environmentalists said we'd have mass starvation within a generation. Never happened. Another good one from a few decades ago was that we were entering another ice age that would ravage everyone... Didn't happen. What will the next critical emergency be??????? Again, I'm not trying to push anyone's opinion either way, just thought it would be an interesting subject to put out there.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
A Short Coming of Borgman's Function
In developing our theory of technology, we only discussed at length what state T(t) technology is in at some time t, and in particular Borgman discussed and established the nature T(now) . However, this erroneous in nature, because technology is evolving and Borgman fails to predict the possible states T3 T4, T5, T6, ... that T(t) could evolve into. Lets look at the history of technology and how it evolved. Technology in it's infantile stage was in the form ofcrude hand tools (an instrumentalist dream). As time increased the complexity and autonomy the tools developed slowing moving state to state and finally into a state that is dominated by devices. Devices are semi-automatic and partially tool-like. I'm going to make an assumption for furthering this argument that technology is moving toward near-full-auton0my. This gives a time-spectrum form as shown.
Instruments_________Semi-Automatic Devices__________Near-Full Autonomy__(t-axis)
At any point along this spectrum, there is a possibility cone that determines the number of possible states that technology could develop into. Let's do a rock hard example (heheh). Suppose we a the point in time, where predominately stone tools are the technology, with some metal tools in the mix. We could project at a future point that metal tools will dominate, however what kind of metal tool? Iron or Bronze? Iron or Bronze metal tools are examples of possible future states T1 and T2 that T(now) could move into.
I'm sure you are wondering why this is a cone, and not a line where T1 moves to T2 to T3 to T4...., this linearity only make sense in hindsight, if we project into the future, technology has several possible ways it could develope along the t-axis. Therefore we have a possiblity cone, where the radius of the cone at any point t determines the amount of possible states it could move into. Super far into the future, there is very, very many possibilities technology could go into, however say a year from now, there is more definite states that technology seems to be directed to, like example one with the stone tools moving metal.
Lets jump to now, we are solidly in the device paradigmn, but what will technology become?
Now that i've established my conical model, I perdict that technology have effective 3 distinct states it could move into. Fully Inogranic Technology, Linear Combonation, and Fully Bio Technology, with the most probably state being a linear combonation, with majority weight on the biological side, a merger of machine and creature.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Book in iPad commercial
So I got to wondering what book was shown in the iPad commercial because I am interested by subliminal messages by advertisers. Anyways... the book shown is called "True Compass" by the late Edward M. Kennedy. I did some research on the book and the author because the only thing I knew was that he was a Kennedy for one and a senator. Through all the political garbage that came up, it was interesting to see that his book is being called "Book of the Times" and "An American Classic." I believe, just like the intentional Star Trek placement, that they are intentionally trying to express the idea that the iPad is the new big thing for our generation. On further research of the iPad, I found that this device comes just short of being a smaller and lighter version of a laptop. This device is said to be ideal for users who just want to surf the web, do social networking, view audio and video files, and do the occasional creative content. There are no USB hook ups, no capability to edit and review large excel sheets, no web chat, and does not support Adobe Flash software. To seek more information for yourself, just to to apple's homepage and there are a shitake ton of sites to give you the run down.
Death to Pluralism
This is a short blog, but I'm tired the inductive arguments of the pluralist camp. Their death comes from a qualitative describtion normal distributions, and the physical interpretations from the distribution's sharpness. (If you, do not know what a normal distribution is, wiki it.) Let suppose we have a rating system of 1-100. One being a fledgling tool, barely even a piece of technology and 100 a piece of technology that is a paragon of "the device paradigm", then let us have 10^4 people survey 10^4 different technological objects selected at random from a database of all technologies. The prepare a histogram plot of the survey. However the distribution and where the mean lies doesn't matter, if the peak is sharp and not a plateau then, clearly their is some paradigm to how technologies behaves and, with some certainty an N-number of individuals can take a random object (not surveyed) and the object's rating will statistically fall within error of one another. The pluralist view of, oh shit everything too complicated we have to look at case by case basis, is a weak cop-out instead of really analyzing the data.
Precautionary Principle / Global Warming
In class we had a discussion about the precautionary principle and were presented with the question, if you knew a plane had a ten percent chance of the wing falling off would you still fly on it? A couple of people ventured to say yes however realistically if this scenario were reality I highly doubt anyone would get on the plane. Ten percent is a lot to risk when your gambling with life, its all or nothing.
I agree with Stewart Brand's view that the Earth is a self regulating mechanism that will eventually remove humans. Yes global warming is occuring but it is only its natural cycle. Polution, though definately not a good thing for the environment, is not the sole cause for temperature increases. Since theres always a small possibility that either side of the debate is wrong I believe just as the precautionary principle states we should be as responsbile as realistically possible and reduce our pollution. At the very least it will be better for everyone else living here. We must be responsible in our actions and not abuse the Earth and its resources but at the same time we must not go overboard wasting precious time and money trying to support a view of humans as the primary catalyst for everything bad with the Earth.
