From Taylorcracy to Taylornoply

Postman's theory of technocracy is a society with the idea of progress. A society that strays from its traditional ideas and instead follows innovation, but maintains that they are still in control of the technology. This society allows technology to shape new social classes and beliefs. "Objectivity, efficiency, expertise, standardization, measure, and progress" (Postman 42). The "tool-using"(Postman 45) culture was said to have been left behind with the invention of the invention. Still, religion and innovation seemed to coexist together because people in these technocratic societies knew that "science and technology did not provide philosophies in which to live"(Postman 47). The technocratic society of the nineteenth-century America was between a rock and another rock: they didn't fully believe in God, and they didn't fully believe in conscience.
"Technopoly. . .is totalitarian technocracy"(Postman 48). In Postman's theory of Technopoly, as opposed to technocracy, the roles are reversed: the human are now the slaves to the machines. Instead of using technology as a tool to reach a goal, it becomes the goal itself.
Frederick W. Taylor is considered the father of scientific management. And he concluded that "the primary, if not the only, goal of human labor and thought is efficiency"(Postman 51). Taylor created this idea in the hopes to increase profit while increasing wages with shorter, more efficient hours in the work place. The thinking was then done for us, much like the idea of human as machines in Brave New World, the technology increases our progress.

i've got a secret..



Date, a Borg (Seven of Nine), and Sonny

 Maybe humans and artificial intelligence will live and work together, like Data and his ship-mates on the Enterprise. Feed off of each other and help each other grow.

Maybe humans will integrate the advance technology into their own bodies. Maybe even become networked together like the Borg on Star Trek.

Or possibly, the artificial intelligence will feel the need to be the only intelligence and subsequently destroy humans.

Maybe.

Resistance is futile; there's no denying that technology is progressing faster than it was a century ago- or even a decade. But "progress is lovely, isn't it?"(Huxley 100). After all, our generation doesn't have to walk five miles barefoot, in the snow, up-hill both ways to get to school. In fact, many students take their classes online.

Robots and human could never have a mutalistic relationship with one another because, as described in the article 2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal, the artificial intelligence will be smarter than humans. Though humans will be the catalyst to the evolution of artificial intelligence, after their Big Bang- the moment of Kurzweil's Singularity- human will become useless to the AI. Relationships like Data's in Star Trek: Next Generation would be impossible because robots would be capable of being independent of human and would "take over their own development from their slower-thinking human creators." But "The kind of intelligence Kurzweil is talking about, which is called strong AI or artificial general intelligence, doesn't exist yet."

Yet
But maybe the out come of creating artificial intelligence is not to develop androids but to develop mankind. In Star Trek: Next Generation, as well as Voyager, the Borg can be used as another example of possible applications of artificial intelligence. The Borg, a hostile race of cyborgs, are enhanced and networked together by technology advanced implants and other synthetic components. A single Borg is truly, as Bernard would say, "just a cell in the social body"(Huxley 90). In Brave New World, Bernard struggles with thoughts (thoughts we may have soon) of individualism and discontent with his social system that contradict the goal of his society. The goal of Bernard's society, and the Borgs for that matter, is technological advancement. The Borg did it though assimilation; Brave New World did in through brain washing. So, in fiction (for now), technology is not only used to heal and advanced a race, but also to manipulate and control it too.

Kurzweil has researched technological growth all the way back to 1900 and concluded that "technological progress happens exponentially". One day we have the iTouch and then next we have the iPhone 10G.  "Ending is better than mending" the scale is re-writen with the new iPhone as the base line(Huxley 49). Out with the old, in with the new. modern. more advanced. better.

Genesis/ Doctor Who

I will often refer to this article in my blog. . .  Enjoy(:

"Cyborgs and Robots: A logically Ordered Existence?" explores how Bernard Beckett's Genesis and Doctor Who's Dalek portray the differences between organic and inorganic life comparing them to the Cartesian Dualism theory. Cartesian Dualism is a philosophy about the mind and body being independent from one another.

In order to understand this article the reader must already know the text and the episode that the author is referring to. The author often goes into detail about the sources he's using without much background and refers to individual characters in them. The author does not actually state Rose Tyler is from Doctor Who, but he has assumed his targeted audience, Si-Fi fanatics, already know this fact and he assumes that both sources have been read or watched and understood.

 The author begins his essay with a "hook", much like we were taught in Mrs. Mot's class. He begin with a quotes the helps lead to his thesis. His thesis, the last line of his introduction, includes both sources and what he is trying to prove through his essay but does not give a clear "road map". If it looks like an introduction, sounds like an introduction, and feels like an introduction, its probably an introduction. The authors second paragraph gives a strange sense of deja vu. The second paragraph refers to two new sources and the agreement of ethical and spiritual problems with artificial and inorganic life. This "new thesis" does not support the previous one and, strangely enough, is not touched for the rest of the essay.  Only a couple sentence fit with the introduction. I feel, it would have been better to combine the couple relevant sentence with the original introduction and delete the rest of the second paragraph completely.

In the other body paragraphs the author often uses both sources in one paragraph even though they have ultimately difference arguments. The author uses Beckett's book to discuss procreation and reproduction for cyborgs and inorganic life. And he uses Doctor Who to challenge the tradition ideas about "being alive" and if the soul can transfer to another host. When both sources are put into one paragraph it can become unclear what idea the paragraph is trying to support. However, towards the end of the essay the fog begins to clear unless you still haven't read or watch the sources. . . Towards the end the author separates the two sources into individual paragraphs but he begins to bring more and more information. This narrows his targeted audience from "Si-Fi fanatics" to those who have studied the sources in detail.

However, the author does have nice transitions. His last line in a paragraph often is related to the first in the nixt. This makes for an easier read. Without good transitions, an essay can sound jerky and awkward.

After reading this essay, I believe a substitution in one of the sources would have supported the author's thesis better. Instead of Doctor Who, "Data" from Star Trek would have supported the Cartesian Dualist argument better. Data is an android who lives and works as member of the Enterprise on Star Trek. Throughout the series, Data strives to be more like his humanoid colleagues but studying their emotions and attempting to properly use them. The same points proved by Doctor Who can also be proved with Data but also expanded.