ETEC 511- Forum Post: Stepping Out of my Comfort Zone
Looking ahead on the course syllabus for ETEC 511 early on in the term had me wondering just how the topic of spirituality was going to tie in with educational technology. Not having ever connected the two in any way previously, when we arrived at the module in which this was our topic of focus, I was pushed way beyond the parameters of my own comfort zone. I am usually a student who posts promptly at the beginning of the week, but during this particular topic, I delayed posting my own thread or even participating in the discourse others in order to give myself some extra time to come to terms with this connection and reflect on how I looked upon the relationship shared by these two entities. This was the first time in my Met experience that I felt like I was taking a real risk with my discussion forum contributions and I felt a vulnerability that I had not previously felt before. This experience allowed me to identify and empathize with individuals who feel vulnerable and anxious about their online activities all of the time, as this was previously a foreign feeling to me. This was a great learning experience for me.
My Forum Post
At first I was not too sure what I was going to take away from our readings and activities this week, as I had not previously thought much at all about the connection between spirituality and technology even when I was exploring the whole concept of the second self and the evolution of online identities earlier on in the course. I guess I was thinking in a very concrete way through those previous modules.
One of the very first things that struck me this week was the linking of technology and magic. To people with zero experience with technology, I would imagine that technology would seem very magical. The notion put forth by Davis in his article that equates ‘the screen’ with ‘magical paper’ (p. 587) made me realize that what we do with text and images through the use of technology does have a very magical vibe to it. We capture, we alter, we shape, we transform, we delete, we clone, we copy…
Not being a tech addict (I have no smartphone, I don’t participate in any social media, most of my computer use is for my job and not my personal life etc.), I really began to ponder what the motivation behind the massive inclusion of technology into people’s personal lives really is? Is it the anonymity that cyberspace has to offer- the ability to be involved while remaining unknown? After all, according to Davis “cyberspace’s ultimate secret code is one’s True Name, one’s real human identity’ (p. 597). Is it the draw of the insanely quick access to vast, and mind blowing amounts of information? Are we drawn to the power of being all knowing? Is our grandest dream really ‘to know everything instantaneously and thereby, presumably [to] know God?” (p. 598). Is the desire even more extreme than that; to become Gods ourselves?
I also came to the realization that it is likely not the tangible device itself that we are drawn to, but what the device allows us to do. I previously thought (possibly naively so) that devices themselves were what people had strong feelings about. However, after thinking about this further, people seem to replace their devices pretty quickly and easily and I don’t hear too many of them saying, “Oh I miss my old iPhone” when they have the shiny new version that is lighter, faster, better! It must then be that the device provides the user with something that fills a need, a want, or possibly even a void. Devices allow users instant connectivity worldwide. Is this what most users are seeking? Is this the ‘hermetic pattern of information addiction’ making itself known?
There is also the notion that technology can be used to capture events, images, history, memories, and human life. Does technology draw us in because it will give us the necessary conditions to achieve immortality? Is technology the ‘universal memory’ (p.603) that will allow us to forever preserve ourselves for future generations to come to know us, learn from us, worship us? Social media sites have plans for what happens to your profile and account after death. We are building in options for online memorials pre-death. Is this type of immortality in a sense artificial life? We currently take in and act on information that we receive through technology. Is it possible as Davis suggests at the end of the article, that we will not act upon information in the future, but instead we will be the information ourselves? (p. 614). Will technology preserve us, immortalize us, ‘save’ us?
Obviously, this week’s topic has brought up more questions than answers for me. This is a totally foreign area of discussion for me and I am very curious to see what sort of conversations take place throughout this module.
References:
Davis, E. (1993). Techgnosis: Magic, memory, and the angels of information. South Atlantic Quarterly, 92(4), 585-616.