I agree with Stewart Brand's view that the Earth is a self regulating mechanism that will eventually remove humans. Yes global warming is occuring but it is only its natural cycle. Polution, though definately not a good thing for the environment, is not the sole cause for temperature increases. Since theres always a small possibility that either side of the debate is wrong I believe just as the precautionary principle states we should be as responsbile as realistically possible and reduce our pollution. At the very least it will be better for everyone else living here. We must be responsible in our actions and not abuse the Earth and its resources but at the same time we must not go overboard wasting precious time and money trying to support a view of humans as the primary catalyst for everything bad with the Earth.
Friday, April 02, 2010
The Cellular Device: Stewart Brand's Perspective
As anyone who reads the first few chapters of Whole Earth Discipline will discover, Stewart Brand’s perception of the potentially positive impact of technology contrasts with Borgmann’s notion of the Device Paradigm’s devastating effects on ‘focal practices’ and the natural world. One of Brand’s most interesting claims so far is that cell phones prove to be advantageous to the quality of human life. For instance, he notes that cell phones and text messaging are promoting the spread of literacy in developing countries, functioning as “offices” or “middlemen” in small businesses, and “allow[ing] people to be able to own themselves” (Brand 51).
Because I have always seen our current dependence on the cellular device as a predominantly negative attribute, this passage in the text made me stop to consider all of the positive elements of the cell phone. First of all, the capabilities of the cell phone are beginning to be utilized in the classroom. Teachers use it as a time keeper and as a method to let the students know when class is cancelled. In my German class, the cell phone is even part of the curriculum; for homework and in-class assignments, students can call a number that records them as they recite a story in German, which the teacher will later listen to and grade. On a social level, cell phones also allow people to quickly and easily make plans and thus, save time and prevent stress in the midst of chaotic daily routines. Furthermore, cell phones allow distant friends and family to communicate with each other during business trips, academic programs, and vacations at fairly reasonable prices. Finally, cell phones permit prompt emergency phone calls after accidents and encounters with criminals or rapists. Although cell phones offer little physical defense against guns, knives, and brute strength, I always have my cell phone out and open in situations where I am alone and feel threatened by the people in my surroundings; it is the only weapon I have on hand that could potentially deter assault in the sense that it connects me to others who would be able to hear any screams of distress and offer quick assistance.
In light of the fact that the cell phone is transforming academic and work environments throughout the vast global community, perhaps it is possible that the innovation of the cell phone is “as big as fire, the wheel, and the railway” (Brand 51).
Because I have always seen our current dependence on the cellular device as a predominantly negative attribute, this passage in the text made me stop to consider all of the positive elements of the cell phone. First of all, the capabilities of the cell phone are beginning to be utilized in the classroom. Teachers use it as a time keeper and as a method to let the students know when class is cancelled. In my German class, the cell phone is even part of the curriculum; for homework and in-class assignments, students can call a number that records them as they recite a story in German, which the teacher will later listen to and grade. On a social level, cell phones also allow people to quickly and easily make plans and thus, save time and prevent stress in the midst of chaotic daily routines. Furthermore, cell phones allow distant friends and family to communicate with each other during business trips, academic programs, and vacations at fairly reasonable prices. Finally, cell phones permit prompt emergency phone calls after accidents and encounters with criminals or rapists. Although cell phones offer little physical defense against guns, knives, and brute strength, I always have my cell phone out and open in situations where I am alone and feel threatened by the people in my surroundings; it is the only weapon I have on hand that could potentially deter assault in the sense that it connects me to others who would be able to hear any screams of distress and offer quick assistance.
In light of the fact that the cell phone is transforming academic and work environments throughout the vast global community, perhaps it is possible that the innovation of the cell phone is “as big as fire, the wheel, and the railway” (Brand 51).
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Blog #9: My Favorite Focal Things…
In Albert Borgmann’s closing arguments, he makes an effort to demonstrate how we can best reform modern technology and its paradigm. A return to focal things and practices, for Borgmann, plays an important part in reforming technology. Although I needn’t recapitulate any of Borgmann’s arguments, it’s not very hard to understand how a fostering of focal things and practices could engender greater physical engagement with the world around us. Focal things do just what their name explicitly denotes: force us to “focus” and enrich our engagements. They provide powerful ways for us to better interact with our surrounding world. The important difference between this interaction and that provided by devices, however, is that focal things proffer us the possibility of invigorating all of our senses within a context that is intimately linked to our greater world. Focal practices and things, as Borgmann so simply states, “can center and illuminate our lives” (page 4). And here is where we discover the power of some of our most beloved focal things and practices.
After reflecting upon the existence of focal things and practices and their importance to our lives, I started to come up with some of my own favorite focal activities and decided to reflect on them.
