Response to Technopoly

The first parts of Technopoly are about the way that society has changed from tool-using to technocratic to technopoly. Neil Postman makes the argument that being in a technopoly has led us to leave our culture behind, and that where once technology was made up of tools to support our beliefs, now technology is our beliefs. One example of this is the way we judge everything as "science" and place facts at the core of society. This comes from having technologies like computers which make available a seemingly infinite amount of information. Postman argues that we are technopolizing things that do not relate to information and facts, for example, the way experts can study how to make friends, or how people call the study of human reactions to certain situations a science. He argues that this emphasis on information, and technopolizing everything has caused our culture to lose its way. We no longer have a cohesive belief system that guides us, which, Postman argues, is dangerous. Society has lost its way because of the dominance of technology. I agree with Neil Postman is some regards, because I think that society is becoming too dependent on technology, especially things like Ipods, cellphones, and Myspace or facebook. (By the way, it was not my choice to write a "blog" about this.) In this way, we probably are losing traditions and culture that could be more important, because our technology uses are draining us of real interactions with each other. Rather than connecting with our neighbors, we are connecting with people living miles away from us and not even hearing their voices. However, I think that Postman goes a little too far. Social Sciences, even though they can be a way to technopolize things that cannot be portrayed in numbers, are important. It is not that they tell us anything new. For example, we could have guessed that people obeyed authority. However, social sciences bring to light certain things we might not have considered, and make it so that we cannot ignore the facts. A study that tells us that so many people would obey an authority without questioning what they are doing, forces us to believe that this could be a factor contributing to situations like the Holocaust, and something that should be focused on and changed. Although I think the emphasis on technology has become too great in our culture, I am not sure that it is worse that we have more beliefs available. Postman does suggest a solution to technopoly, and I think he is right in that there is a way to manage all this information we recieve. If we are able to choose our beliefs, and organize what we hear from society, we will have more freedom of belief than a technocratic or tool-using society. Postman suggests that we use schools to organize the information and teach specific beliefs. One of the best themes that could be used in schools, he says, would be "Ascent to Humanity (187)." This would have schools focus on the history of every subject. I agree with Postman's idea that subjects should be taught with a history, since it would give them more relevance to the student. However, there are a few things Postman leaves out. The most obvious solution to over-use of technology in my opinion is nature. Nature gives us a base, which cannot be contradicted by any amount of information, and I think it is the most logical way to ground people so that they do not get lost in all the facts. Also, I think that a school philosophy should be focused more on the individual, and on finding yourself, rather than entirely on the history of the subjects the students are taught. Neil Postman gets at a significant problem in society, however, he forgets the more positive freedoms and information that can be gained through technopoly. His final conclusion as to how to solve the situation of technology could also use improvement.