Postman began Chapter 3 saying that from the time of the
steam engine (1765), not a decade went by without inventions of machinery (p.
40). Later on in the chapter appears this quote:
“We had learned how
to invent things, and the question of why
we invent things receded in importance. The idea that if something can be
done it should be done was born in the nineteen century” (p. 42) It is interesting
that in this shift of thinking—ignoring the why and worrying about the how—a
shift in the way people viewed each other occurred as well. People were no longer
seen as wholly children of God but as consumers and markets. It’s ironic how
most groups lobbying for human rights of some sort is asking for this change to
be reversed—to see people for who they are individually, not as a stereotype or
a generality!
“Technocracy gave us the idea of progress. . .promise of new
freedoms and new forms of social organization. . . also speeded up the world. . .Time in fact,
became an adversary over which technology could triumph” (p. 45) Technology vs. tradition. These two
became opposing world-views. The rise of technology redefined traditional
thought, rather than eliminating it. And by redefining it, traditional thought
and culture began to submit to the rule of technique and technology (the how
taking over the thought to even ask why).
Chapter 4: The Improbable World
From a writers standpoint, I loved Postman’s “. . .the ways
of technology, like the ways of God, are awesome and mysterious” (p. 58). What
a loaded and scary statement to make! But I definitely think he is onto
something. He went to explain that “What was being lost was not immediately
apparent. The decline of the great narrative of the Bible, which had provided answers
to both fundamental and practical questions, was accompanied by the rise of the
great narrative of Progress” (p. 59-60) Information distributed through new
technologies was becoming the new “god” of the culture, a “deceiver.” He points out a dangerous assumption made in
this new information culture. Now that the information is out there, we have a desire
to access the information, and because we can access it, we know what to do
with it and how to use it for our own interests and benefit. He argues that information, usefulness and
reason no longer go hand in hand (p. 66-67), as it had in pre-technolpoly
times. “In Technolopy, we are driven to fill our lives with the quest to
“access” information. For what purpose or with what limitations, it is not for
us to ask” (p. 61).
Burning Questions:
1. Do you feel that technology serves as a
source of quantity or quality information?
2. How do you (or how do you teach your students to) find and
use meaningful information rather than information glut (p. 70)?
I think that technology predominantly serves both, depending where we look and for which subject.
ReplyDeleteI teach my students to use credible sights that are at their reading level. We use the internet for research purposes often, so they seem to have a pretty good sense of where to look after our initial project for the year. Some teachers only allow students to use sights that they have found for them. I have chosen not to do that because I feel that it is more important for my 5th graders to learn where and how to find what they need. Our school also has a good filtering system so I don't have to worry about dangerous sights. That is a whole other issue, though. Wow, there are sooo many things to think about every day, are't there?
Reading this book I am just more and more convinced about the importance of showing our students/children the ways of the computer and how to find valid information. There is plenty of quality information but the issue is walking through the quantity to find the quality. It is a skill! It is just one more thing to teach! You are right, Phyllis, there is so much, everyday!
ReplyDeleteI had the privilege of attending my daughter's dance recital. When keeping in mind that prof. dave said that this book was written pre-internet/computer (the way we know it) made me think about the technology I saw in those performances. And then I had to disagree somewhat with postman. While I'd like to assume a little bit of the "why" was put into the performances I saw, even if not, I think there was a "why" that maybe they can't even voice. Why do we perform? Why do we move out bodies to music? Why do we try to perfect a craft or learn steps? Why do we do it to music or backgrounds? Why do we add costume and colour? Maybe I am over-stepping into the readings from Pink, but there is something of beauty and satisfaction and celebration when this all fits together so wonderfully. When I saw my daughter dance--and all the dancers, really--technology became something to celebrate! And God's talents and abilities became afresh, even if others/non-believers couldn't see it (or not yet!). I saw quality!
ReplyDeleteYou may also be dipping into Perera's article on "Loving Technology, Loving God" but in that article she talks about using technology (which is a gift from Him because He initially made all things good) to worship Him. She says "Our urge to invent things, to create technology, whether it be to solve problems or just for the fun of it, comes out of that God-imaging, creative impulse." So yes, just as the dancers where using their God-imaging creative qualities, technophiles could be seen in the same category, with just a different medium.
ReplyDelete