One of my favorite focal activities is hiking. I love to hike. I believe that Borgmann would agree with me in regards to the power of hiking. When I hike, a lot is required of me. Each and every one of my senses is employed. I am forced to smell the cool, crisp, refreshing scents of the current season’s air. I am guided through flowery brush and wooded groves by enlisting the aid of my sense of sight. My ability to hear allows me to envision the smooth, swiftly flowing current beyond the grasp of my eyes and affords me the ability to learn the natural calls and bleats of a diversity of animal life. My sense of taste coordinates with my sense of smell to allot me an enriched but subtle impression of my surroundings. And, arguably most importantly, through the power of touch, I am able to physically connect with nature in an unrivaled way. Texture becomes the touched and the world around me takes on a whole new meaning. This high degree of engagement is why I like to hike. As a matter of fact, I have hiked in the Rocky Mountains in northwestern Montana, the same area which Borgmann so often describes in his work, and I would highly recommend it. For the above reasons, I also love to ski. Skiing probably requires more physical stamina and skill than hiking but can be just as fun with a little practice. Skiing in the Rockies is also a lot of fun, and I would highly recommend it as well.
Another one of my favorite focal activities is swimming. Like hiking and skiing, swimming also provides an opportunity to enlist your senses. Additionally, when you swim, especially if you’re swimming in a natural environment like a river or stream, you are freed from the earthly environs of gravity because of your buoyancy and allowed to interact with nature in exotic ways. Swimming gives us a taste of what traveling to the moon or another small planetary body would feel like and allows our imaginations to run rampant. When you’re swimming, almost all of your electronic and digital devices are forced to sit idle. We are given a break from the technological stream of disengagement and consumerism and allowed to interact with what water and our imaginations have to offer.
When I compare hiking, skiing, and swimming to surfing the internet, watching TV, or playing a video game; the focal activities win out for me almost every time. It’s not that I don’t like activities which aren’t as focal, but it’s probably just that I like focal activities more than I do those which aren’t focal. Focal activities and practices really do enrich our lives and provide us with total-body experiences that devices and the like could only dream of providing. Albert Borgmann’s emphasis upon reawakening a love for focal things/practices is not inordinate because maybe such a reawakening is just what we need to relearn what we once loved most in our world.
After reflecting upon the existence of focal things and practices and their importance to our lives, I started to come up with some of my own favorite focal activities and decided to reflect on them.
One of my favorite focal activities is hiking. I love to hike. I believe that Borgmann would agree with me in regards to the power of hiking. When I hike, a lot is required of me. Each and every one of my senses is employed. I am forced to smell the cool, crisp, refreshing scents of the current season’s air. I am guided through flowery brush and wooded groves by enlisting the aid of my sense of sight. My ability to hear allows me to envision the smooth, swiftly flowing current beyond the grasp of my eyes and affords me the ability to learn the natural calls and bleats of a diversity of animal life. My sense of taste coordinates with my sense of smell to allot me an enriched but subtle impression of my surroundings. And, arguably most importantly, through the power of touch, I am able to physically connect with nature in an unrivaled way. Texture becomes the touched and the world around me takes on a whole new meaning. This high degree of engagement is why I like to hike. As a matter of fact, I have hiked in the Rocky Mountains in northwestern Montana, the same area which Borgmann so often describes in his work, and I would highly recommend it. For the above reasons, I also love to ski. Skiing probably requires more physical stamina and skill than hiking but can be just as fun with a little practice. Skiing in the Rockies is also a lot of fun, and I would highly recommend it as well.
Another one of my favorite focal activities is swimming. Like hiking and skiing, swimming also provides an opportunity to enlist your senses. Additionally, when you swim, especially if you’re swimming in a natural environment like a river or stream, you are freed from the earthly environs of gravity because of your buoyancy and allowed to interact with nature in exotic ways. Swimming gives us a taste of what traveling to the moon or another small planetary body would feel like and allows our imaginations to run rampant. When you’re swimming, almost all of your electronic and digital devices are forced to sit idle. We are given a break from the technological stream of disengagement and consumerism and allowed to interact with what water and our imaginations have to offer.
When I compare hiking, skiing, and swimming to surfing the internet, watching TV, or playing a video game; the focal activities win out for me almost every time. It’s not that I don’t like activities which aren’t as focal, but it’s probably just that I like focal activities more than I do those which aren’t focal. Focal activities and practices really do enrich our lives and provide us with total-body experiences that devices and the like could only dream of providing. Albert Borgmann’s emphasis upon reawakening a love for focal things/practices is not inordinate because maybe such a reawakening is just what we need to relearn what we once loved most in our world.
From class I think that if there is like a ten percent chance for something to happen that we should try to avoid it. If the disaster that could happen is avoidable and we decide to get on the plan anyway, then we crash. I think that if there is even a slight chance that something will happen and we knew in advance that it was going to happen and also we new things we could do to avoid it then we should do those things.
It doesn't matter if global warming is caused by us or not. If it is and we know somethings to prevent it then we should do those things. I don't know if global warming is real and I don't think there is a way to be sure that it is, but we should do things to slow it down or prevent it even if we don't know if its real.
