Reading Questions for Week of 2/6/05
Sorry this is a day late (and perhaps a dollar short...). I had a few things come up yesterday that kept me from posting.
Anyway, here is your new set of questions for the week. We'll discuss some in class, but I do want folks to chime in a bit more. Even if things aren't making sense, ask or say something....
1. Pacey's article in general: What are, in your opinion, the cultural aspects of technology related to writing for electronic communities? (Consider, if you need to, the diagram on p. 98).
2. Winner's article: Winner discusses on p. 104 the difference between "making" and "using." This is a distinction he carries throughout the article. Think about writing on computers -- how do we "make" writing versus how do we "use" writing in electronic environments?
3. Borgmann talks about Heidegger's idea of "dwelling." Heidegger argues elsewhere that we have to "dwell" in language before being able to use it. What does it mean to "dwell in language" and how does one "dwell in language" on a computer?
4. Haraway and Latour present the idea that there are humans and nonhumans in this new world of electronic communities. We perhaps are reaching the point that larger numbers of humans are blending with nonhuman elements. From your own experience, where do you see these intersections happening between the human and nonhuman, and based on Latour's diagram on p.189, where do you think society is at this point in the state of social/nonhuman relations?
5. David Harvey argues starting on p. 337 that we can see ourselves as architects of our worlds. Thinking of how people generate new personas, new identities, and new ways of thinking and being in online environments, read over Harvey's "universal rights" (pp.348-351) and discuss how online life might change these rights.
Anyway, here is your new set of questions for the week. We'll discuss some in class, but I do want folks to chime in a bit more. Even if things aren't making sense, ask or say something....
1. Pacey's article in general: What are, in your opinion, the cultural aspects of technology related to writing for electronic communities? (Consider, if you need to, the diagram on p. 98).
2. Winner's article: Winner discusses on p. 104 the difference between "making" and "using." This is a distinction he carries throughout the article. Think about writing on computers -- how do we "make" writing versus how do we "use" writing in electronic environments?
3. Borgmann talks about Heidegger's idea of "dwelling." Heidegger argues elsewhere that we have to "dwell" in language before being able to use it. What does it mean to "dwell in language" and how does one "dwell in language" on a computer?
4. Haraway and Latour present the idea that there are humans and nonhumans in this new world of electronic communities. We perhaps are reaching the point that larger numbers of humans are blending with nonhuman elements. From your own experience, where do you see these intersections happening between the human and nonhuman, and based on Latour's diagram on p.189, where do you think society is at this point in the state of social/nonhuman relations?
5. David Harvey argues starting on p. 337 that we can see ourselves as architects of our worlds. Thinking of how people generate new personas, new identities, and new ways of thinking and being in online environments, read over Harvey's "universal rights" (pp.348-351) and discuss how online life might change these rights.
posted by Diane Penrod at 2/06/2006
4 Comments:
1. I think that we all bring different aspects to the table so to speak and when trying to talk on the internet, those aspects of our cultures may not be evident, obvious or understood. I think that to communicate effectively, you need to understand those differences.
2. I was along the same wavelength as Allison with this one. I thought that Winner was saying that "making" the technology was about the codes and programs that go into the technology, whereas "using" technology refers to application and manipulation of that programming. I know very little about how I make writing because to me I just hit a bunch of keys to assemble my thoughts, but I use it to communicate the message that those symbols represent.
3. I think dwelling in language refers to your comfort with that language. To comfortably communicate in any language, online or other, you need to be understand the basics of the language and be able to use the "rules" that apply in that language.
4.I think just the fact that humans depend so much on technology to function emphasizes the nonhuman qualities growing in all of us. Particularly observing for my thesis, students give up quickly when they get frustrated doing something as a result of their lessened attention span. Or when the server goes down the night before a test is due and students don't know what to do - the thought of going to the libary and flipping through some journals never even enters their mind because their laptop usually does all of the skimming for them. I think that all of these qualities and the growing dependence on IPods and cell phones and the next new gadget brings us closer to nonhuman everyday. And until doing some of this reading, I didn't realize the profound effects that could have on society. I wonder if other people would feel the same way if they really knew what these texts are telling us.
Questions for Discussion 12/13/06
I didn't know how else to post this so I hope everyone sees it!
1) Part III opens furthering Winner's earlier idea of "making" and "using" where technology is concerned. "The crucial ethical issue with technology is not whether we can make or use something but whether we should make or use something." Do you think that line has already been crossed? Where do you think the lines needs to be drawn?
2) Jonas believes the changed nature of human action has changed the nature of politics and ethics. He asserts this based on the "new dimension of ethical relevence for which there is no precedent in the standards of traditional ehtics." Do you agree that new ethical guidelines need to take the place of traditional ethics in the age of growing and changing technology?
3) McGinn's essay seems to capsulate the idea that government can not keep up with technology and they are attempting to do so to preserve our natural resources. He thinks in the coming years Americans will experience a downfall in our quality of life. Do you think, as a nation, we would be willing to sacrifice future technology to save our resources?
