Both James O’Donnell and Neil Postman make the point that technology has both positive and negative aspects to it. O’Donnell uses the term loss and gain while Postman notes “technology is both a burden and a blessing” (Postman, 1992, p.5). While I can certainly recognize that technological advancements have made significant contributions to an improved quality of life in areas such as medicine, entertainment, and a broader dissemination of information, I am not convinced that these gains have outstripped the losses. I am not sure that we are living a better life or that we are happier, in this information age than our ancestors were. I think that we know more, and have access to an abundance of information but we are not necessarily any smarter or wiser as a broad society. I tend to agree with Freud who commented that technology gives us an improved means to an unimproved end. (Postman, 1992).
Postman makes an interesting point that “Technological change is neither additive nor subtractive. It is “ecological’…..it changes everything.” (Postman, 1992, p.18) He raises some examples where new technology changed our entire way of existence. One such example was that of the mechanical clock. Originally created by Benedictine monks to determine when their seven regular intervals of devotion should occur each day, the clock expanded to outside the monastery into the broader world where it would become used to regulate working hours, for example. If one takes a moment to imagine a world without clocks, or another tool to measure time, it is easy to conceptualize a very different world. Although using a clock to control and regulate another’s time as in, for example, a working day, may seem oppressive, a world without time measure is likely to feel chaotic and unproductive by today’s standards. So we accept the loss with the gain.
Another point raised by both O’Donnell and Postman is that we must know ourselves when new technologies emerge. Postman notes that we must admit new technologies “with our eyes wide open” O’Donnell notes that, “We need to know who we are. We need to know what our values are…..to make rational choices and rational applications of technology to our problems without either being hypnotized by the technology or being hypnotized by the threats or the promises the technology seems to offer” (Engell et al., 1999) For me, this is an important point and reminds me that technology is simply a tool, and how we use it – the gain or the loss – is largely up to us. Unfortunately, in 2018, we have examples in social media and in cyber bullying where individuals are either not adhering to their values for whatever reasons, or have some pretty poor values. This has a far reaching consequence that is worrying.
The integration of technology and continued development of information technologies is certainly here to stay. Of some comfort was O’Donnell’s oft repeated line, “we have been here before”. It was a reminder that generations before have been concerned with the technological changes of the day from the dawn of writing to the printing press. They adapted and so will we.
References:
Engell, J. & O’Donnell, J. (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/8770/pages/activity-cambridge-forum?module_item_id=446325
Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
zarah mathai
May 29, 2018 — 10:06 pm
While reading your post, a single memory came to mind. I was at a restaurant, and noticed a mother seated with her teenage children across from her. What I witnessed in that moment was truly heartbreaking. As dinner progressed, the children were preoccupied and completely immersed with their cell phones, to the point that they missed these momentary, fleeting flashes of sadness and longing that appeared ever so briefly on their mother’s face. My husband and I had an honest discussion about technology and its role within families, and we continued to express how much we both wanted to cultivate healthy relationships with out future children. We now have a 11-month old daughter and we have decided for the first two years to not exposure her to technology (to the best of our ability), choosing instead to stimulate her by other means. This story is quite reflective of the views presented by both O’Donnell and Postman. Yes, technology does have its well-known benefits, but has it stunted our growth, creativity and soial skills in some ways? As you mentioned, technology has made incredible advances in the medical field, entertainment and the flow of information. However, it is equally important to recognize that technology has also led to issues such as cyberbullying and privacy loss. O’Donnell states that “we all have a stake in applying our knowledge and our wisdom in making good sense of the world we are going to live in” (O’Donnell, 1999). It really does not matter how the world changes; we are responsible for how we live our lives and the choices we make. For example, “ABC announced on Tuesday [today] that it would cancel the hit sitcom “Roseanne” following “abhorrent” comments from the show’s star, Roseanne Barr, who had compared former Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett to an ape” (Higgens et al., 2018).
References
Engell J. & O’Donnell J. (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace. [Audio File]. Cambridge Forums. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview
Higgins, T., & Breuninger, K. (2018, May 30). ABC cancels ‘Roseanne’ after Roseanne Barr compares black Obama aide Valerie Jarrett to an ape. Retrieved May 29, 2018, from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/29/abc-cancels-roseanne-barrs-sitcom-after-her-tweet-about-black-obama-aide-valerie-jarrett.html
Kathryn Williams
May 30, 2018 — 3:04 am
Over the course of the readings I was also drawn to the idea of gains and loses described by both Postman (1993) and Engell & O’Donnell (1999). It’s a theme that I also try to get across to my colleagues when trying to convince them to try a new piece of technology in their classroom, for example, “Kahoot is an easy assessment tool but it won’t work if the connection is down,” and a concept I also discuss with my students, for example, “Social media is great for staying connected but can also create a false sense of what reality looks like.” The concept of gains and loses is one that has come up throughout several MET courses I have taken already and a theme that I will continue to explore with interest.
