Rhetorical Analysis: We D Be Fools

Credibility is a very important thing to have when writing an article or anything in general. If you don’t make your reader feel comfortable or make them believe what they are reading then they won’t stick with your opinion. That is what Jeremy Maitin-Shepard did, not only did he cite his references at the end, he quoted important scientists. Unlike online vlogs or Wikipedia which are places where anybody can go edit on their own terms without the story being published by a real publication house. Shepard makes his article a credible source because he the author is identifiable, gives real controversial examples, and sites a regulatory agency. The Wikipedia article has some credibility since it cites different institutional cites, but there’s no actual concrete author nor date.

In his book Smarter Than You Think, Clive Thompson aims to persuade the readers into believing that technology has had a positive impact on our society and the World as a whole. He claims that technology has improved our retention rates, allows us to write and think with global audiences and even improves our senses.

Fahrenheit 451 takes place in a dystopian society where knowledge and critical thinking is considered to be different. The novel revolves around the main character, Guy Montag, referred to as Montag throughout the novel. Montag is a firemen, which means that in his society he starts fires rather than puting them out. A ban was put on books by society the people because they were seen to create a form of inequality, and contained controversial content. This was replaced by modernized technologies such as wall televisions. Montag questions his beliefs when he encounters his new teen neighbour Clarisse, who exposes him to what being social really means rather than society’s interpretation.

Nicholas Carr is “an American journalist and technology writer” who attended Dartmouth College and Harvard University. Over the past decade, Carr has examined and studied the different impacts that computers have on our life and the “social consequences” of this new technology (Carr 123). In “A Thing Like Me” by Nicholas Carr, the author claims that technology is overpowering and dominating our lives. Carr expands on this idea further by defining it as people using “tools that allow them to extend their abilities” (Carr 124). To help with his argument, Carr uses a historical narrative about the creation of computer software, named ELIZA. Carr uses the creation of ELIZA as a way to get his point across to the reader. The creator of ELIZA, Joseph Weizenbaum, programmed a system into the computer that essentially allowed ELIZA to be able to have conversations with virtually anyone.

We are at a time where technology is widespread; it has become a part of our everyday life leading to advantages and disadvantages. Technology nowadays has become the most important topic to discuss and everyone has developed their own unique opinion. In Nicholas Carr’s article published in 2008, “Is Google Making Us Stupid” he argues that as technology progresses people’s mentality changes. Carr is effective in his argument by sharing his fears and personal experiences to have an effect on the audience utilizing pathos and ethos. Not only does he include his own experience, but he also includes other people’s point of views. He goes on to support his claim of how technology

“I wish you were dead” ,”now im feeling persecute lets get out of here” .Technology can be our best friend, and technology can also be the biggest gruesome part

Thomas C. Foster writes that all literature is a collective of reworked ideas. Just as Theseus slain the Minotaur to free the youths from King Minos, Katniss Everdeen sparks a rebellion to save future generations from The Hunger Games invoked by President Snow. While no concept is original, each creation

In the past six centuries humans have become more reliant on technology to take over the simplistic jobs to create a more efficient and widely connected world. The shift from the age of industry and production to media and information culture has raised the question of what it means to be human. Industrial jobs have been taken over by computers and society looks to humans to fill jobs that are a provision of service. William Gibson’s Neuromancer, is a blueprint of how the human reality in the postindustrial and neoliberal ages is dominated by technology. Overall, the novel shows that humans depend on technology to feel interconnected, human identity is found through the fixation on technology, and that human life revolves around business.

The assumption that the modern world is rational, secular and driven by science is not new. During the Enlightenment, it was a prevailing belief that the emancipation of mankind would be reached through the growth of scientific knowledge (Gray, 2007, s. 2). However, God has yet to die, and in the previous century the world has witnessed an uprising of religious and spiritual movements (Shah & Toft, 2006, ss. 39-40). The book “TechGnosis - Myth, Magic & Mysticism in the Age of Information” by Erik Davis argues that contrary to popular belief, computers, internet and global communication has not replaced myths, magic and spirituality. The book explores many different ideas and topics related to the development of technology. However, this critical review will focus on the themes of Gnosticism and utopia and its links to technology and communication connected with resistance to this material world.

