Blog Assignment #4

The technological question is: Sustainable abundance, or ecological crisis?


In Chapter Six of “Technology Matters,” David Nye focuses and attempts to address one question that asks if technology brings “sustainable abundance, or ecological crisis?” Such question can be responded in copious ways depending on one’s own perspective on how technology has affected them personally and the environment in it which surrounds them. Inquiring such a question himself, Nye reacts and replies in an interesting manner. Nye approaches to answer this remarkable question in a way that enables his readers to see that technology can create both sustainable abundance and ecological crisis. In his attempt, he gives his own personal thoughts and provides facts to support his point. Instead of arguing for one side, Nye is not for or against neither. Nye elaborates on how technology has been useful in agriculture and industrializations but at the same time, it creates many ecological problems. Nye points out that technology in “agriculture development illustrated how industrialization creates more wealth, more jobs, and more goods.” (pg.90) Technology can help to create these abundances, but many environmental problems existed because, “technology also affect the air, which carries traces of smoke, microscopic particles, pollen, carbon monoxide, and dust.” (pg. 89) Nye draws from several sources such as statistics, facts, and views from other people who were against technology and also who encouraged it to help support his own personal thoughts when replying to such a question that he poses. In conclusion, Nye believes that, “technologies have been use to create abundance, but at a high environmental cost.” (pg. 98)

Does technology bring “sustainable abundance, or ecological crisis?” I would have answered this question quite differently from Nye simply because I am more against technology than to encourage it. I can see that technology provides abundances in many aspects, but the environmental issue to me is more important and it is disturbing. To me, it is an issue that I can’t ignore. I think that the ecological crisis factor will outweigh the abundances that technology has provided in the end. I say this because the harm that technology brings to us and our environment is arduous to repair. Can we get rid of harmful things that already existed in our environments? Certainly, we can try and find ways to improve things and slow down the process of things, but once it exists; to get rid of is almost impossible. Global warming is an example of what is happening to our environment as a result of technological uses. Take a moment and read through this article about global warming. Surely, it might alarm you as much as it has alarmed me. Knowing that technology is causing our environment harm is frightening and startling.

Even if technology gives us abundances, are we willing to ignore the fact that technology is causing damage to the world in which we live in and can we ignore that? I certainly can’t. I say this because of my own personal experiences in life. I was not born here, nor was I rose surrounded by technology and abundances. I was born to a large family in a country that did not adapt much technology in their cultural uses. “People at the periphery create their own environment.” (pg.81) I believe this is so true because how I answered the question Nye poses in Chapter Six is a result of where I came from and what I am surrounded by.

Blog #3

To start of with writing the rough draft of this assignment, I just wrote what I had in mind at the time. I didn't take much time looking back at notes or reviewing them. I just wrote what I remember from the readings and wrote my thoughts about it. It was not a good rough draft, I admit that, but rough drafts are rough drafts. It's not supose to be perfect...

For the revised part of this assignment, I went back to view my rought draft then back at my notes and made an outline of what I really wanted to focus on and discuss about. I hightlighted passages and information that was interesting, shocking, and striking to me and used them as my guidelines. My outline was not perfect, but it was super helpful and really beneficial to me while reconstructing and revising my essay.

I choose to construct my essay in a way that presents the ideas of Vincente and Vonnegut by making comparisons between them. I then elaborated on their opinions and views about technology and add on my own opinions. If I agree with what the authors are saying then I simply state that I agree with what they are saying. If I have a different opinion, I just state what I intially think and gave reasons why.

From the experience of peer editing online, I think it could have been better if I got more commets and feedback. I think that to many, this has been a good experience and has been really helpful to them. As it goes for me, it was ok. I only got one feedback from my peers, but I appreciated that and take that into consideration.

"The Human Factor" vs. "Cat's Cradle"

Reading “The Human Factor,” by Kim Vincente and “Cat’s Cradle,” by Kurt Vonnegut was really intriguing. Both of these author stride to address their thoughts and concerns about technology. Technology is progressing at a rate that is too fast for us humans to manage, as a result, I believe that both of these authors are trying to address their concerns and fears through their books. They seem to have a common purpose. Their books seem to ask a common question. The question that jump at me when I read these books is, is technology good, and do we need it? Through their books, both author suggested that we don’t necessary need technology and to some degree, technology is bad.
In Vincente’s book, he clearly makes his readers aware that technology is progressing way to fast for an average person to handle. Throughout his book, he discussed about the most simplest human activities to the most complex. He shows us how we are living day-to-day with technology how it affects us both negatively and postively, but mainly he discussed about how technology is bad. I find it to be really interesting because, his book was full of information that is shocking, distressing, and intriguing all at the same time.
In comparison to Vincente, Vonnegut composed his book quite differently. Instead of presenting his readers with facts and information, Vonnegut was able to express his thoughts and concerns about technology by presenting a story. The beginning of his book seems to have nothing with technology at all. As the book goes on, I was able to see that he constructs his book in a way that informs his readers abut what technology can eventually to do us.
Both of these authors show an objection toward technology but differently. Vonnegut composed a story while Vinncent’s book is full of facts and information. Both authors make really good points about technology, but they were somewhat complicated for me to understand. Honestly, when I read through these books, I had a really arduous time trying to understand what it really means.
Overall, I had really enjoyed reading these two books. They have really interesting and strong points. It somehow changed the way I see and think of technology now. It also makes me think twice and question myself if technology is good and if we really need it after all.

Blog Assignment #2




Toward the end of Cat's Cradle, Kurt Vonnegut suggested an really interesting idea. He suggested a question that asked "You know why ants are so sucessful?" With this he answered that it is because "they cooporate."

To me, I think that with this idea, he wants to address to the whole world that if we humans work together and coorporate together like the ants then we will be really succesful and can accomplish many good things. For example, if we all work together, we can save the environments around us and our planet earth, we will get along and not have wars, and we can be successful in countless of other things.

I think that if everyone feels this way, the world would be at peace. I don't know about others, but I feel that it is best if everyone gets along and be friendly to one another. Although I believe this and agrees strongly with Kurt Vonnegut, it is a very hard thing to ahcieve. This is impossible, but is it really? Kurt sometimes in his book also asked, is it really impossible to complete something? They always say anthing is possible.