Technology and Power

Commentary 1

By Melanie Wong

Technology has had a significant impact on individuals in the 21st Century.  In Postman’s (1992) work he states that “once a technology is admitted, it plays out its hand; it does what it is designed to do. Our task is to understand what the design is- that is to say, when we admit a new technology to the culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open” (p. 7).  It is apparent form this statement how powerful technology is.  Technology provides a platform for a power struggle between the “powerless” and the “powerful.”   

Postman (1992) indicates in his writing that “those who have control over the works of a particular technology accumulate power and inevitably form a kind of conspiracy against those who have no access to the specialized knowledge made available by the technology (p. 9).  Technologies have provided individuals with more access to knowledge and information.  In turn it has also provides individuals with more “power.” Willinsky (2003) discusses the concept of “Open Access.”  It is apparent from his arguments that digital technologies have enabled the individuals with many affordances.  “However, as prolific scholars…we are implicated in a secondary digital divide that is becoming all the more pressing with the spread of…technology” (Willinsky, 2003).  He echoes the views that were written in Postman’s (1992) work.  Although Willinsky’s arguments are centred on digital technologies, his comments regarding the “knowledge divide” are significant.  It is becoming apparent that with knowledge comes privilege and power.  

In Postman’s (1992) work he cites Harold Innis.  In particular he indicates that “Harold Innis… repeatedly spoke of the ‘knowledge monopolies’ created by important technologies (p. 9).” Postman also mentions that there are “benefits and deficits of new technology [when] not distributed equally… [and there] are winners and losers” (p.9). Again this sense of inequality between the powerful and the powerless is expressed. Interesting when you reflect on when Postman wrote his book.  It was over ten years ago that he made the comments that he did.  Yet his comments are still significant and hold true at present.  In many aspects being a member of a literate society, we are privileged. Our access to technologies is never an issue. We often take for granted technologies.  In particular I consider digital technologies and books.  In our society we have an abundance of written material and as a result an abundance of knowledge.   

Ong (1982) discusses the technology of writing. Part of his argument focuses on how oral cultures are very different when compared to a literate culture. In particular he argues how oral cultures are somewhat more primitive then literate cultures.  Although I have indicated in previous discussion forum postings that I don’t agree with Ong’s (1982) biased views, Ong still mentions some very valid points about the powerful and the powerless.  In particular he mentions how writing has changed the human consciousness.  Writing, as argued by Bolter (2001), is a technology.  Ong’s (1982) takes on a semi-biased stance on literate cultures being better then oral cultures. It is my opinion that since Ong comes from a privileged position (i.e. has access to technology (writing), published a book) he is in many aspects accumulating power.  Accumulation of power is when an individual has control over the works of a particular technology; this concept was expressed in Postman’s (1992) book.  When we speak about technology and in particular writing, it is obvious that those who publish a book are very much in a position of power.   Ong (1982) also indicates that “once a word is technologized there is no effective way to criticize what technology has done with it without the aid of the highest technology available” (p. 79).  Technology is a powerful tool.  Even as I write these words, I understand the significance of the power of this action. 

One final point of power that was brought up in Postman’s writing was the issue of the competition between new and old technologies.  He mentioned how these new technologies competed for many things (i.e. money, attention, time, prestige).  It is interesting that he brings this up.  Ong (1982) in his book recaps the history of writing.  In particular he discusses how writing has always been considered prestigious.  He provided several examples of how people who were literate in the past were in a position of power.  Ong’s examples support Postman’s comments.  Even now, with digital technologies or written technologies, whenever a new product is released there is a sense of competition between the old and new.

Postman’s work presented an interesting theme regarding the powerful and powerless.  As an educator, I have to consider the implications of technology on my students. In particular, I have to consider the possible struggles between the powerful and powerless.  In many ways, there are “knowledge monopolies” represented even in North America.  Perhaps they are minor in comparison to a global scale. However, many students on a daily basis do not have access to new technologies (whether it is digital or even a book).  There are certainly winners and losers as a result of this. 

