Modern Technology:
Promising a Future of Doom or Life?
Modern technology will affect human life in the coming future, for better or for worse. Ray Kurzweil is a futurist; a scientist who specializes in predictions about the future, in his essay “Promise and Peril”, he proposes possible advantages and disadvantages of technological improvement in the world, and mentions greatness of technology that not only benefits human life, but also the danger of its existence. After deciding between the effects, Kurzweil takes a stance for the idea that future technology will benefit humanity. On the other hand, the environmental journalist Erica Etelson disagrees with Kurzweil’s idea. In her article “Is Modern Technology Killing US?”, she argues that most
…show more content…
However, mankind should be concerned of the risks that lie beneath it. The big aspects determining the future of modern technology is whether safety and utility will be able to catch up with the improvement of technology. In the early part of his essay, Kurzweil stated that the development of technology grows exponentially instead of linearly. Exponential grow makes it seems as if the technology is improving too fast for human to handle it. Kurzweil refuses to believe so, he argues that as the technology grows exponentially, the precaution and safety regarding the technology proportionally follows its …show more content…
Kurzweil is a technology optimist and he believes that technology always benefits human life. At first it seems that Etelson agrees with Kurzweil. In her first paragraph, Etelson states that she would not be the same person without technology. If the reader stops reading at this point, they might be tricked into believing that Etelson is a pro-modern-technology. However, throughout the rest of her essay she argues that technology often diminishes, rather than enriches quality of life. She argues that many times humans devalue life-affirming activities and ways of being. As technology improves, humans learn less and less of abilities and social
Lately, research has shown that kids these days are not that intelligent as the use of technology increased. Their reading and math skills decreased and the amount of books they would read has also decreased as well. This has brought some worry to many adults that this upcoming generation will end up being the “dumbest.” However, there are multiple factors that can cause us to seem the “dumbest generation.” In Goldberg’s article, “If Technology Is Making Us Stupid, It’s Not Technology’s Fault,” he uses pathos and logos to prove that technology itself is not the reason why our level of intelligence is decreasing; instead, technology actually can prove to be making us smarter in different ways from the past.
However, throughout the rest of her essay, she argues that technology often diminishes, rather than enriches quality of life. Many times, humans devalue life-affirming activities and ways of being. As technology improves, humans learn less and less of abilities and social skills. Although Etelson’s reasoning towards the end of her essay seems acceptable, the overall picture of her essay is confusing for the reader. The way that she argues for both sides makes her stance looks hypocritical.
Humans like relying on other things instead of themselves. We need to appreciate what we have and learn to be content with it. Both the short story "There Will Come Soft Rains" by Ray Bradbury and the poem "There Will Come Soft Rains" by Sara Teasdale Bradbury and Teasdale both discuss how technology and nature don’t need us, but we need both of them to survive, and when we’re gone, they won’t notice. Technology is a very useful thing that we have that helps make our lives easier and better. Few people like it, though but many are getting used to it and relying on it to do way too much for them.
In the technology filled world that we live in, people have many different opinions and views on how this technology affects us whether it is positive or negative. This can be seen by comparing “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” by Nicholas Carr and “Smarter than You Think?” by Clive Thompson and their separate opinions on this technology that is affecting us. Both Carr and Thompson agree that technology is having a large impact on people but what they differ on is the type of impact, Carr saying it’s a negative impact by making us too reliant on it and Thompson saying it’s a positive one in the way that it can help us accomplish many things. How has technology changed the skills people already possess? In the essay by Carr, he talks about the typewriter, but more specifically about the writer Friedrich Nietzsche who started to lose his vision and had to master touch-typing to be able to continue writing.
In Bradbury's short stories, he uses his idea of the future to inform the reader on how technology could be a bad thing. He goes into great detail on how technology can be flawed, how it can negatively affect us, and how it may be advancing too far one way and not enough in the other. With that being said, what does he think the future will be like? Well, to answer answer that question, lets take a few examples from his work.
