Kenny's Technopoly

Kenny Fox

10/3/11

Period 7

Dominguez

Technopoly

The chapter being analyzed from Neil Postman's Technopoly draws a very close correlation to the society in the book Brave New World. To begin; Postman defines the term Technocracy as “a society only loosely controlled by social custom and religious tradition and driven by the impulse to invent.” This statement in itself makes only a moderate relation to Brave New world. Throughout the book there is little to no tradition, as it is actually discouraged. Additionally they are relentlessly thriving to better their production of a work force, thriving to better themselves, and thriving to invent. Furthermore Postman describes what he calls Technopoly in a much different way. It doesn't eliminate traditional influences in a normal way; it “does not make them illegal. It does not make them immoral. It does not even make them unpopular. It makes them invisible and therefor irrelevant.” Postman goes on to state that “Technopoly is totalitarian technocracy.” Therefor the difference between the two is very easy to spot. They are very much the same thing as they have the same goals and such. Although on the other hand a Technopoly manages to eliminate what it feels to be negative to progress in a much better fashion than that of a technocracy. Frederick W. Taylor's work was a key component of the scopes case and eventually spread elsewhere. He was thought of as the “originator of scientific management.” His book displayed the first outlined assumptions of the thought-world of Technopoly. Taylor believed that the key of labor is efficiency; that technical calculations are superior to human judgment, that human judgment cannot be trusted because it is corrupted by many other influences. Taylor wrote that people should be ruled by experts, not themselves, meaning other people should make their decisions for them. This thought process is very similar to that presented in Brave New World.  

Kenny's Singularity Analysis

Kenny Fox

9/26/11

Period 7

Dominguez

Singularity

Singularity is a very interesting concept. The thought of one day creating a form of artificial intelligence is startling enough as it is, but to merge with them as pointed at in the article “The Year Man Becomes Immortal,” is simply baffling. It can be both a good and a bad thing. There's no telling what the results of such a thing can be; as stated by Lev Grossman in the article “It's impossible to predict the behavior of these smarter-than-human intelligences with which (with whom?) we might one day share the planet, because if you could, you'd be as smart as they would be. There are a multitude of possibilities that can arise. It can be good in that it aids the life style of humans; but bad, as displayed in numerous movies, should the machines take over and annihilate humanity. I don't feel that merging with machines would exactly make us “less authentically human” until the point that we stop making decisions, feeling emotions, and creating for ourselves.

Bernard, in Brave New World, has these feelings of something missing that he should be doing with his life. His displays this thought in his viewpoint on women. In this futuristic novel he holds many views of today that would be said to be romantic, but he is in that new world. I'm struggling to draw a direct correlation to what Bernard is on to. I believe he is simply being romantic and drawing away from this mechanical human that everybody else seems to be. Bernard was always said to be a little different than everybody else, because he was a little normal in our world. Furthermore Bernard does show some signs of singularity in the novel that shows that he is truly human and feels emotions to prove that he is more than just another piece of this Giant mechanical Brave New World that they live in. 

Kenny's Ret Analysis

Kenny Fox

9/6/11

Period 7

Dominguez

Immigration has drastically changed over the course of several decades. Cody Brotter examines the thoughts and ideas of new immigrants to the United States in his essay Immigration, and What it Means to be an American. Brotter points out the lessening of nationalism as time goes on of American Immigrants. The author goes about this through a rather different structure of writing that I am not entirely accustomed to.

Cody Brotter Analyzes 3 different articles throughout his essay. Initially he quotes from Letter of an American Farmer that an American “is a new man, who acts upon new principles; he must therefore entertain new ideas, and form new opinions.” Although later in the essay he goes on to quote Fallow's article contracting the previous article quoted as it states that American immigrants are “involuntarily idle.” Brotter is attempting to draw a correlation between the two in order to better depict the different viewpoints on immigration in early America. Brotter is attempting to make clear to people the viewpoints on immigration; he does not have a verbatim “intended audience,” but simply seeks to inform others of this correlation. Furthermore Brotter greatly emphasizes the use of an emotional appeal throughout his essay. He does this because emotions are much more effective to tamper with in this subject. The audience is much more likely to be persuaded one way or another about immigration with the use of emotionally appealing quotes all throughout the essay. On the contrary; should Brotter have used something like a logical appeal, it would prove to be much less effective. This is because simply stating a fact is not as powerful in this type of writing where emotions are peaking, whereas in a subject such as physics statistics prove to thoroughly help your argument. To sum things up, different types of appeals are more appropriate in different genres of writing. The author structures his piece in an almost chronological order. He begins by explaining early American's optimism for the future and for America, and then goes on to later years where America is “Swollen with immigrants.” This is effective in that it grasps the readers attention as it will bring them up emotionally; only to be dropped back down, making the drop more effective. Brotter does a pretty effective job at this. The author allows for ideas to flow from one paragraph to the next by drawing close connections between the last sentence of one paragraph to the first of the following. This allows an immediate transition from one paragraph to another with little to no disruption. Brotter uses some formal diction while maintaining his emotional appeals by developing a familiar diction. This is very effective because it allows the audience to feel touched by the familiar tone, while clinging onto the formal diction here and there. The formality of the author contributes to his purpose in that it allows him to create vivid imagery. The author continuously contrasts the two ideas of immigrants throughout the essay. He will tell how one feels optimistic of America, only to counter it with another's pessimism. This is a very useful tool to use in writing because it shows to the audience the vast difference between the two. Cody Brotter, through his use of tone and diction, allows himself to develop a sense of complete authority over the subject.

This type of writing contradicts many things that I have been taught as law by previous instructors. It allows the writer to better develop their ideas; rather than focus on a ridiculous structural patter to follow, which prevents them from completely getting their point across. Henceforth, it throws everything I have been taught into perturbation. This style effectively allows the writer to get their views across, causing me to believe superior.