References

Bolter, J.D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.).    Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ong, Walter. (1982.) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York, NY: New York

Willinsky, J. (2003). Open access: Reading (research) in the Age of Information. In
 C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, B. Maloch, J.V. Hoffman, and D.L. Schallert, 51
st National Reading Conference Yearbook. Oak Creek, WI: National Reading
Conference. Pre-print version available: http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/NRC_Galley.pdf

Posted in Commentary 1 | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The Invention of False Wisdom

Henry The Owl

Postman (1992) begins his book, Technopoly, with The Judgment of Thamus from Plato’s Phaedrus. Thamus, an Egyptian king, judges the god Theuth’s invention of writing. Although Theuth claims that writing will improve wisdom, Thamus predicts that writing will create false wisdom. Postman builds on Thamus’ prediction by claiming that modern writing technologies, such as the Internet, have falsified the concept of wisdom by downgrading wisdom to mere knowledge and by allowing those with access to quick and convenient information the right to undeservingly consider themselves among the wise.

The Oxford English Dictionary (2010) defines wisdom as the “capacity of judging rightly in matters relating to life and conduct; soundness of judgement in the choice of means and ends; sometimes, less strictly, sound sense, especially in practical affairs: opposite to folly.” If wisdom is the ability to judge, or think critically about issues or problems and the ability to make sound decisions in real situations, then the mere receiving and memorization of information and facts is not wisdom. Remembering comparatively useless or impractical information, whether purposely or unwittingly, may actually be considered an act of folly. Thamus states that receiving information will give people the façade that they are gaining wisdom when they are in actuality only remaining ignorant (Postman, 4). Postman, who does not actually completely dismiss technology as Plato dismisses writing, elaborates by explaining that the danger of holding onto a façade of wisdom is not only that it creates factions of egotistical elites, but that those elites continue to assume more and more power as technology advances, while societies without access to information remain or are kept powerless (Postman, 9).

Because Plato was able to spread his teachings through oral means, he perhaps did not see the use in writing to teach. Plato valued the ability of the mind to remember actively, as oral cultures do. Thamus, therefore, expressed his worries to Theuth that memory would be downgraded to mere “recollection” with the introduction of writing. Through this parable of Plato’s, Postman is able to bring light to the issues concerning human dependence on technology for retaining information. An active human mind, or an active memory, is one part, or the basis of, a wise mind, therefore, artificially stored memory challenges the value of human memory. Perhaps Plato feared the invention of writing because it challenged his own regard as a wise man: “By storing knowledge outside the mind, writing and, even more, print downgrade the figures of the wise old man,” (Ong, 41). Ironically, it may be that because of the spread of writing and information, that Plato’s wise philosophies have existed to this day.

Certainly, writing technologies such as the Internet have helped speed the spread of knowledge and information. Education that does not include at least a hint of technology may be quickly and inaccurately judged as inadequate or insufficient. This is the view that Plato and Postman are warning about, that technology is bought into blindly, even by knowledgable educators, without critical evaluation. Without being instructed on what wisdom is, without learning how to apply new knowledge, there is little meaning to increasing the quantity of information one holds. In “The Balance Theory of Wisdom” in The Brain and Learning, it is argued that wisdom should be included in the school curriculum, that providing only knowledge, information and facts, is not sufficient, that in order to allow students to build better lives and a more harmonious world, wisdom is what needs to be taught (Sternberg, 2008: 141).

As technology, such as writing, makes its shifts and changes, so do the terms that are associated with those technologies, such as “memory,” “information,” even “technology” itself. Perhaps the meaning of “wisdom,” need not be regarded in the same sense it was in Plato’s day, the exercising of one’s own memory (Postman, 4) and the ability to rely on one’s own internal resources (information) instead of external resources (Postman, 12). “Wisdom,” however, ought to mean that a person is able to think critically about how new information effects how they view the world around them. In the preface of Brabazon’s (2002) book, Digital Hemlock, she states that “ignorance of history and political debate will cut the heart out of education. Without attention to social justice, critical literacy and social change, our students will know how to send an email but will have nothing to say in it.” The job of educators is not so much to impart knowledge or information and its retainment, but to ensure that students think critically about that information and find a beneficial way to apply it through discourse or practice. By doing so, educators who use writing and technological aids may be able to prove that Plato’s prediction on the invention of writing is the real falsity.