Ray Bradbury’s short story “The Veldt” teaches readers that too much technology can have a bad effect on people. In the story, the Hadley family lives in a Happylife Home which has machines that do pretty much everything for them. The machines make their meals, brush their teeth and tie their shoelaces. There is even a nursery for the children that creates any world they could imagine. In the end of the story, the nursery and the family take a turn for the worse.
Nothing says “human nature” like love and individuality. Part of what makes humans unique is our species’ ability to show compassion and caring for our peers and surroundings. Many people, particularly older generations, believe that the overuse of social technology has ruined the appreciation that younger generations have for the world around them. In Ray Bradbury’s stories, “The Pedestrian” and “The Veldt”, he gives examples of how technology could ruin our affiliations to what would be considered human characteristics. In “The Pedestrian”, Bradbury describes a futuristic world in which no one socializes or takes walks because they are so consumed with their televisions with the exception of one man; in “The Veldt”, parents using advanced
Regardless, nature doesn’t appear to care much how ‘human’ technology actually is, only that it is not meant to remain standing if mankind is not there to protect it. If humanity wished to be remembered by Earth, it
The fact that technology and science has developed incredibly fast over the past years is due to knowledge. We, the people, have become comfortable with the technology and science industry bombarding with new innovations and discoveries that has become part of our daily life. We never question ourselves the limit in where knowledge can become dangerous or if knowledge for good is able to intertwined with evil. The idea of too much knowledge becoming dangerous is observed in the classic novel, "Frankenstein," by Mary Shelley. Dr. Frankenstein pure intentions of creating a creature from dead by electricity turns out to be a dark twist.
Technology drives nature away, with the support of humankind demanding more and more breakthroughs and advancements. The isolation of humanity as it further itself from nature creates a longer distance that must be traveled to capture its essence. As Richard Louv argues, our changing culture is important because nature is overlooked and technology is glorified. Where the accepted synthetic nature makes “true” nature irrelevant. Where looking out the car window is going extinct only replaced by a television screen on the back of mom’s seat.
While this might be a very compelling argument to some, others have found technology to be quite contradictory to the perceived norms of Mother Nature and have stated that the introduction of this ever growing phenomenon has brought about a disturbance in natures ability to shape and reproduce the order of life. In trying to understand both these arguments one must start by understanding the true essence of what technology is and what qualities define and characterize it. According to Dusek(2001: 32/3), technology can be seen as an applied system that works together with a set of hardware tools to be set into a context for the people who use, repair and maintain it. He further suggests that as a tool, technology can be seen as a neutral instrument to be used or refused, yet when we look at technological systems it can then be viewed as being more autonomous (Dusek 2001 : 36). This tells us that technology consists of a vast range of features that characterize it and because of this a lot of people have formulated different opinions of its effect in our world through its growth.
From Heidegger alone we can garner a warning that technology might be harbouring more than just utility, that it may as well be the representation of an unexamined life, an inauthentic life. That is saying a life “human” but not truly human, for we Dasein, socializes with one another, yet not totally relating on the fundamental level with one
Uniqueness amongst each other makes us Human. In Closer this uniqueness is described as, “… the alien, the unknowable, the mysterious, the opaque” (Greg Egan, 1990). Technology takes that away from us by destroying the idea of the mysterious nature of our souls. It unifies us and makes us all look the same, talk the same and worse, think the same. Moreover this constant need to be the same drives us to loneliness and incompetence.
They imply that life would be hard to live with the lack of new technologies, however, it becomes ironic because life is already at risk due to technology. Making technological advances and preserving the environment and human health will not be possible because of the pollution resulting of the waste output, the depletion of natural resources and the global warming resulting of the emission of carbon dioxide. To begin with, the waste output of the new technologies pollutes the lands, the water and the air of the earth. An average computer screen contains up to 8 pounds of lead and 2 to 5 percent of the trash in American landfills belong to electronics waste.