"I Have Been The Best Slave"

A speech by high school valedictorian Erica Goldson




Here I stand

There is a story of a young, but earnest Zen student who approached his teacher, and asked the Master, "If I work very hard and diligently, how long will it take for me to find Zen? The Master thought about this, then replied, "Ten years . ." The student then said, "But what if I work very, very hard and really apply myself to learn fast -- How long then?" Replied the Master, "Well, twenty years." "But, if I really, really work at it, how long then?" asked the student. "Thirty years," replied the Master. "But, I do not understand," said the disappointed student. "At each time that I say I will work harder, you say it will take me longer. Why do you say that?" Replied the Master, "When you have one eye on the goal, you only have one eye on the path."

This is the dilemma I've faced within the American education system. We are so focused on a goal, whether it be passing a test, or graduating as first in the class. However, in this way, we do not really learn. We do whatever it takes to achieve our original objective.

Some of you may be thinking, "Well, if you pass a test, or become valedictorian, didn't you learn something? Well, yes, you learned something, but not all that you could have. Perhaps, you only learned how to memorize names, places, and dates to later on forget in order to clear your mind for the next test. School is not all that it can be. Right now, it is a place for most people to determine that their goal is to get out as soon as possible.

I am now accomplishing that goal. I am graduating. I should look at this as a positive experience, especially being at the top of my class. However, in retrospect, I cannot say that I am any more intelligent than my peers. I can attest that I am only the best at doing what I am told and working the system. Yet, here I stand, and I am supposed to be proud that I have completed this period of indoctrination. I will leave in the fall to go on to the next phase expected of me, in order to receive a paper document that certifies that I am capable of work. But I contest that I am a human being, a thinker, an adventurer - not a worker. A worker is someone who is trapped within repetition - a slave of the system set up before him. But now, I have successfully shown that I was the best slave. I did what I was told to the extreme. While others sat in class and doodled to later become great artists, I sat in class to take notes and become a great test-taker. While others would come to class without their homework done because they were reading about an interest of theirs, I never missed an assignment. While others were creating music and writing lyrics, I decided to do extra credit, even though I never needed it. So, I wonder, why did I even want this position? Sure, I earned it, but what will come of it? When I leave educational institutionalism, will I be successful or forever lost? I have no clue about what I want to do with my life; I have no interests because I saw every subject of study as work, and I excelled at every subject just for the purpose of excelling, not learning. And quite frankly, now I'm scared.

John Taylor Gatto, a retired school teacher and activist critical of compulsory schooling, asserts, "We could encourage the best qualities of youthfulness - curiosity, adventure, resilience, the capacity for surprising insight simply by being more flexible about time, texts, and tests, by introducing kids into truly competent adults, and by giving each student what autonomy he or she needs in order to take a risk every now and then. But we don't do that." Between these cinderblock walls, we are all expected to be the same. We are trained to ace every standardized test, and those who deviate and see light through a different lens are worthless to the scheme of public education, and therefore viewed with contempt.

H. L. Mencken wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not "to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. ... Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim ... is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States."

To illustrate this idea, doesn't it perturb you to learn about the idea of "critical thinking." Is there really such a thing as "uncritically thinking?" To think is to process information in order to form an opinion. But if we are not critical when processing this information, are we really thinking? Or are we mindlessly accepting other opinions as truth?

This was happening to me, and if it wasn't for the rare occurrence of an avant-garde tenth grade English teacher, Donna Bryan, who allowed me to open my mind and ask questions before accepting textbook doctrine, I would have been doomed. I am now enlightened, but my mind still feels disabled. I must retrain myself and constantly remember how insane this ostensibly sane place really is.

And now here I am in a world guided by fear, a world suppressing the uniqueness that lies inside each of us, a world where we can either acquiesce to the inhuman nonsense of corporatism and materialism or insist on change. We are not enlivened by an educational system that clandestinely sets us up for jobs that could be automated, for work that need not be done, for enslavement without fervency for meaningful achievement. We have no choices in life when money is our motivational force. Our motivational force ought to be passion, but this is lost from the moment we step into a system that trains us, rather than inspires us.