References

Brabazon, T. (2002). Digital hemlock: Internet education and the poisoning of teaching. Sydney: Griffin Press.

Ong, W. J. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York: Routledge.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.

Sternberg, R. J. (2008). “The Balance Theory of Wisdom” in The Brain and Learning.

Wisdom (2010). In the Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved from: https://dictionary-oed-com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/cgi/entry/50286109/50286109se7?query_type=word&queryword=wisdom&first=1&max_to_show=10&sort_type=alpha&result_place=2&search_id=wnWq-Xl0SEp-11059&hilite=50286109se7

Posted in Commentary 1 | Leave a comment

The place of Rote Learning

As I read through module two, I was fascinated by the discussion question about rote learning. As I thought more about rote, I began to consider its possible place in history as well as its place in today’s culture. My examination of the themes discussed in Ong’s book, as well as other readings led me to an exploration of the prevalence of rote learning in oral, written, print or technology cultures. Through my research, I recognized that the use of rote learning rose as written and print cultures became dominant and is now diminishing in today’s technological world.

In considering the concept of rote learning, it is important to have a clear understanding of the term itself. The Oxford English Dictionary defines rote as “a mechanical or repetitious manner: (esp. of learning, etc.) acquired by memorization without proper understanding or reflection”.

When I first thought about the subject, I assumed that rote learning would be a dominant learning method in a culture without writing because memory is so important. Further reflection on the subject led me to deduct that this is not the case. The concept of rote learning is by definition a separation of the facts from the contextual framework. According to Ong (2002), people in oral cultures see themselves as situated within the context. He describes them as “situational thinkers” (p.51). Since people don’t separate themselves from situations, the concept of facts outside of the context would not occur to them. Consequently, rote learning would not have a large role in oral cultures.

In an oral culture, context is everything. Stories are about life events and are used to explain the world. They are told at specific times of year and in specific situations. For example, a story about marriage is told at a wedding. This strengthens context (Clariana, 1988). Since oral people’s memorization of stories and poems occurred in context, oral storytellers fully internalized the meaning of the story and thus were able to retain meaning and meter while making changes to the recitation as they tell it. This is not true for people who memorize passages using rote learning. Rote memorization is done out of context. Repeated repetition of facts leads to verbatim recitation of words without a true understanding of the meaning behind the words. Although words that have lost their meaning have been passed down through generations of Oral people, this is not the norm. People understand the meaning behind the words because they are immersed in the context that occurs with the stories.

A contrast to this is rote learning in our print culture which is associated with repetition of verbatim information, such as multiplication tables or complete texts. Success in rote memorization is a perfect word by word rendition of the original material and is usually achieved by consulting a text to check accuracy (Ong, 2002). This avenue of learning is clearly not available to a culture with no texts to consult. As Ong (2002) points out, people in an oral society would not be able to tell if a recitation was exact or not. There was no way to record the information and play it back and so no method to check if the recitation learned was exact. (Ong 2002 p. 57) Therefore, although it has been found by researchers, perfect verbatim renditions of stories are not the norm (Ong 2002 p.67).

Examining the place of rote learning in early writing cultures leads me to reflect on how the ancient Greek people would react to rote learning. The ancient Greek philosophers lived in a culture with a deep oral residue. One way that they developed and remembered complex thoughts is through shared conversations. Discussions with others leads to deep thinking in context, not rote memorization. My contemplation on this subject leads me to believe that Plato would not have recognized rote learning as real learning. Rote memorization is something done through consistent repetition, forcing the mind to memorize. Plato said “Do not train youth to learning by force or harshness, but direct them to it by what amuses their minds, so you may discover with accuracy the regular bent of the genius of each…” . To me, this implies a search for deep understanding instead of a memorization of facts.

