Reading Questions for Writing for Electronic Communities
As I said in class last week, I'll get the discussions rolling. Tonight I have a series of five questions for everyone to consider. You can post a bit here throughout the week, and you can use the questions as prompt's for Monday night's class.
I've jumped around a bit in the readings, so I'll offer page numbers for you to orient yourself.
Here we go...
1. Robert Heilbroner puts forward the idea of technological determinism as a problem of a social time period marked by high capitalism and low socialism, so technology is unleashed but agencies that can control or guide this technology are rudimentary (p.14).
Given that, think about the electronic writing technologies we have in society today...is Heilbroner correct in his observation that -- for writing -- the technologies are unleashed but there are very basic, raw controls or guidelines for content and presentation? Be able to explain your ideas cogently.
2. Hans Jonas's article is quite interesting in that Jonas describes technology as a "species of power" (p.24). Thinking about writing in these new technological environments, who/what has the power over the written word? Are there dangers or concerns related to power that we should be wary of when linking writing to technology?
3. Now, think about Heidegger's essay "Question Concerning Technology" particularly in light to how you respond to question 2 -- pay close attention to the "four causes" Heidegger outlines on p. 36. Now, consider Heidegger's notion of "telos" in relation to both the "four causes" and to writing in an electronic environment. How must writers be responsible for their words given Heidegger's sections on pp.36-37?
4. Marcuse discusses technology and efficiency on p.65. Is writing made more efficient through changes in technology? If so, how? If not, why not?
5. Pay close attention to the Aldous Huxley quotes in Habermas's essay "Technological Progress and the Social Life-World." What do Huxley's observations about literature teach us about the connections between writing and electronic environments?
Have a go! See you Monday night at 6:30.
I've jumped around a bit in the readings, so I'll offer page numbers for you to orient yourself.
Here we go...
1. Robert Heilbroner puts forward the idea of technological determinism as a problem of a social time period marked by high capitalism and low socialism, so technology is unleashed but agencies that can control or guide this technology are rudimentary (p.14).
Given that, think about the electronic writing technologies we have in society today...is Heilbroner correct in his observation that -- for writing -- the technologies are unleashed but there are very basic, raw controls or guidelines for content and presentation? Be able to explain your ideas cogently.
2. Hans Jonas's article is quite interesting in that Jonas describes technology as a "species of power" (p.24). Thinking about writing in these new technological environments, who/what has the power over the written word? Are there dangers or concerns related to power that we should be wary of when linking writing to technology?
3. Now, think about Heidegger's essay "Question Concerning Technology" particularly in light to how you respond to question 2 -- pay close attention to the "four causes" Heidegger outlines on p. 36. Now, consider Heidegger's notion of "telos" in relation to both the "four causes" and to writing in an electronic environment. How must writers be responsible for their words given Heidegger's sections on pp.36-37?
4. Marcuse discusses technology and efficiency on p.65. Is writing made more efficient through changes in technology? If so, how? If not, why not?
5. Pay close attention to the Aldous Huxley quotes in Habermas's essay "Technological Progress and the Social Life-World." What do Huxley's observations about literature teach us about the connections between writing and electronic environments?
Have a go! See you Monday night at 6:30.
posted by Diane Penrod at 1/29/2006
3 Comments:
1) I think Heilbroner is saying that in our society, technological progress speeds ahead faster every day. However, we don’t have a system in place to police that spread or its content. In that way, there isn’t a real conscious entity in charge. Technology itself is in control. I agree with that assessment. Technology speeds ahead at such a rapid rate that it‘s incredibly hard for the average person to keep up. My mother never touches the computer, let alone gets on the internet. Yet, I can’t imagine living even a day without access to it. When so many people don’t understand the basics, how does society control content? We can’t. We’re at the mercy of technology.
2) Who has the power over the written word in these new environments? That’s hard to say. My first thought is corporations. They have control over many aspects of the internet. The individual generally must pay to be granted access to the internet and then pay again if they want to take up any actual space. However, at this point I think the individual has the power. Though there can be censorship by both governments and corporations, they can’t shut everything down. They can’t find every blog or every message board post. If one program or access point is closed off, another will simply spring up in its place. Probably after finding some legal loop holes. The internet is very much like the Wild West. We’re struggling to control as many aspects as we can, but it’s still an anything goes environment.
There are certainly concerns one must examine when they put any sort of information on the internet. When you put yourself out there, you must realize that any information you divulge could be used against you. It could be used to hurt others. Likewise, you must also realize that since anyone can put information out there, there’s always the danger of being taken in by false information. Everything you read must be taken with a grain of salt.