We are more than robotic bookshelves, conditioned to blurt out facts we were taught in school. We are all very special, every human on this planet is so special, so aren't we all deserving of something better, of using our minds for innovation, rather than memorization, for creativity, rather than futile activity, for rumination rather than stagnation? We are not here to get a degree, to then get a job, so we can consume industry-approved placation after placation. There is more, and more still.

The saddest part is that the majority of students don't have the opportunity to reflect as I did. The majority of students are put through the same brainwashing techniques in order to create a complacent labor force working in the interests of large corporations and secretive government, and worst of all, they are completely unaware of it. I will never be able to turn back these 18 years. I can't run away to another country with an education system meant to enlighten rather than condition. This part of my life is over, and I want to make sure that no other child will have his or her potential suppressed by powers meant to exploit and control. We are human beings. We are thinkers, dreamers, explorers, artists, writers, engineers. We are anything we want to be - but only if we have an educational system that supports us rather than holds us down. A tree can grow, but only if its roots are given a healthy foundation.

For those of you out there that must continue to sit in desks and yield to the authoritarian ideologies of instructors, do not be disheartened. You still have the opportunity to stand up, ask questions, be critical, and create your own perspective. Demand a setting that will provide you with intellectual capabilities that allow you to expand your mind instead of directing it. Demand that you be interested in class. Demand that the excuse, "You have to learn this for the test" is not good enough for you. Education is an excellent tool, if used properly, but focus more on learning rather than getting good grades.

For those of you that work within the system that I am condemning, I do not mean to insult; I intend to motivate. You have the power to change the incompetencies of this system. I know that you did not become a teacher or administrator to see your students bored. You cannot accept the authority of the governing bodies that tell you what to teach, how to teach it, and that you will be punished if you do not comply. Our potential is at stake.

For those of you that are now leaving this establishment, I say, do not forget what went on in these classrooms. Do not abandon those that come after you. We are the new future and we are not going to let tradition stand. We will break down the walls of corruption to let a garden of knowledge grow throughout America. Once educated properly, we will have the power to do anything, and best of all, we will only use that power for good, for we will be cultivated and wise. We will not accept anything at face value. We will ask questions, and we will demand truth.

So, here I stand. I am not standing here as valedictorian by myself. I was molded by my environment, by all of my peers who are sitting here watching me. I couldn't have accomplished this without all of you. It was all of you who truly made me the person I am today. It was all of you who were my competition, yet my backbone. In that way, we are all valedictorians.

I am now supposed to say farewell to this institution, those who maintain it, and those who stand with me and behind me, but I hope this farewell is more of a "see you later" when we are all working together to rear a pedagogic movement. But first, let's go get those pieces of paper that tell us that we're smart enough to do so!





Source: http://blog.swiftkickonline.com/2010/07/valedictorian-speaks-out-against-schooling-in-graduation-speech.html

Private Service Announcement

As cliche as it is, people really are their own worst enemies. So often the only barriers blocking our path to happiness are those of our own design. We need to learn to love a little more unconditionally; conditions only prevent us from getting close to people and allowing them to make us happy.

Love your parents, your siblings, your friends-the people who love you. Appreciate that they love you in the same way. Accept them for exactly who they are; don't resent them for not being what you want them to be.

The way the world is, we could all do to love a little more freely, and allow ourselves to be loved in return.

I find myself thinking again and again about that huge argument that kept coming up in class, about whether or not the teacher has a responsibility to 'make' their students learn. There was a heated debate about the degree to which a student is responsible for their own learning.

After thinking about it a great deal, I feel I've figure out where I stand. I feel like there are two kinds of students. There is the student who, while reading, encounters an unfamiliar word, and immediately asks their teacher 'what does this word mean?' There is also the student who, upon encountering this same unfamiliar word, will open up a dictionary and look it up themselves.

