While
there is certainly some truth to the statement that “we must begin to say 'no'
to certain kinds of technology and to begin to control technological change
because we've now reached the point that technology is so powerful and so rapid
that it could destroy us unless we control it,” I feel that it is rather more
alarmist than useful (Future Shock).
I do agree that there are certain technologies that should be denied for the
moment, to be researched in-depth further in the future when we are more used to
the constant change technology has brought us and have better learned to adapt
to such change, for instance, eugenics and human cloning. There are so many
possible abuses of such technology, and such a fine line between a miracle and
an abuse, that a culture just emerging from the throes of “future shock” should
not ideally be trusted with them.
I also believe,
however, that my generation, and possibly the generation or two prior to mine,
have matured in an environment where constant technological change has been
normal, and that we have grown to become comfortable with the kind of pace of
change once considered to be far too quick. For example, an article in USA Today quotes Vernon Wease, a
50-year-old who, according to the article, “uses a smartphone, the Internet,
e-mails, texts and Facebook,” but who “struggles” and “speaks longingly of his
dad’s…manual typewriter” (el Nasser 1). On the other hand, his 23, 19, and 15-year-old
children “have no difficulty with the information overload Future Shock warned…about” (el Nasser 1).
His children were
born straddling the line of demarcation, so to speak, between those of us who
are comfortable with technology and its constant improvement even if we deride
the companies who force us to shell out constantly for those improvements, and
those who are overwhelmed by the amount of change that has happened to them in
their lifetime. The very first computers I used would be considered ancient
relics today, with resolutions (and memories) equivalent to the newest calculators,
little more than glorified typewriters in some ways. Yet of those who grew up
using typewriters, only some can be said to have comfortably transitioned into
the computer era. While some of that may be more related to a set of mind than
to inadaptability (most scientists and engineers that I know are extremely
comfortable with computers no matter what their age, while a majority of
teachers and others in such humanities-type professions seem to struggle with
any technology), a portion of it is most likely still related to future shock.
Works
Cited
El Nasser, Haya. "'Future Shock' Team Issues
Predictions for Next 40 Years." USA
Today. USA Today, 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-10-14-futureshock14_ST_N.htm>.
Future Shock. Dir.
Alexander Grasshoff. Perf. Orson Welles. Metromedia Producers Corporation,
1972. Film. Youtube. 5 May
2007. Web. 2012.
I agree with the fact that as time goes on we will continue to adapt to the fast changes of technology. I liked your point stating that their is a fine line between the abuse of technology and using it properly. I too believe that as we continue to adapt to technology we will become increasingly more mature around it. Like with anything else we must learn from our mistakes. However I feel that there is also no denying the fact that we are better off with technology in our lives because of the advantages it offers us. Overall I agree with your points and think this was very well written.
ReplyDelete