Some scientists say its real and others say its not real. They shouldn't be trying to prove their point because they can't. What they sould be doing is if they think its real then they should find ways to solve the problem. Either of them can put any numbers together, but they still can't put a convincing aruement together. All they can say is what might be. We need proof, but their is no way to prove what is causing it or what is going to happen in the future. We should still go things to prevent it.
It doesn't matter if global warming is caused by us or not. If it is and we know somethings to prevent it then we should do those things. I don't know if global warming is real and I don't think there is a way to be sure that it is, but we should do things to slow it down or prevent it even if we don't know if its real.
Some scientists say its real and others say its not real. They shouldn't be trying to prove their point because they can't. What they sould be doing is if they think its real then they should find ways to solve the problem. Either of them can put any numbers together, but they still can't put a convincing aruement together. All they can say is what might be. We need proof, but their is no way to prove what is causing it or what is going to happen in the future. We should still go things to prevent it.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
The Best Camping Laptop
While online I came across a forum post where a person was seeking advice on a good camping laptop. This question really does sound insane but it just goes to show how strong of a hold technology has on our lives. Some of my most memorable times have been camping or spending time outdoors away from the controlling grip of technology. Camping has completely modernized as new devices have been introduced promising to make the camping experience more enjoyable. Really all they are doing is depriving us from one of the few pure focal activities in life. Camping should be a time of living with just the very basic supplies and focusing on human interactions and the tranquility of nature. As tents become more luxurious, and camping supplies turn into devices it seems that the focal practice of camping has been for ever defaced by the influence of the device paradigm. I think that it is vital for everyone to experience a temporary vacation from the stressfull and demanding control of technology; the problem is finding a place that has not already been affected by the paradigm.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Action Movie Deictic Discourse
As we were discussing the wilderness as deictic discourse the other day, I had an idea. Could my favourite movie, Princess Mononoke, be a deictic discourse on the relationship between the wilderness and industrialization? The animated film has incredible scenes of wilderness vistas and "big game" animal gods, contrasted with the mighty industrialization of a mining town and its warriors. I will post a link to a trailer, but if anyone's interested I can try and convince Prof. Langguth to let me show it on the projector after class; it successfully combines deictic discourse with the action/adventure movie genre.
Trailer (but it's better in the original Japanese):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWWWKKA8jY
Trailer (but it's better in the original Japanese):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWWWKKA8jY
Nature
In class, we discussed how nature or being outdoors has become less and less of a focal point. I completely agree with this. Growing, we did not have game systems or even the Internet until I was in sixth or seventh grade. We had to entertain ourselves in other ways, mostly by playing outdoors. My friends, siblings, and I would rush through homework after school just so we could play outside for a few hours. During the summer, we were hardly indoors. Now, kids get excited when new versions of video games or game systems come out. They can figure out how to kill 500 people at once with a few buttons on a controller but cannot climb a tree. While this is all appalling and disturbing, there are those who take bonding with nature too far. We started watching "Grizzly Man" and learned a little about Timothy Treadwell and his idea of being with nature. There is something to be respected about his time with the bears and what he was trying to accomplish, but at the same time, one must ask if he was crazy? He sat there talking about how powerful these animals are and that the one in particular is dangerous. To me, it seemed almost as if he was asking to be attacked. I love nature as much as the next person, but there are boundaries that need to be respected. As I was watching the film, it reminded me of a similar story I had seen on "60 Minutes." There is another man living in Alaska and sharing his home with grizzly and black bears. To me, he seems a little more intelligent than Treadwell, but both are too extreme for my liking. These are wild animals that need to be respected, which includes leaving them to the land by themselves. I've provided a link to the transcript and segment of video from "60 Minutes." What do you think? Are they both crazy or can we learn something from the two men?http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/liambartlett/587148/the-bear-man
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Nature on Exhibit
One concept that really stood out to me in today’s class discussion was Borgmann’s notion that parks have become museums of nature. This is certainly a valid classification for today’s public recreational parks, state parks, and resort parks; indeed, most parks seem to be offering no more than an artificial experience of nature. For instance, beaches are often outlined with boundaries that seem to separate human recreation from the uncultivated aquatic world beyond that point. In addition, many ‘nature trails’ consist of glorified sidewalks that coil around the edge of the wilderness; even ‘hiking trials’ through park forests come complete with steps and bridges over the smallest streams and up the smallest inclines. These trails offer a tour of the wilderness but provide few opportunities for visitors to venture off the designated path and truly interact with nature. Consider how often one hears parents telling their children “Don’t touch anything!” on nature walks. I even saw a sign at my local park that ordered visitors to “Please stay off the grass”, which, now that I think about it, reminds me of the “Please do not touch the exhibit” signs at art and natural history museums. Furthermore, if a group of people see a fallen tree across the path or a particularly flooded section of the trail, the individuals tend to turn around and retreat back to their vehicles rather than trying to find a way around the obstacle. Even the animal wildlife is intended to be kept at a safe viewing distance. In contrast, when my sisters and I walked along the creek in-between the ridges on the family farm two weeks ago, we encountered a half-eaten carcass of a large deer directly in our path. It is arguable that the experience of nature is being sugar-coated for the average citizen in America. The last remaining artifacts of the once vast wilderness in America are kept on exhibit at our public parks; however, the purity of this wilderness is tainted by mankind’s inability to function without the comforts of technology in its most basic forms. Ultimately, it seems that the more we succumb to the device paradigm, the more alien the natural world appears to us.