Either way, the student is going to get an answer, but who will remember that answer better? I think that my suppositions are clear :D.

P.S. I am trying out a new reductionist style of blog posting in response to criticism of my general verbosity. How is it working?

I'm Not Dead

The last two days have just been just horrific. Possibly the worst, like, ever. And it made me miss our last 1F00 classes too.

If anyone needs me, I will be curled up in the fetal position watching the Discovery Channel.

The Human Condition

My friend and I had the following conversation tonight:

Them: I have come to the realization that truth is choice.

Me: Both truth and choice, I would argue, are illusions :).

Them: Normally, I would agree, but I've since decided that if choice isn't a part of the game, somehow, then I'm unwilling to continue playing.

This, I think, sums up the human condition quite nicely.

I'm reading (and enjoying) a book by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Notes From the Underground, and it explores this idea in greater detail. In the first few chapters, the narrator talks about something similar; he says that nothing drives him more insane, as a thinking man, than the laws of nature. He says that anyone with a brain will come to the conclusion that we have no choices, that free will is an illusion, because the path of our lives are dictated by things completely outside of our control - biology, gods or greater powers (if you're into that sort of thing), the laws of physics, our culture - in short, all of the external influences that shape who we are, and determine the courses of our lives. All of the things that put life outside of our control. This idea drives him insane.

He goes on to explain that man needs the illusion that he has choice, that he has a say in what he does and what will happen to him. He needs to feel like he matters as an individual. And this, he says, is what causes people to defy logic in every possible way and do things that make absolutely no sense at all, even to them! He says that sometimes, our best interests don't interest us at all, and that sometimes we will do the exact opposite of what we know is best for us, simply so that we can have a choice. Just so we can regain some measure of control.

And this, I think, is totally true. I've done it, lots and lots of times. Put off an important homework assignment that I knew I ought to do, avoided making an important appointment, or perhaps made a stupid, stupid purchase on impulse despite knowing that I needed money to pay for groceries. And after the fact, I often ask myself 'why on earth did I do that? I know better!'

But now it makes a bit more sense.

Human beings are magnificently stupid creatures, aren't they?

Sartre is Smartre

Jean-Paul Sartre once said,

"Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does."

The dutiful existentialist in me takes issue with this; I would drop the last two words, and edit it thusly,

"Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything."

And it's true, isn't it? We talked about it in class: if we're just one anonymous, meaningless face in a collective of billions, a mere cog in a machine, a disposable node in a network, what significance do we have? What do our lives mean? What's the point?

Existentialism asks us to consider that life is without meaning: that we are cosmic accidents, thrown into existence by chance circumstance, mere biological curiosities without greater purpose or design. But in spite of this, we are here. And as uniquely sentient, conscious creatures, we have the power to create meaning for ourselves, pull some significance and purpose out of the nullity of existence. We each color our view of the world with our unique outlooks, feelings, values, and experiences, wielding the sword of subjective experience to carve out a version of reality that fits us. We have the ability to see that fundamentally, we're just a pile of flesh and bones, going through the motions of biological inevitability, and yet, we also have the power to transcend that knowledge and choose to inject our lives with meaning and purpose, to take the seemingly random, undecipherable confusion of our existences and make them something important.

We are responsible for shaping our own worlds, shaping our own realities, establishing our own Truths. As Sartre said, from the moments we are thrown from comfortable nonexistence into this crazy thing we call life, we truly are responsible for everything. Everything we do, at the very least, but also everything we feel, experience, believe, overcome, imagine, idealize, rationalize, question, hope for...everything.

There's the old adage, "with great power comes great responsibility," and I think this holds true regarding all of our existential freedom. Anything is possible and can be possible; it's up to you. This freedom gives us a tremendous amount of power, and in turn, the responsibility of being accountable for our own existence.

And to that freedom, we are condemned.

And that's what I'm thinking about today. I lead a small life, haha.

