Technopoly by Neil Postman

Technopoly

Summary:
Technopoly is about assessing technology for both its good and bad consequences. In this particular chapter, "The Judgment of Thamus", Postman stresses that one cannot only look at just the bad side or just the good side of technology. He also stresses that technology may have unforeseen consequences. He talks about how technology changes the balance of society and shifts the way people communicate.

Interesting Quotes:
 "I have brought Freud into the conversation only to show that a wise man- even one of such woeful countenance- must begin his critique of technology by acknowledging its successes."(Postman7)

This is interesting because this sentence characterizes the way Postman advocates looking at technology- that one must look at both the bad and the good. It is also very interesting that he brings in Freud as an example of someone who has critiqued technology well because he first talks about the positive effects of technology, then goes on to talk about its negative effects.

"No manuals have been written to explain what is happening, and the schools are oblivious to it. The old words still look the same, are still used in the same kinds of sentences. But they do not have the same meanings; in some cases, they have opposite meanings."(Postman8)

This is a very interesting quote because Postman assumes that no one is talking about the way technology has changed speech, and no one notices the difference when it has, in fact, been noticed. Last year we read an article on how words have changed to either mean "good" or "bad". It wasn't exactly addressed as to whether or not technology had a hand in this, but it was addressed. Also, Postman doesn't actually give any specific examples of which words have changed and how they have changed. Sure, later on, he gives a list of words who's meanings have been supposedly changed- but he only says that they have changed. He never takes any of those words and says that its meaning has changed from this one specific thing to this other specific thing. This is where Postman's argument is weakened. He assumes that the reader will just blindly agree with his argument that those words have changed in meaning. The article we read last year in Modern Western Thought gave specific examples of words that changed in meaning and how they changed in meaning. For example, the author of the article we read last year said that the word "gentleman" went from a land-owning noble ( a member of the gentry)  to any man who was chivalrous.

"He means to say that those who cultivate competence in the use of a new technology become an elite group that are granted undeserved authority and prestige by those who have no such competence."(Postman9)

This is an interesting quote because it puts into view a different way of looking at the digital natives and the digital immigrants. This is a far more negative way of looking at the whole concept of digital immigrants and digital natives- that the digital natives have an unearned advantage over the digital immigrants.

Confusing Quotes:
"But we may learn from Thamus the following: once a technology is admitted, it plays out its hand, it does what it is designed to do. Our task is to understand what that design is- that is to say, when we admit a new technology to the culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open."(Postman7)

I thought Postman was trying to argue that technology does things that weren't in its original design or intention, not that they do whatever their design intends. Also, are we to only watch and point out all of technology's effects? What is his call to action? What do we do in response to all of these affects?

"For one thing, in cultures that have a democratic ethos, relatively weak traditions, and a high receptivity to new technologies, everyone is inclined to be enthusiastic about technological change, believing that its benefits will eventually spread evenly among the entire population. Especially in the United States, where lust for what is new has no bounds, do we find this childlike conviction most widely held."(Postman11)

What other countries is he talking about besides the United States? He only seems to point out the United States, and it sounds like he has a bias against that particular country. Especially because it doesn't seem like he has actually done any research on what everyone in the United States is thinking. We just read two articles by people in the United States about how a lot of people in the United States are concerned about the negative effects technology may be having on the population. Where has he done his research?

Postman, Neil."Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology". 1993. New York, USA. Vintage Books.