As writing cultures evolved and writing became more widespread, it is clear how the study of the characters themselves could give rise to embracing rote learning. Students must learn how to write each character before they can be put into context. Although once an accepted learning technique, the role of rote learning in modern schools has gradually been diminishing. This pedagogical shift has occurred as theorists have realized that rote learning doesn’t give rise to true understanding of the concepts and ideas. Since this method creates a list of facts with minimal understanding of meaning, the human brain has great difficulty using these facts in new situations. Newer learning theories such as constructivism and the social learning theories advocate for knowledge to be connected to context and for facts to arise from understanding. These concepts are becoming more and more common in classrooms today. Students work to understand the reasoning behind the facts so that they can follow the pathways of the reasoning and arrive at the facts when required. For example, if a student understands why 2×3 equals 6, he or she is able to follow the process again to get the answer and to then apply that process to other multiplication questions. Instead of rote memorization, teaching the facts in context allows students to understand the relationships surrounding facts and learn them as “instances of generalizations instead of rote associations” (Dixon & Carnine, 1994 p.360). These facts will then be remembered though use in context as opposed to rote repetition out of context.

This means that in today’s culture, facts used consistently will be memorized for quick recall and, because of the easy access to information provided by today’s technology, rarely used facts, such as historical dates, don’t need to be memorized, verifying my aforementioned premise.

References:

Dixon & Carnine (1994). Ideologies, Practices, and their Implications for Special   Education. Journal of Spec Education 1994(28) 356-367 DOI: 10.1177/002246699402800309

Ong, W. J. (2002). Orality and Literacy. London: Routledge.

Rote (2010). In Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved from http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50209129?query_type=word&queryword=rote&first=1&max_to_show=10&sort_type=alpha&result_place=1&search_id=AipB-ejT1VC-19507&hilite=50209129

Clariana (1988). Peace Corps Nepal 1988 Preservice Technical Training Manual for Math and Science Teacher Trainers. Retrieved from ERIC ED300 276

Posted in Commentary 1 | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Balancing Technology

YouTube Preview Image

Neil Postman's book published in 1993.