The Rape Game

I was reading the headlines today when I saw an article about RapeLay, a new Japanese video game that allows the player to act out realistic simulations of rape. An excerpt from the article:

"The game beings with a teenage girl on a subway platform. She notices you are looking at her and asks, "can I help you with something?"

That is when you, as a player, can choose your method of assault.

With the click of your mouse, you can grope her and life her skirt. Then you can follow her aboard the train, assaulting her sister and her mother.

As you continue to play, 'friends' join in, and in a series of graphic, interactive scenes, you can corner the women, rape them again and again.

The game allows you to even impregnate a girl and urge her to have an abortion. The reason behind your assault, explains the game, is that the teenage girl has accused you of molesting her on the train. The motive is revenge.

When does a video game go too far?"

I don't even know what to say. I mean, it's horrible on so many levels; I don't know where to begin. It's just sickening. But the question asked in the news article is a good one, and approaches a question we asked when discussing the Super Columbine Massacre RPG in class. When does something become so morally repugnant that it's considered 'too far,' beyond even the realms of the controversial, experimental, and the avant-garde?

I've always been a big supporter of a free and open internet, and the uncensored exchange of information and ideas, but this makes me wonder if there are, perhaps, limits to freedom of expression. Do games like RapeLay go too far? What are the implications of an uncensored, unpoliced internet?

RapeLay can downloaded free here: http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/94626489/rapelay?tab=summary

Something to Think About

Today, I used a public restroom. Amongst the usual wall graffiti was written:

"Toy Story 2 was OK!"

...

For the Record: an Open Letter to Barry Joe

Dear Professor Joe,

I'm happy to say: I'm glad you were wrong too. Of course, if you had only mentioned it a bit sooner, I don't think you would've been allowed to labor under such an illusion for long! Haha.

I can't speak for the rest of my classmates, but I think you were right when you said that the juvenile notion that learning is lame and caring uncool is passing. Well, maybe not when it comes to graphing river bottom sediment flows, or memorizing French verb conjugations and all that. But in 1F00, certainly.

I mean, in what other class are we asked to examine things that are so relevant to our lives? In what other classes are we actually encouraged to think, and question, and learn, and grow? To explore what it means to be human? In other courses, we're told that knowledge is a finite, concrete commodity, and that we're here to absorb as much of it as we can, until four years down the road when we're all full-up, and handed a piece of paper that declares us 'educated' (and profoundly broke). In other classes-indeed, in the education system as a whole-we're told that we are ignorant and naive, and that the only way to succeed as a person is to supplicate to the elite knowledge-holders: the teachers, parents, and authority figures of the world, and to study and internalize their absolute Truth, accepting it as our own. And in other classes, we're taught that knowledge is a fixed destination, reachable only by following the well-worn path of mindless, mechanical, memorization; soulless, rote learning; and uncritical acceptance.

But IASC 1F00 isn't one of those classes. It's not about finding the right answers; it's about asking the right questions. And that, I think, makes all the difference.

Like I said, I can't speak for the rest of my classmates, but I can say that 1F00 is among the most important classes I've ever taken. Yeah, I'm going to need some chapstick for this ass-kissing, but it's the truth. In other classes I've always felt limited, like I was supposed to be learning, but only within the boundaries of a limited framework. Ask questions, but not those questions. Push the boundaries, but not too far. And quite honestly, I've always thought of education (the kind I've been subjected to, at least) as a big, fat waste of time.

But I don't feel that way about 1F00, because unlike the other classes I've taken over the last few years, I'm actually learning. Instead of feeling helpless, hopelessly ignorant, and dependent on my elders and betters to make me right, I'm empowered as an agent of my own betterment. Instead of being limited by inflexible criteria and curriculum, a fear of asking difficult questions, and the inability to stray from the beaten path, I feel free to be curious, to wonder, to reexamine myself, the world I live in, and my beliefs about it. Education is feeling less like a long, boring hallway with only one exit at the end, and more like a big room with an unending variety of doors, with more appearing every day, begging to be opened.