4) For the most part, I think writing is made much more efficient through changes in technology. Not just the physical process, but in the distribution of writing and exchange of ideas. It’s much easier to gain access to the work of others today than it was a hundred years or even five years ago. I still talk to my childhood friends thanks to the speed of internet communication. If we had to write letters back and forth we would have all lost touch years ago. Computer programs automatically format words and paragraphs for us to meet our specific needs. They help us with grammar and spelling, allowing us to focus more on content as opposed to mechanics. They act as mini-teachers. Those that are willing can gain a wealth of information from even just one simple computer program.
However, sometimes those very advantages cause some of us, even perhaps many of us to become lazy. It can dilute our writing. Some may use these quick fixes offered by computer programs and not take the time to think about content. Sometimes, we stop thinking about what’s important in an assignment and think too much about presentation. We may use technology as an easy excuse to get from point A to point B as quickly as possible. Because computers make things so much easier, we become spoiled and look for more and more ways to save time and skip the actual thought process that’s so important to writing.
Ultimately, I think it depends on the individual and their use of technology. Whether they embrace the advantages or abuse this new power. I personally believe that advances in technology do much more good than they do harm.
5) Huxley says that Literature deals in the very specific human world. The world that deals with human emotions, actions and the uniquely human perceptions of all things. Things that change everyday and offer potentially different experiences each time. Science generally deals with the static. They find the way something actually works and move on. Also, in many instances scientists are dealing with what they can’t see and/or personally experience.
I don‘t fully understand the question, but I‘ll try. The connection between writing and electronic environments is bringing these two ideas closer together. For a long time, cyberspace was like literature in that it was mostly made up of e-mail and chat rooms. It was a simple way for individuals to communicate. As internet use has grown, so has the exchange of information. People are much more knowledgeable now that they have access to all those scientific ideas. At the same time, communication between individuals has grown and our exposure to the literature side of Huxley’s argument has grown as well. There is not necessarily such a clear line between the two anymore.
Both Tyler and Gary's points resonate with me. While the market certainly drives technology and our general access to it, at some point the process does have a feel that technology takes control of itself and keeps growing.
Of course, that's anthropomorphising technology, but as we have been reading, people have anthropomorphised technology for centuries.
Mark Taylor, as Gary notes, is an interesting individual to look at regarding "network culture." However, I'm increasingly becoming more curious and more persuaded by Internet or Networked culture transforming into collective or "swarm" intelligence, where human mental power mixes with nonhuman technology to create either a massive breakthrough in thinking or a massive breakdown in communication -- the latter seems aptly described by what Miss Fox noted was posted on the WPA list.
Ah, we will continue these and other discussions....
Hello, this is Bill from class; I forgot my blog password and it’s being “mailed” to me as we speak (call me impatient but it’s taken more then an hour...).
Anyways, here are my comments for the questions from this week:
1. I think that Heilbroner has it partially correct. Writing technologies have been emerging relatively quickly (such as blogs and wikis) and so the guidelines and rules that govern them have developed from quick observation and/or learned error. Other relatively-older writing technologies such as email have a much more stringent set of rules because a governing structure has been given time to develop.
Are governing structures rigid and permanent? In this technologically evolving society, it’s an impossible expectation. Therefore, if we cannot predict what is to come tomorrow, how we develop a set of detailed rules? As a result, does not all technology still subject to evolution contain a raw aspect to it? And on the same line, does not anything that deals with communication fall into the same basic rules?
2. I would agree with Hans Jonas in that technology is a “species of power.” Those who possess the capital and/or the knowledge have the power (whether rightfully attained or not) to place restrictions, manipulate usage, and influence others. Technology enhances and better equips us to perform a task; those who own it or master it have the upper hand (though capital has become less a player in past years…).
Much like any kind of power, writing technologies can be used wrongly. A blog can be used to distract, defame, or manipulate a public as can a website be used to shuttle across an ill-mannered agenda. Now that capital becomes less of a player in technology (we all have basic access now), the skilled computer guru with an agenda can pose a formidable adversary.
4. I guess it depends on what you mean by efficiency. Technology has greatly improved writing efficiency, as in words per second. People can communicate at such rapid and effective rate that it makes communication ten years ago seem extremely antiquated.
But if you mean efficiency in terms of quality words per second, I think technology slows that down. People today worry more of the quickness of the message that they take little time to consider its craft. Efficiency of time has destroyed efficiency of quality and therefore, we may send fast messages but do they hold the potential they could?
Post a Comment
<< Home