My Opinion
Antiquating technology in a progress-oriented society

Sitting here, trying to figure out what to write about, something occurred to me.

I spend an enormous amount of time with computers.

From those Commodore PETs I could actually program, to the color 64s, and into the Macs and IBMs, staring at a screen with a cursor blinking at me has become a daily ritual.

I never really thought about it until recently. How much a part of your life is technology? For me, and most people, it's huge. Most of us don't think about it. We're used to the appliances, programs and systems that are an integral part of our lives, and getting results -- as well as newer, faster technology -- in a nanosecond. Literally.

By many measures, Western society has moved ahead in leaps and bounds due to its development of technology. We can travel to all regions of the world, acquire knowledge from an incredible amount of databases in a moment, cure ourselves of many diseases.

The promises and solutions technology offers are well-known to us. But we're having trouble recognizing the problems intrinsic to technology.

The glossy magazine ads and the slick television commercials don't tell us about those things. An advertisement for nuclear technology would never picture the area around Chernobyl. We just aren't shown the fallout.

We must have knowledge about the full impact of technology. The information we're getting about new technologies comes from their creators, not from any unbiased source.

I have to wonder if society would have wanted automobiles if it had been presented the negative with the positive or chose to thoughtfully consider the side effects. The pollution from emissions and production, the cities becoming wall-to-wall concrete and much of the countryside, too ...

Would society have chosen television if its impact on people's ability to think for themselves was considered? Or its power to market, to create stereotypes?

If we ask enough questions, we see another side to technology: the negative. I have to wonder if it has really improved our lives. Enriched with knowledge, beaten with toxins. There are prices to be paid for every step forward. We must stop being naive; "progress" and technology do not necessarily go hand in hand.

I'll suggest two questions. One: How do all the aspects of this technology affect me and my society? If you're considering the Internet, you may think that it's invaluable because it promotes global communication at a new level and connects us to information. Or it's useful, but not indispensable, because it's part of the megatechnology that mechanizes society and robotizes people.

As you consider how technology affects you, ask another question. Does this technology leave me fulfilled or happy? Differentiating between fulfillment and convenience is important. Keep in mind that we have much less free time now then we did centuries ago before we became civilized. How much time do we spend working for technology versus enjoying its benefits? Has it made our lives better, or more complicated?

We have to ask questions to take a defensive stance against technology. It is imperative to find some balance in this one-sided dialogue. Its creators tell us how well it works for us, we nod our heads and buy it. Considering the rampant cynicism in society, we swallow technology very easily.

Whenever I talk about halting technology, people's responses disappoint me. Nobody thinks we can stop the integration of new technology into society because it would halt progress.

I think there are two fallacies in that argument. If you feel technology's production is out of control, you provide another argument for taking a critical, defensive stance against it. If you feel technology is "progress," you define the word differently than I do. Progress means moving in a direction beneficial to our society as a whole, and it is clear to me that technology, considered in all its aspects, does not always help us.

We need to continue to speak out against technology for our well-being. We are only as powerless and uninformed as we allow ourselves to be. Promote a critical stance against technology.

"Silence is tacit approval." -- Jerry Mander

Thanks to Mander and Chellis Glendinning.