Commentary on Neal Postman’s Technopoly: Chapter 1, The Judgment of Thamus
By Laura Bonnor
Neil Postman uses Plato’s Phaedrus to structure his critique of the modern world’s unabashed love affair with technology. He makes a concerted but somewhat meandering effort to put the reins on the riderless horse he refers to as Technopoly. (Postman, 1992, pg. 20) Postman focuses on the passage where Thamus examines Theuth’s inventions and reminds Theuth that the “creator is not always the best judge of the creation.”(Plato) Likewise, as stated in the discourse that precedes it, the lover may not be able to make the practical choice, and passion often clouds the issue.
In Phaedrus, as Postman points out, Socrates, over two thousand years ago, advised caution when embracing a new technology, in that case writing. Postman draws the comparison to our current enthusiasm for all things technological. The inventors of today’s technologies are certainly passionate about them and very few technophiles admit that there are two sides to the equation. Postman chides Thamus for being too one-sided and negative in regards to writing and rightly claims that “technology is both a burden and blessing: not either or, but this and that.” (pg. 5) Later he describes this as being akin to ecological change (pg.18), a concept that is further developed by Frank and Zhao (Frank and Zhao, 2003): that technological components enter our society much as any other living organism and have complicated and far reaching effects on the structure of that society.
Postman asserts that we make a bargain with technology, a point which O’Donnell repeats in his lecture (O’Donnell,1998) and he uses Freud’s examples of the loss and benefits that are created by our inventions to further drive home this argument (Postman, pg.5). Technology itself takes on a life of its own with unforeseen implications for humanity. Postman states that “function follows form” (pg. 7) but does not relate this to Marshal McLuhan’s phrase “the Medium is the Message” until pg. 14. Postman also refers to Harold Innis’ concept of “knowledge monopolies” (pg. 9) and the fact that the proponents of the new technology gain power within society because of their expertise with the new technology.
His concerns about the serious consequences, which may be positive or negative, of this unbridled enthusiasm is well founded and continues to be debated and studied. Pointing to the mechanical clock and the printing press (pg. 14/15) as examples of how technology can dramatically change society, Postman suggests caution when embracing the new technologies with such haste.
Postman asks two significant questions: who gets the power and freedom from a new technology and who loses it (pg. 19) and, just as Socrates asked, does the technology change our perception of truth, wisdom and mankind, not just on a practical level but on a human level ? (pg. 12) Postman refers to Innis (pg. 20) again when he reminds us that technology is changing what we think and how we think about it. It is changing the very symbols we use to understand ourselves (pg. 17). He cautions that although orality has had a place in the world of reading and writing, he is concerned that the solitary world of technology may end that ‘truce’ and asks: “Will the computer raise egocentricism to a virtue?”(pg. 18)
We may well debate whether we think our current technology leads us to a more or less solitary existence and if orality hasn’t actually increased with live chat, texting and cell phones. Although much of the commentary is reasonable and well founded, I do question a few of his assertions. He states that technology is “thrusting” (pg. 8 ) new words into the English language. The English language develops primarily according to usage, and always has; that has been one of its strengths. As people use more varied forms of technology, the words as labels will enter the language. Yes, our language evolves, but we play a great role in that. Postman also states that while teachers are “cheering on the new technology” (pg. 10), their jobs are becoming obsolete. As always, the best teachers, Socrates being one, are able to engage students in a dialogue which aims to question and consider the implications of change while supporting students as they navigate the ever-shifting universe. This is a prime example of ‘the guide on the side’ concept presently in vogue. Also, his concern that technology gives almost nothing to the losers (pg. 10-11) may be somewhat dated in light of Google, Facebook and Twitter. Technology has become in many ways a tool of the masses, and as such students do need to know how to use these tools effectively. And finally, his assertion that Galileo, who believed that mathematics was the language of nature, did not intend to apply it to measuring human intelligence (pg. 13), is not supported. Our current standardized intelligence tests are crude tools. Mathematics may well hold the potential to provide insight into and replicate human intelligence.
Postman’s main insights ring true, although I do question a few of his assertions, which may be due in part to the fact that the piece was written 18 years ago. He emphasizes that even as Socrates questioned the arrival of writing, so too must we examine the implications of the new technology. Technology does indeed have unknown and far-reaching consequences for the future of mankind. Postman died in 2003 and it is left to others to continue his thoughtful evaluation of the changes to come.

References
O’Donnell, J.J. Avatars of the word: From papyrus to cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Plato, Trans. B. Jowett, (2008), Phaedrus, Project Gutenberg, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1636/1636-h/1636-h.htm
Ong, Walter. (1982.) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.
Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books
Neil Postman Ponders High Tech, Jan 17, 1996 (abc forum) http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/january96/postman_1-17.html
Zhao, Yong and Kenneth A. Frank,(2003) Factors Affecting Technology Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective, Michigan State University, American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2003, Vol. 40, No. 4 pp 807-840.

Posted in Commentary 1 | Leave a comment

How Far We’ve Come

Farrington Automatic Address Reading Machine

Posted in Introductions | Leave a comment

TechnoDelillo


cc licensed flickr photo shared by lindsayloveshermac

The question is whether the enormous force of technology, and its insistence on speeding up time and compacting space, will reduce the human need for narrative—narrative in the traditional sense. Novels will become user-generated. An individual will not only tap a button that gives him a novel designed to his particular tastes, needs, and moods, but he’ll also be able to design his own novel, very possibly with him as main character. The world is becoming increasingly customized, altered to individual specifications. This shrinking context will necessarily change the language that people speak, write, and read. Here’s a stray question (or a metaphysical leap): Will language have the same depth and richness in electronic form that it can reach on the printed page? Does the beauty and variability of our language depend to an important degree on the medium that carries the words? Does poetry need paper?

An interview with Don Delillo

Posted in Technology | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Technology — Many Facets

I found the following reflection on “What Counts as Technology?” on a UK website dedicated to technology education.

What Counts as Technology?