Blog #8: An Antiquated Technology…
I’ve been thinking a lot about the progress of technology lately. When one considers the evolution of technology over time, it’s not hard to notice an obvious pattern: the old and more ancient technologies are inevitably replaced by newer more advanced ones. Let’s take for example the progress of devices in communication. Years before modern cordless and cellular phones existed, the corded phones ruled the day. Corded phones claimed their precedence through the course of a small developmental evolution of their own. However, even the oldest looking telephone seems new when compared with the telegraph, a device which was invented almost two centuries ago. Again though, even the telegraph’s inception in the 1830s and 1840s improved upon the faculties and developments of its primitive predecessors. Communication technologies seem to move forward in ways in which Alexander Graham Bell and Samuel Morse could have only dreamed. Just as devices in the realm of communication have evolved, so too have machines endured transformation in almost every other conceivable area. Not surprisingly, the older is always succeeded by the newer.
In light of this documented progression, I want everyone to take a step back from the technological scene of today and try to imagine the future. It’s hard to imagine a world in which our contemporary devices are no longer thought of as cutting edge or modern. Yet, as the incessant progression of technological development tells us, one day all of our technologies will cease to exist as we know them today. With your now distanced perspective, try to envision a world in which everything is so new that even our generation is forced to ask its grandchildren how to operate the latest devices. In order to envisage such a world, a great deal of difficulty is usually encountered. In other respects, though, it’s not so hard to conceive of such an existence because of the presence of some seemingly archaic and inefficient devices today. There are several “modern” devices whose future evolution is imaginable because of their inept qualities today. I have made up a list of three contemporary devices which I think people will one day, maybe a century from now, look upon with laughter and disbelief.
1) The modern gas-powered automobile: Is it even hard to imagine how this clunky and antiquated invention will one day be replaced? I don’t think so. The automobiles of today just look and act old. The rumbling of the bulky and oversized engines, the emission of contaminating pollutants, and the constant need to repair and service these mechanical brutes illustrate their utter incompetence and antiquity. We’re still using cars which are essentially modeled after their ancient ancestors. Isn’t there a better means of transportation with another, more efficient fuel source that we can come up with?
2) Microwaves: Upon first glance, the microwave oven might seem competently designed and developed. However, microwave ovens suffer in a number of ways. Why do you think some researchers tell pregnant women to stay away from microwaves? They must not be as safe as we think they are. And even if they are safe if properly contained, what happens if a leak in your microwave oven develops unbeknownst to yourself? Moreover, the time microwaves take to work sometimes amazes me. Yes, I realize that when compared to a great many other things in our culinary repertoire, microwave ovens work at near light-speed. Yet, when I want to defrost something, a microwave can take more than 10-20 minutes (depending upon the size of the food being defrosted). One day, I think that humanity will invent a safer and more efficient version of the microwave oven.
3) Central Heating and Air Conditioning: Although heating and air conditioning may seem like it is already as about as advanced as it can be, I think the future will transform how we heat and cool our homes. The current system of heating and cooling our homes is very cumbersome: installation or overhaul requires putting in a rather large outdoor fan and linking this with an even larger apparatus in one’s basement. Additionally, the outgrowth from these machines is a mass of ducting and vents. Who could even imagine a more unwieldy or bulky machine? One day, I believe that heating and air conditioning will take on a more organic character, one which will shed its ungainly physical excesses.
For me, it’s not hard to visualize how these three devices will one day be thought of as old-fashioned or clumsy. Maybe you have a different list of modern devices which you think will one day be thought of as old or inept. If you can think of a couple, comment on this blog post. It should be interesting to see what type of world we each believe the future will hold.
In light of this documented progression, I want everyone to take a step back from the technological scene of today and try to imagine the future. It’s hard to imagine a world in which our contemporary devices are no longer thought of as cutting edge or modern. Yet, as the incessant progression of technological development tells us, one day all of our technologies will cease to exist as we know them today. With your now distanced perspective, try to envision a world in which everything is so new that even our generation is forced to ask its grandchildren how to operate the latest devices. In order to envisage such a world, a great deal of difficulty is usually encountered. In other respects, though, it’s not so hard to conceive of such an existence because of the presence of some seemingly archaic and inefficient devices today. There are several “modern” devices whose future evolution is imaginable because of their inept qualities today. I have made up a list of three contemporary devices which I think people will one day, maybe a century from now, look upon with laughter and disbelief.