4) Tribe compares internet gateways to bookstores saying that the government does not hold that bookstore liable or monitor what is sold on their shelves, therefore the internet gateway is not liable and also not monitored for what is on their bulletins. If neither is liable for content and they seem equals in this explanation, why is so much more expected of online information? Or, is more expected at all? DO you think there needs to be a more watchful eye on one or the other?
5)Tribe also goes on to discuss the First Amendment as it applies to online content. On page 266 he asserts that written viruses and other online dangers are not protected under free speech. What is your opinion on how the first amendment applies to the internet?
1) Culturally, I see there being more of a difference between generations than I do between different ethnicities when it comes to technology. I’m 24 and most of my friends use technology to a great extent. Still, I’m always surprised to see the difference in someone who is only two or three years younger than me. That age group seems to be totally immersed in technology. However, my mother is actually afraid of computers and all those hackers that are out to “get her.” There’s such a vast difference between people just a few years apart. As a result, you don’t see the older generation represented in electronic communities nearly as much as today’s youth.
2) I’m not sure I fully understand the wording of the question, but I’ll try. I agree with what has been said above me about the meanings of “making” and “using” technology. He’s saying that the way technology or even the writing itself is made, has a great effect on its use by everyday people who may or may not understand how these things were made in the first place. People’s perceptions on how these technologies are made can alter writing as well.
3) Dwelling in language means to experience it first hand before trying to utilize it. I’m taking a class now where we examine different ways of speaking the same language. For example, I have no idea what half the things in this book mean. But as I spend more and more time reading, it begins to make more sense. (slowly) If I went up to a group of kids at a rap concert who were speaking in a form of hip-hop slang, I wouldn’t understand a word, much less be able to speak it. However, if I started hanging around with them on a regular basis, it would all start to make sense.
This applies to computers as well. You can’t just jump in an expect others to understand you. You have to take the time and read e-mails, IM conversations, message board postings, blog entries and all the different things the internet has to offer before you can expect to utilize those tools.
4) So far, I see the blending happening at basic levels and increasing everyday. For example, many websites have programs where you can type in questions about technical assistance and the computer itself will find you answers. Another example, when I called to activate my new credit card, I didn’t talk to a person. Instead, I punched in a few numbers on my phone and their computer system did all the work. Machines do a lot of the basic work that we used to need people for.
I’m not sure exactly where we are on the scale, but I think we’re getting close to giving almost all of our power away. Every day, we let machines do more thinking for us than we had allowed the day before. Will we go too far and unknowingly give over total control? Is there a line that has to be drawn somewhere and if so, where do we draw it?
5) I think a lot of these could be changed. There have been many attempts of censorship, what people write on their blogs and message boards can and have been used against them. People can steal your identity and/or spy on you. The internet allows you to experiment with new ideas and to let your voice be heard, but that seems to come at a price as everyone has access and can use your own words against you.
This is Bill again, still waiting on his password...
1. Though I may be reading this question wrong, Pacey’s article seemed to focus a great deal on cultures/people having a narrowed view of a technology or task. Similarly, we all usually focus on the aspects of a technology that will benefit us in the short run. When you begin to see the needs and uses of technology for other people/cultures, we begin to widen our perception, but this rarely happens because many people never really attempt to gain new perception unless absolutely necessary.
Similarly with writing technologies, as a college student I see the uses for writing tools as I can utilize them. I have not thought of how a blog can be best utilized by a Hungarian steel worker or a Siberian caribou herder because I have not been forced/motivated to look through their lenses. But each writing technology holds different potential for different people.
3. To dwell in a language means to know more then how to construct fluent thoughts and small talk in well-written sentences; it means to have a complete working knowledge of how to craft effective and clever messages to the appropriate parties.
Relating to computers, I dwell regularly in English but certainly variations arise between my speech, my papers, my email, and my texting (instant messenger). Knowledge of slang, sentence construction, and other unique aspects are involved in dwelling.
4. The intersections of the human and nonhuman, increasing steadily, hold great promise and great danger to the court. Automated chat help offered by many big companies, computerized telemarketers, and cognitive super computers given the ability to reason (not as much science fiction as one would hope) have all breached the frontier of uniquely human activity. Where will it grow disastrous (because we’re too curious to stop before disaster)?
Based on the graph, I would have to say we’re at the ninth state of networks of power because (and this is a guess) we have not yet reached a point of clear and utter dependence on the nonhuman (though it’s pretty close). We can still survive with a decrease of the symbiosis we now share, but it wouldn’t be pretty.
5. Along with great advancement, online life has developed loop holes, new situations, and greater problems to the society. We have a magnificent space in which we have no idea the limit of the potential. Who is to say what may be developed in the days ahead?
Online life has no clear parameters as of yet and so we have little hard rules on what one’s rights are within the space. Sure the government keeps on top of illegal action, but even there the web is so huge that it’s impossible to get all the crime.
Rights such as right to privacy becomes a question of “what is really private?” or “when is it appropriate to release private information?” Other things such as freedom of speech hold a limitless notion of where things will go. Who really knows what lies ahead?
Post a Comment
<< Home