Throughout the twentieth century the uses of the term have increased to the point where it now encompasses a number of “classes” of technology:
1. Technology as Objects: Tools, machines, instruments, weapons, appliances – the physical devices of technical performance
2. Technology as Knowledge: The know-how behind technological innovation
3. Technology as Activities: What people do – their skills, methods, procedures, routines
4. Technology as a Process: Begins with a need and ends with a solution
5. Technology as a Sociotechnical System: The manufacture and use of objects involving people and other objects in combination

John Bilton (2010). Technological Questions & Issues. Retrieved from The UK Technology Education Centre Website: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/trinity/watistec.html

As I reflect on text technologies and review the thoughts and ideas of my peers, I find it helpful to categorize my perspective through these five lenses.

As objects, we see modern text creation devices and tools that are powerful, portable and highly functional for all ranges of ability and needs.

As knowledge, the technology of text can be stored, recorded, changed, embellished, translated and rendered in more ways than ever before.

As activity, text technology is highly accessible.  Laymen like me can publish our work with ease, finding attentive readers like you without incurring cost or censure of our ideas.  Text technology is generalized to entertainment (online Scrabble), socialization (Facebook), and instant communication over long distances (texting).

As process, text technology finds itself beginning with a need to communicate and ending with the recording or transmission of meaning.

Text technology as a sociotechnical system speaks to the long standing tradition of people melding their ideas and creative products together to form a larger whole.  In ancient times this may have been manifest in scrolls filled with the psalms and inspired words of a number of authors.  In the last few centuries we have seen the combination of many distinct technologies – pen, ink, typewriter, printing press – to create newspapers.  Today we connect through waves and wires to join our collective voices on blogs and on-line discussion forums.

Posted in Technology | Leave a comment

What’s on your desktop?

Data Entry

Desks in the study room used to be designed mainly for reading and writing text on paper. A comfortable desk should have a well lit, spacious flat surface to place our stationery and paper/books.

The design of a comfortable desk has evolved with the development of computers. We now have to consider whether the desk is close to the socket, whether the light is going to reflect on the monitor… and what is expected to be on our desk is no longer just pencil and paper, but also another common medium for recording text – our keyboard.

I always clean up my desktop to make sure there is enough space right in the middle to place my 15.5″ laptop.

Posted in Introductions | Leave a comment

Text: Record and Relay Meaning

Chumash for Blackberry

Words. Poems. Recipes. Lyrics. Lines and circles. Scribbles of alphanumeric symbols. Organized clusters of pixels on a screen. Keyboard. Crosses and dots. Pictures on a cave wall. Books.

Text is a collection of symbols that represent thoughts, sounds and ideas. Text in its many forms is learned by many in order to communicate. At times text is meant to be cryptic and guarded to keep secrets. It is used to record data, history, song, and the collective knowledge of the human race. It flashes with brilliance in Vegas, inviting you in. It is emblazoned on signs attached to chain link fences to keep you out. It is a technology of woven words, given permanence when written, chiseled, inscribed, engraved, typed, etched or printed.

The forms and representations of text are myriad, yet the basis for its use and implementation across cultures and time is the same. Text records and relays meaning.

Photo by Chajm Guski, http://www.flickr.com/people/chajms/

Posted in Text | 1 Comment

Text

Thinking about text got me reflecting on the famous writers of all time. One of my favourites has to be William Shakespeare. I have read, seen, heard,and watched probably most of the plays written. I still find them most fascinating. I have heard many colleagues and friends voice less enthusiatic responses, but I am still captivated. In searching for a quote that could sum up TEXT I happened upon this particular one. “My words fly up, my thoughts remain below: Words without thoughts never to heaven go.” ..William Shakespeare.
To me having visited Shakespeare’s birthplace and attended a play in Stratford -upon-Avon, any reference to writing cited by Shakespeare causes me to reflect deeply on the meaning. This quote I feel is saying that text is empty if not supported by meaning from the writer. Words are just words and they are empty without meaning and purpose.
Expression and intent need to accompany the words to create meaning. Profound text has over the centuries been evident of the greatest writer of all times.
This quote is pointing out that text needs to be backed by intent and some writings are more powerful than others. Text can be a powerful medium.
Leslie

Posted in Text | Leave a comment