1) The modern gas-powered automobile: Is it even hard to imagine how this clunky and antiquated invention will one day be replaced? I don’t think so. The automobiles of today just look and act old. The rumbling of the bulky and oversized engines, the emission of contaminating pollutants, and the constant need to repair and service these mechanical brutes illustrate their utter incompetence and antiquity. We’re still using cars which are essentially modeled after their ancient ancestors. Isn’t there a better means of transportation with another, more efficient fuel source that we can come up with?
2) Microwaves: Upon first glance, the microwave oven might seem competently designed and developed. However, microwave ovens suffer in a number of ways. Why do you think some researchers tell pregnant women to stay away from microwaves? They must not be as safe as we think they are. And even if they are safe if properly contained, what happens if a leak in your microwave oven develops unbeknownst to yourself? Moreover, the time microwaves take to work sometimes amazes me. Yes, I realize that when compared to a great many other things in our culinary repertoire, microwave ovens work at near light-speed. Yet, when I want to defrost something, a microwave can take more than 10-20 minutes (depending upon the size of the food being defrosted). One day, I think that humanity will invent a safer and more efficient version of the microwave oven.
3) Central Heating and Air Conditioning: Although heating and air conditioning may seem like it is already as about as advanced as it can be, I think the future will transform how we heat and cool our homes. The current system of heating and cooling our homes is very cumbersome: installation or overhaul requires putting in a rather large outdoor fan and linking this with an even larger apparatus in one’s basement. Additionally, the outgrowth from these machines is a mass of ducting and vents. Who could even imagine a more unwieldy or bulky machine? One day, I believe that heating and air conditioning will take on a more organic character, one which will shed its ungainly physical excesses.
For me, it’s not hard to visualize how these three devices will one day be thought of as old-fashioned or clumsy. Maybe you have a different list of modern devices which you think will one day be thought of as old or inept. If you can think of a couple, comment on this blog post. It should be interesting to see what type of world we each believe the future will hold.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Blog #6- The Wireless Future of Medicine
I urge everyone to watch this video, as it explains what medical capabilties we now have (or soon will) for monitoring our vitals signs:
To summarize the video, new wireless technologies on SmartPhones (including iPod Touches) now have the ability to keep tabs on all our vital signs, which include blood pressure, glucose levels, and for pregnant women, fetal heart rates and intensity of contractions. As an aspiring medical student, I find this to be fascinating; to have these technologies either already available or soon to be available, keeping track of a patient's road to recovery will become much easier than it is now (and even now it's still quite good).
At one point in the video, the speaker describes an application that monitors your sleep levels at night, when you are in REM, light, and deep sleep (the most rejuvinating kind). Additionally, another application monitors the caloric intake of food in real-time, as well as caloric expenditure while exercising.
One highlight of the video describes the "new stethoscope", a portable ultrasound device that can much more accurately detect the beating of the heart and the contraction of the lungs and diaphragm; such a device will surely assist in the diagnosis of patients that might have heart arythmia or lung issues.
I feel this is exceptionally good news; future and current doctors will now be able to treat patients more efficiently and carefully than ever before.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Blog #7 Communication
After my dad, brother, and me finished watching some basketball, my family sat down at the table for dinner. This was very unusual today because I live at school, and my brother, his wife, and daughter live elsewhere- so my mom made dinner for seven. During dinner, my brother pulled out his cellphone, and immediatly my mom told him to put it away. He quickly responded with "I just want to check the scores" (of the basketball game). When he did this, I thought about something we had discussed in class about losing the focal point and about Matters of Ultimate Concern. We are so distracted by the gadgets and the easy access of this technology distracts the person from the real focus. Technology is so present in our day to day activies that even myself- who doesn't have an i-pod or texting- find myself easily distracted, yet easily annoyed with others. Losing focus on the family or communication is a matter of concern that needs to be addressed if the technological devices are becoming more and more prevalent in our day to day life. During dinner, my family was distracted from conversation, but my brother was busy on his phone updating his bracket. Do we even want to communicate with others anymore, or just acknowledge their existence?
Maps
In class today we had a brief discussion on GPS systems and maps and the idea of people being able to read a map. I know that anytime that I go on vacation I have an option of getting a trip tick. In order to get this you have to be a member of AAA (which is a traveling, insurance, vacationing, and roadside assistance organization). Any time I go on vacation I call AAA and they make a readable map for me. Instead of looking at a map they write out all the directions, kind of like map quest does. The only difference is they offer alternative routes, park areas, and other details that might be suitable for someone. I find this to be much easier than reading a map. I like the idea of reading directions rather than looking at a map and analyzing, planning, and thinking about the best route or idea, I find AAA to be much easier. This topic relates somewhat to the device paradigm. The idea of people losing there basic knowledge and skills is in effect in this case. I can read a map only due to being taught by my father at a young age to my teenage years, but every time my friends or my girlfriend are traveling they rely on their trusty GPS system or AAA. My question to anybody who finds this interesting is how can technology change the whole essence of a road trip and just going where ever the road takes us?