And that's not even touching upon the subject matter of our tri-weekly discussion. Whether you're a technophile, or a technophobe, a tech-savvy media fantatic, or a bookwork like me, there is something you can gain from our talks on mythology, morality, reality, communication, the future...because regardless of what's on the agenda, what we're really doing is stretching our disused intellectual and existential muscles. Figuring out what it means to be human, how to navigate the imposing overwhelmingly complex world we live in. And best of all, we're doing it in an environment where everyone is both student and teacher, and where everyone has something to offer and so much to gain. And I don't know about everyone else, but it's sure encouraged me to grow, as both a student and as a person.

In class, I believe it was Nikita who said that teachers ought to make students learn. On another occasion, it was suggested that no one present cared about learning and examining the world around them. No one spoke up to the contrary, and it was assumed that we all are truly and completely indifferent. However, I know both of these things to be false. I think that we do care, and that we are all curious and hungry to expand our knowledge. All of us. But I have a growing feeling that those years and years of being told that we don't know anything, that the things we do know don't matter, and that learning comes from a teacher, rather than from within has made us neglect all of that, taught us that caring gets us nowhere. I honestly think that sometime we're silently simply because it's been so long since we were asked to speak.

*Pause for dramatic effect. Or vomiting.*

Well, that's what I wanted to say. Maybe it's lame and corny, and looks like some grade-A brown-nosing, but it's how I feel. A year ago, I probably never would've posted this for other people to read, but part of what I've learned from this class is that you have to reach outside of your comfort zone to grow. So, here it goes.

Thanks Barry Joe!

An Idea

I'm sitting here in the fishbowl working on my flash game for IASC 1P30. It's going well; I'm in the home stretch, but I'm having a bit of trouble with some of the Actionscript, so I decided to check the 1P30 chat room on Sakai to see if anyone else had experienced the same problem. Reading through the conversation for the last few days, I saw that lots of people (lol, shout out to Kev, Simon, Jess and company) were taking advantage of the chat room to talk over their issues with our instructor, Matt, and help each other out. I find this to be pretty awesome- partially because seeing them talk through their problems is really helping me navigate mine-and partially because, well, could it be more appropriate?

Just yesterday we heard about Matt's appeal for students to share their thoughts on the role the internet has in education. When I first watched the video, I really had to think about it. Initially, I was tempted take the old-school approach and favor the familiar classroom experience, largely due to my frequently frustrating experiences with Brock's online offerings: the slow, horrendously outdated email service; the awkward, unwieldily Sakai; and let's not forget the generally abysmal Brock website, including the Student Portal and course registration site. It's often seemed to me that integrating all of our awesome new technology into our education is a great idea in theory, but that people seem to jump in head first, like a kid tearing the wrapping paper off of an expensive new toy, not reading the instructions but playing with it anyways, and making a big mess in the process. I've been thinking that perhaps we're so keen to wield all of the amazing potential of New Media that we don't always take the time to really understand how to make it practical and functional rather than a superfluous display of bells and whistles.

But when I logged onto the chat room and I saw a substantial portion of our class getting together in virtual space to talk homework, ideas, and troubleshooting (and also Booster Juice and space junk, of course), well, it made me reconsider. Instead of sitting alone at home in their jammies smashing their heads against the keyboard in frustration, everyone had the opportunity to connect with their peers and teacher to pool their knowledge and experience together for everyone's benefit. I don't know, maybe I'm just lame, but I thought it was kind of cool to see technology being used so effectively to meet its' users' needs and enhance their learning experience rather than being a hindrance to be battled with and cursed at. It was also kind of cool to see people really engaging with each other and collaborating: a chance to see some of the abstract 'connected intelligence,' H. G. Wells stuff we talk about in class happening right in front of me, in a kind of dichotomy-shaking, gestalt the-whole-is-greater-than-the-sum-of-the-parts kind of way. But I digress.