One of the very first things that struck me this week was the linking of technology and magic. To people with zero experience with technology, I would imagine that technology would seem very magical. The notion put forth by Davis in his article that equates ‘the screen’ with ‘magical paper’ (p. 587) made me realize that what we do with text and images through the use of technology does have a very magical vibe to it. We capture, we alter, we shape, we transform, we delete, we clone, we copy…
Not being a tech addict (I have no smartphone, I don’t participate in any social media, most of my computer use is for my job and not my personal life etc.), I really began to ponder what the motivation behind the massive inclusion of technology into people’s personal lives really is? Is it the anonymity that cyberspace has to offer- the ability to be involved while remaining unknown? After all, according to Davis “cyberspace’s ultimate secret code is one’s True Name, one’s real human identity’ (p. 597). Is it the draw of the insanely quick access to vast, and mind blowing amounts of information? Are we drawn to the power of being all knowing? Is our grandest dream really ‘to know everything instantaneously and thereby, presumably [to] know God?” (p. 598). Is the desire even more extreme than that; to become Gods ourselves?
I also came to the realization that it is likely not the tangible device itself that we are drawn to, but what the device allows us to do. I previously thought (possibly naively so) that devices themselves were what people had strong feelings about. However, after thinking about this further, people seem to replace their devices pretty quickly and easily and I don’t hear too many of them saying, “Oh I miss my old iPhone” when they have the shiny new version that is lighter, faster, better! It must then be that the device provides the user with something that fills a need, a want, or possibly even a void. Devices allow users instant connectivity worldwide. Is this what most users are seeking? Is this the ‘hermetic pattern of information addiction’ making itself known?
There is also the notion that technology can be used to capture events, images, history, memories, and human life. Does technology draw us in because it will give us the necessary conditions to achieve immortality? Is technology the ‘universal memory’ (p.603) that will allow us to forever preserve ourselves for future generations to come to know us, learn from us, worship us? Social media sites have plans for what happens to your profile and account after death. We are building in options for online memorials pre-death. Is this type of immortality in a sense artificial life? We currently take in and act on information that we receive through technology. Is it possible as Davis suggests at the end of the article, that we will not act upon information in the future, but instead we will be the information ourselves? (p. 614). Will technology preserve us, immortalize us, ‘save’ us?
Obviously, this week’s topic has brought up more questions than answers for me. This is a totally foreign area of discussion for me and I am very curious to see what sort of conversations take place throughout this module.
References:
Davis, E. (1993). Techgnosis: Magic, memory, and the angels of information. South Atlantic Quarterly, 92(4), 585-616.
Some Valuable 'Sidebar' Learning
There were a few topics of study in this course that most definitely pushed me beyond my comfort level. Although the learning was very interesting, when cyborgs and spirituality became our topics of discussion, I ended up with more questions than answers and I found myself more than a little uncomfortable at times. The thing that I loved about these topics though, was that they pushed me well beyond the assigned readings and videos and I ended up digging deeper into the topics in order to try to wrap my head around these incredibly big ideas. In doing so, I came across this TEDtalk with Amber Case that helped me to arrive at a very important conclusion:
“Technology does not become an integral part of our lives because it exists; it becomes such a key aspect of society because we humans use it and therefore make it relevant and valued in society today. By using that technology we are creating a culture of cyborgs.”
“Technology does not become an integral part of our lives because it exists; it becomes such a key aspect of society because we humans use it and therefore make it relevant and valued in society today. By using that technology we are creating a culture of cyborgs.”
Things only have value because humans place value upon those things! Therein lies the answer as to why products either sell or don’t sell; because the customer either buys it or bypasses it and reaches for a different product on the shelf. Although Amber Case discusses a number of ways in which humanity is experiencing loss due to the increased use of technology in society, she also shares that in a number of ways technology is also bringing people closer together than has ever been possible before. In the end, Amber Case’s musings sat much better with me than Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto did.
References:
Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDUFpPibuMs,)
Amber Case’s TedTalk ‘We Are All Cyborgs Now (http://www.ted.com/talks/amber_case_we_are_all_cyborgs_now.html)
Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century," in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (New York; Routledge, 1991), pp.149-181. http://www.egs.edu/faculty/donna-haraway/articles/donna-haraway-a-cyborg-manifesto/
References:
Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDUFpPibuMs,)
Amber Case’s TedTalk ‘We Are All Cyborgs Now (http://www.ted.com/talks/amber_case_we_are_all_cyborgs_now.html)
Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century," in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (New York; Routledge, 1991), pp.149-181. http://www.egs.edu/faculty/donna-haraway/articles/donna-haraway-a-cyborg-manifesto/