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Changing Definition of "Family"
Today’s in-class group collaboration on Matters of Ultimate Concern got me thinking. The meaning of the word family is changing along with technology. It seems as though the traditional activities and functions of a family have been clouded by technology. It has indeed made tasks much simpler however it has only increased the workload of many. A traditional work week of nine to five with evenings and weekends reserved for the family is quickly becoming a thing of the past due to our always-on society. Conveniences such as the DVR offer us much enjoyment however we almost become enslaved to them as recorded shows begin piling up and we begin feeling the need to catch up on watching them. The meaning of the word family has become increasingly narrower as the members making up the family change, number of multi-career families increase, and devices influence the way we spend our spare time and interact with others. It used to be common for families to have a very nice meal every once in a while; one with the nice plates, glasses, silverware, tablecloth, and that required many hours to preparation. Families today tend to keep the nice china behind a glass door just for looks. Families are special because of the unique and strong bond shared by members. I fear that as they evolve and loose the very focal aspects that once made up their foundation, they will become merely a formality.
No More Family Dinner
Today in our class discussion of deictic discourse, we discussed things in our lives that have been altered by technology. One thing that has been affected by technology is the importance of family dinner. When I was younger, my whole family had a set time to eat dinner, normally around 5 o'clock. This time was a valuable time during my day, a time when all of my family gathered together to spend time with eachother and shed insight as to the things that had occured during the day. Many good memories have occured at the dinner table when my family was together, from funny stories to embarrassing moments that will never be forgotten. As my brothers and I got older, the daily family dinners began to diminish. The advancement in technology, with so many fast food restaraunts around, has contributed to the decline in family dinners. It soon became common practice to snag a burger at Wendy's on the way home from practice, and family dinner became a part of history. The time of day when the whole family was able to gather together no longer existed and the traditional family practice of cooking dinner and sharing it together was replaced with the fast food burger and fries.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Blog #7: A Response to “Vermont: Neighbors and Online Networks”…
The article “Vermont: Neighbors and Online Networks” presented a very interesting account of how the internet is being used as a tool to help procure and engender focal interaction and practices. In effect, an object (i.e. the internet) which Albert Borgmann would undeniably brand a device (if one scrutinizes the internet in a strictly straightforward sense) is being utilized in order to help develop focal activities of the most engaging variety. Focal practices are thus springing forth from within the frame of a device. As the article described, one individual decided to help better knit his neighborhood together in order to foster a greater sense of belonging and community. More specifically, he used the internet to create an online forum to help better connect his neighborhood. The results of his endeavors seem to be successful, so successful that his once small neighborhood forum has spread to several hundreds of communities all across Vermont. Small threads posted by individual citizens have worked to foster social interaction and relationships which would have otherwise remained nonexistent.
In regards to the use of the internet cited above, I believe that Albert Borgmann would be slightly hopeful but extremely cautious (this is kind of how Borgmann comes off to me throughout his entire work). Borgmann would likely be hopeful because of the great benefits to the engenderment of focal things/practices established through such usage of the internet. His caution, though, would arise from the fact that there seems to be, in this case, a reformation of technology which is occurring within the paradigm of technology itself (i.e. a device is being used to help secure focal things/practices).
The outright positive results of such a novel creation are quite obvious; as a matter of fact, the article works to list several. The “Front Porch Forum,” as the present online aggregate is now called, has enabled neighbors, especially those who are elderly, to become better acquainted. Many times, the initial awkwardness of visiting or conversing with poorly known neighbors works to defeat any seed of potential interaction and much more the chance at establishing any type of genuine relationship. The “Front Porch Forum,” however, ingeniously works to undermine this awkwardness by removing that often distressing first-time meeting. For lack of a better phraseology, the “ice” is essentially “broken” through more comfortable interactions within more secure settings. In this way, neighbors get to know one another at their own pace and can better prepare to later start a more grounded relationship with those they will one day tangibly meet. Apparently, many of the relationships and actions which have resulted through even the most simple of forum posts have been focal in nature (take for instance the procurement of a canoe for a little girl who wanted to go canoeing with her friends for her birthday). The beneficial outcomes of this type of networking are undoubtedly many. However, I believe that the “Front Porch Forum” does run the risk of establishing and maintaining disengagement and a lack of focal practices/things. It runs this risk if stagnation occurs. By stagnation, I refer to the idea that the “Front Porch Forum” may, by distancing the initial interactions between individuals, work to construct the safe environment of impersonal interaction. Neighbors, instead of acting on forum posts which call for interaction or neighborly assistance, might ignore forum posts which demand this. The onus thus rests upon the individual person using the internet forum. To prove my points about the ostensible negative features of “Front Porch Forum,” just look at Facebook. The same positive features mentioned above regarding “Front Porch Forum” could also be said about Facebook. Facebook brings groups of people together and works to create a great many events which could be considered focal in the strictest sense. Yet, many of us, on our recent essay exam, likely wrote about the disengagement engendered through using Facebook. Why is there disengagement if Facebook, like “Front Porch Forum,” offers benefits: because there are people involved. It is critical to note that the most absolute form of disengagement comes at the hands of the user. By failing to act upon opportunities for establishing relational intimacy, the Facebook user denies himself/herself engagement and exposure to focal things/practices. It is not hard to envision a re-creation of this scenario within the realm of the “Front Porch Forum.” Furthermore, another community, one which isn’t enveloped in the rural roots present in Vermont, might reject interaction and suffer stagnation due to its very cultural composition. The constitution of both the person and the culture appear to be important here. The internet forum also runs the risk of maintaining disengagement through its leanings towards mass commercialization. What started as a grass roots project to unite a neighborhood has now become a company which enwraps two Vermont counties. Although the spread is still minute when compared to the greater population of the United States, it is not inconceivable that “Front Porch Forum” could grow to become merely a commodity present for millions of consumers…I mean “neighbors.” I do realize that the article does seem to imply limits of about 400 homes in each forum community (this prerequisite smallness is definitely a step in the right direction), but I am still not sure that such a large number would fail to overwhelm forum users. It may push users into stagnation and relegate the usage of the forum to mere commodity. It is also plausible that larger forum communities could spring up as the company evolved to accommodate a more state/region-friendly outlook.