This little experience has opened my eyes to the idea that technology really can be used to supplement our learning, and be a very useful tool that allows us to do things we couldn't do otherwise, like have a real-time conversation with our teacher to work through an assignment quickly and conveniently, and with our work right in front of us. I'm reminded of using Google Wave for the second inquiry assignment, and using virtual space to extend our learning beyond what was already available to us in the 'meat world.' We asked ourselves the question 'why bother with new technology? Is it necessary?' And I feel like both Google Wave and this classroom/chatroom are perfect examples of why we should bother exploring these new avenues at all, and answers my personal questions about the role technology should play in our day-to-day lives as human beings. I've reached the conclusion that New Media shouldn't replace old media; e-learning shouldn't replace classroom learning; virtual reality shouldn't eclipse physical reality: they should supplement, augment, facilitate, support! Technology is made by us, and we should make it work for us, not the other way around.

Okay. This post wasn't meant to be nearly this long, but I guess I started a bit of a curiosity snowball with this topic, haha. I'm fascinated. But enough rambling: the original reason I wanted to write this entry was because while I was reading the 1P30 chat log it was obviously working to everyone's advantage, but it did have its limitations. Trying to help someone figure out the minute problems with an intricate Flash project, or trying to explain your Actionscript issues is cumbersome in a purely text-based environment. At one point Simon had to go through the hassle of uploading and posting a screenshot to explain what he meant.

This gave me the idea of expanding what Google has done with the Wave in allowing users to collaborate on a document, and perhaps taking it a step further by injecting it with more multimedia functionality. I have no idea if it's even possible, but imagine if you could log onto a program that allows you to chat and share, but with the added option of being able to show your peers your desktop workspace remotely, like a real-time video screen shot. That would make it so much easier to demonstrate an example for a friend, or show your instructor the exact difficulty you're having so they can help. Or perhaps take it a step further and make it interactive by allowing users to upload and work together on a Flash document, video-editing software, or programming exercise. Imagine doing a group presentation without commuting to meet, and instead joining a Wave to chat and brainstorm ideas, and then actually opening up a Powerpoint document and working on it together, or maybe making a video instead and having each user upload their contributions, link to youTube videos they want to emulate/integrate, and then edit it together in real time with each person contributing according to their own knowledge and skills. The cool game you found on the internet? Open up a shared browser window and play together. That ballin' easter egg you found in Halo 3? Open up a video/sreenshot and share. Or better yet, open up a PC version of the game and show people yourself.

To me, that sounds like the ultimate educational tool. Group projects would be a piece of cake to arrange, teachers could hold web sessions to walk students through new skills with live, interactive examples; or hold question-and-answer sessions; group brainstorms; or even assign online skill tests and practical exams. To me, such an application could consolidate all of the scattered, niche apps we currently use to communicate, share, and learn. But with my luck, such a thing already exists somewhere, and I just wasted an hour not working on my project for nothing :D.

Socratic Wisdom for Today

The unexamined life is not worth living.

A crazy Athenian man once said, and I'm inclined to agree.

In an Alternate Universe...

I'm not really a big Mac person. Outside of class, I never really get a chance to use Apple computers, so I was totally unfamiliar with how incredibly fun the Photobooth application is. Who needs games when you can warp your face beyond recognition for hours on end?






Awesome.

A Personal Renaissance

I have come to the conclusion that I'm not a very good blogger. I mean, three posts in a month? Pathetic, right? However, my blogosphere inactivity has had little to do with negligence or indifference; it's not that I've got nothing to say, there's practically too much! I have started half a dozen blog entries and never finished them due to my tendency to ramble and digress, and I've got several pages of jot-notes waiting to be fed into the blog machine. But once I get excited about something, it seems almost impossible to write about it; it seems like there there is just no way that my words will do it justice, or communicate what I want to say. What a conundrum!