Your point about not being sure if we are living a better, happier life with increased technology made me think about Walter Ong’s (1982) work on orality and literacy. More specifically, Ong’s examination at primary oral cultures, that is, cultures untouched by writing. This shift from a completely oral culture to a literate one would be a complete change in the way that these societies think, communicate and understand. Do we think that these societies would have been happier before the onset of literacy? Comparatively, lets think back to a time before cell phones. I don’t think that the development of cell phones, and the absolute change in lifestyle that followed, could have been predicted. In both these situations, would the earlier society have thought that their life was better? I think I agree with you when you say that we may not be living a happier life due to increased technology, but as we didn’t know what was to come, how were we meant to know that the simpler life would have been better? I appreciated how you ended your post – societies have adapted and so will we. But do we have any other choice?
Kathryn
References
Engell, J. (Presenter) & O’Donnell, J. (Presenter). (1999). From Papyrus to Cyberspace [radio broadcast]. Retrieved from https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/4290/files/609973/preview
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality & literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.
kristie dewald
May 30, 2018 — 6:33 pm
I appreciated both your comments. I just finished reading Chapter 3 of Ong and found it fascinating. What would life be like in a purely oral culture? I certainly think there would be a greater sense of community. Whether that would place one in a “happier” life or not depends on the individual, I suppose. After a Twitter session, I usually think I would be happiest relegated to a cabin in the woods never to see or communicate with another human. I suspect Roseanne is feeling a similar disdain for social media these days!
I do think that much of the “losses” could be mitigated with a greater view of technology as a tool, a means to an end, rather than the purpose of existence. My aunt is a teacher/administrator in junior high and she has often commented that we place these powerful tools (phones and tablets) in the hands of children but never teach them appropriate use. I wonder how we could when adults, myself included, are prone to some pretty poor behaviours with them as well. As much as it saddens me to witness interactions, or lack thereof, that you described, Zarah, there I find myself, looking at my phone in the company of others.
Ah well, as you noted Kathryn, we have to adapt. The toothpaste is out of the tube. The best we can do is maximize the gains while we figure out how to minimize the losses. All exactly the reasons that I am in this program!
sally bourque
June 5, 2018 — 8:20 am
Hi Kristie (and all),
Ong makes a lot of sweeping categorizations about oral vs. literate societies. One is that “…writing and print isolate. There is no collective noun or concept for readers corresponding to audience…the spoken word forms unities….” (Ong, p. 72) One broad and extreme way to interpret this categorization might be to suggest that the shift from oral to literate society will destroy community. I can imagine someone suggesting that, because individuals may choose to stay home and read or write they will be absent from traditional community gatherings and hence their voices will be lost from the organic, immediate experience of community. This sounds rather terrible! However, on the other hand, we also know (looking back) that writing helped to spread Christianity, and is therefore partially responsible for the creation of a wider, vaster community.
I think there’s a certain romantisization that comes with all change. Change is disconcerting and it’s easy to look to the past and think “things were so much better then”…but were they?
Don MacIintosh in one of his presentations at the World Online Learning Conference, 2017 said ” There’s a myth of interactivity being perfect in face-to-face classrooms. The reality is that students tune and are too shy to speak…” (MacIntosh, 2017) Yet, it is so easy to forget these kinds of challenges as we face the new ones presented by online learning.
With that said, I also agree, and think that, in some ways, we are all like children when it comes to new technology. I certainly remember going through several years in my 20s where my new smart phone was always with me and I shamelessly checked it while I was sitting with friends. (In fact, I felt left out if I didn’t have a cell phone to at least pretend to be checking.) Now, however, I make a conscious effort to leave my phone in my pocket or purse when I am with people. It was hard at first, but now I prefer it and I feel a little frustrated by someone who absolutely refuses to stay off their phone during a conversation. It’s a bad habit, I think, only sometimes excusable.
MacIntosh, D. (2017) Exploring the Potential: Innovative uses of Technology for Teaching and Learning1 [live presentation] http://onlinelearning2017.ca/en/presentation-schedule/exploring-the-potential-innovative-uses-of-technology-for-teaching-and-learning-1/
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality & literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.