Internet forums represent an interesting possible means by which the reformation of technology could take place. Ironically however, they also remind us that it is ultimately humanity and not technology which stands in the best position to reign in the excesses of the device paradigm.
In regards to the use of the internet cited above, I believe that Albert Borgmann would be slightly hopeful but extremely cautious (this is kind of how Borgmann comes off to me throughout his entire work). Borgmann would likely be hopeful because of the great benefits to the engenderment of focal things/practices established through such usage of the internet. His caution, though, would arise from the fact that there seems to be, in this case, a reformation of technology which is occurring within the paradigm of technology itself (i.e. a device is being used to help secure focal things/practices).
The outright positive results of such a novel creation are quite obvious; as a matter of fact, the article works to list several. The “Front Porch Forum,” as the present online aggregate is now called, has enabled neighbors, especially those who are elderly, to become better acquainted. Many times, the initial awkwardness of visiting or conversing with poorly known neighbors works to defeat any seed of potential interaction and much more the chance at establishing any type of genuine relationship. The “Front Porch Forum,” however, ingeniously works to undermine this awkwardness by removing that often distressing first-time meeting. For lack of a better phraseology, the “ice” is essentially “broken” through more comfortable interactions within more secure settings. In this way, neighbors get to know one another at their own pace and can better prepare to later start a more grounded relationship with those they will one day tangibly meet. Apparently, many of the relationships and actions which have resulted through even the most simple of forum posts have been focal in nature (take for instance the procurement of a canoe for a little girl who wanted to go canoeing with her friends for her birthday). The beneficial outcomes of this type of networking are undoubtedly many. However, I believe that the “Front Porch Forum” does run the risk of establishing and maintaining disengagement and a lack of focal practices/things. It runs this risk if stagnation occurs. By stagnation, I refer to the idea that the “Front Porch Forum” may, by distancing the initial interactions between individuals, work to construct the safe environment of impersonal interaction. Neighbors, instead of acting on forum posts which call for interaction or neighborly assistance, might ignore forum posts which demand this. The onus thus rests upon the individual person using the internet forum. To prove my points about the ostensible negative features of “Front Porch Forum,” just look at Facebook. The same positive features mentioned above regarding “Front Porch Forum” could also be said about Facebook. Facebook brings groups of people together and works to create a great many events which could be considered focal in the strictest sense. Yet, many of us, on our recent essay exam, likely wrote about the disengagement engendered through using Facebook. Why is there disengagement if Facebook, like “Front Porch Forum,” offers benefits: because there are people involved. It is critical to note that the most absolute form of disengagement comes at the hands of the user. By failing to act upon opportunities for establishing relational intimacy, the Facebook user denies himself/herself engagement and exposure to focal things/practices. It is not hard to envision a re-creation of this scenario within the realm of the “Front Porch Forum.” Furthermore, another community, one which isn’t enveloped in the rural roots present in Vermont, might reject interaction and suffer stagnation due to its very cultural composition. The constitution of both the person and the culture appear to be important here. The internet forum also runs the risk of maintaining disengagement through its leanings towards mass commercialization. What started as a grass roots project to unite a neighborhood has now become a company which enwraps two Vermont counties. Although the spread is still minute when compared to the greater population of the United States, it is not inconceivable that “Front Porch Forum” could grow to become merely a commodity present for millions of consumers…I mean “neighbors.” I do realize that the article does seem to imply limits of about 400 homes in each forum community (this prerequisite smallness is definitely a step in the right direction), but I am still not sure that such a large number would fail to overwhelm forum users. It may push users into stagnation and relegate the usage of the forum to mere commodity. It is also plausible that larger forum communities could spring up as the company evolved to accommodate a more state/region-friendly outlook.
Internet forums represent an interesting possible means by which the reformation of technology could take place. Ironically however, they also remind us that it is ultimately humanity and not technology which stands in the best position to reign in the excesses of the device paradigm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)