Science fiction is a very unique and significant/relevant/crucial/necessary genre in modern society. Science fiction, despite its specific predictions of contemporary society being “wildly inaccurate”, stands out almost exclusively as being a tool of social commentary/criticism. It is almost paradoxical that the genre that lends itself to ideas that are seemingly impossible and unrealistic ¬- bears the most social relevance in today’s society. The ideas, themes and representations portrayed in science fiction can be used to deconstruct, analyze and understand contemporary society. This essay will analyze three of Isaac Asimov’s science fiction texts, namely A Boys best friend; Sally and True Love, showcasing how this genre and specifically theses three texts speak to said contemporary concerns such as our own decadence, greed, quest for knowledge and control

In the argumentative essay, “Should We Let Computers Get Under Our Skins?”, Moor argues that the era of cyborgs-part human and part computer-is coming whether we like it or not, but we should accept a policy of “responsible freedom” along with it. He argues against the thoughts of not allowing cyborgs. He thinks that instead of trying to fight and go against this coming of computer help, we should accept it but be aware of the things that come along with it. We should approach it with having the freedom to be able to decide whether we want computer implants or not, but also by being responsible in knowing the harms that could come with it. He also argues against the side opposing computer based implants. The things he argues against are complete prohibition of these implants and about the therapy and enhancement distinction.

Has technology changed so immensely over the years that it now controls society? What has it done to control society? Over the years, technology has become one of the society's major resources. This relates to the use of technology to control the World State in Aldous Huxley’s, Brave New World. In the present day, we aren’t quite advanced enough to create clones or flying cars, but technology has become more of an everyday tool over the course of time. Over time technology will take complete control over society.

Herbert Marcuse was known to have focused on how technology was used for cultural and social control in what he believed to be our increasingly irrational society. Marcuse considered it irrational because of its destructive nature and its inability to meet the growing number of its people 's basic needs. In many ways, it is not inherently irrational, but the actions of the elites and the oppressive structures in and of themselves may appear to be irrational.

I grew up in a time of technological progress: I went from a Nokia 3310 to a Smartphone, from a home computer to a laptop and I am a frequent user of social media such as Facebook  even I cannot resist peer pressure. However, for a long time I resisted these technologies, a phenomenon known as Luddism. Although I am quite familiar with modern technology – or I thought I was – I enter unknown territory when encountering the technologies Pynchon describes in his novel Bleeding Edge. Nevertheless, references to things known in the West such as IKEA, Friends, the Simpsons, Pokémon, Cheetos, GameBoy, etc. keep you focused on the story. Despite Pynchon’s depiction of these aspects of daily life, many reviewers, such as Jarvis, Robson and Dirda, suggested that Pynchon critiques 2001 society for its late-capitalist consumer philosophy. That is, much has changed in our use of technology. In fact, the more technology evolves, the more reaction it provokes. By extension, America, the society, which is portrayed in Bleeding Edge, tends to believe that technology is superior and empowering but at the same time a vengeful weapon, as if it is a righteous tool for global dominance (Dinerstein 569). In other words, whereas the term luddite started with destroying the stocking frame, it is now a term for the invention of viruses, terrorist attacks, strikes and simply

On initial reading of lecture nine (‘American neo-liberalism (I)’), in Michel Foucault’s 1979 seminal lectures entitled The Birth of Biopolitics, it seemed rather clear to me that he was critiquing the neo-liberal order. Foucault mocked economist Gary Becker’s theory of human capital , and how humans are demoted to robots, with the sarcastic repetition of “ability-machines”. However, in 2013, after looking into Foucault’s work, Becker states, “but as I read the essay [lecture 10] it’s hard for me to see something in that essay that Foucault doesn’t like in terms of my work.” (Harcourt, Becker & Ewald 2013, 7). He made this fascinating observation in a dialogue with Bernard Harcourt, and Foucault’s close associate and producer of the lecture