But I suppose that sense of authorial inadequacy must be overcome at some point, and I'm going to start by expanding on my last update, The Answer. I quoted a passage I had read in Robert M. Pirsig's 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' about resolving the 'ugliness' of technology. Ben mentioned to me that it was a pretty cryptic post, and I suppose he was right. Just get caught in the moment sometimes, haha.

Well, anyways, the passage really resonated with me because it was talking about a primary conflict in my own life and view of technology. I mean, we all love our tech stuff: our Xboxes, laptops, self-checkout machines, right? But it seems to me like there's also a pervasive sense of wariness, and at times even fear and hatred, of technology. It's this love-hate relationship where we are half enthralled with technology's novelty and possibility, and half the time disarmed by a quickly shifting digital world whose techno-centrism makes us wonder where we, as human beings, fit into it all.

There's no doubt that we have an immense capacity to be really thrilled and engaged with the trajectory of technological advancement, from the triviality to touch-screens and video games to the more daunting prospects of connected intelligence, a 'world brain,' and the possibility of a sort of technological renaissance/paradigm shift. However in my experience there is an underlying tendency to regard the rapidly-changing technological landscape with skepticism, wariness, and even fear and hatred. It can't be denied that technology (in all of its many forms) is profoundly intertwined with how our world works: our communities, jobs, values, ideologies, economies, social hierarchies, knowledge, information, power...our very humanity. There is a lot at stake, so it's no wonder that we find ourselves, in the face of a burgeoning fountain of tech-advancement, asking whether or not all of this is good or bad, whether 'new' is synonymous with 'better.'

While a lot of us would label ourselves 'technophiles,' it seems to me like there's a far larger portion of the population who is decidedly more cynical, who hesitate to embrace the so-called virtues of new technology. Furthermore, I think there's a bit of this technophobe inside of all of us whenever we think about technology instead of passively accepting it: wondering about our security on Facebook, our intellectual property on blogs, net neutrality, censorship, and so on. I also think that there's a tendency to view things-not just technology-within the confines of dualistic thinking. That is, thinking that it's either bad or good, beautiful or ugly, human or machine, revolutionary utopia or 'creeping panopticon.'

And to jump just a little bit further, I think that these tendencies combine to shape a view of technology (and the forces that give rise to it) as ugly, mechanical, lifeless, inhuman. We see our 'humanity' challenged by machines, circuits, networks, our values challenged by cool, mechanical rationalism, the beauty of our world sullied by motors and exhaust fumes and telephone lines. The rapid ascent of technology in our world challenges our established notions of our selves and our world, and our tendency to view things in terms of binary opposites makes us resent it, view it as ugly and horrible.

Which brings us to that passage I quoted,

"The real ugliness [of technology] lies in the relationship between the people who produce the technology and the things they produce...between the people who use the technology and the things they use...The way to solve the conflict between human values and technological needs is not to run away from technology. That's impossible. The way to resolve the conflict is to break down the barriers of dualistic thought that prevent a real understanding of what technology is-not an exploitation of nature, but a fusion of nature and the human spirit into a new kind of creation that transcends both. When this transcendence occurs in such events as the first airplane flight across the ocean or the first footstep on the moon, a kind of public recognition of the transcendent nature of technology occurs. But this transcendence should also occur at the individual level, on a personal basis, in one's own life."

Which tells us that it is not the plastic, steel, silicon, and concrete that makes technology ugly, nor is it the mechanical, rational, and decidedly unhumanistic value system it embodies. It is our failure as people to reconcile our human values with technology. Our failure to reconcile what we are with the things we make. It suggests that instead of viewing technology as the 'other,' as something we cannot understand, engage with, or control, we should strive to find some sense of identity with it. Relate it to our values. Transcend.

This, I think, is one of the most important things I've learned all year.

The Answer?

I had to put down my copy of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance," because the following passage struck me so forcefully:

"The real ugliness [of technology] lies in the relationship between the people who produce the technology and the things they produce...between the people who use the technology and the things they use...The way to solve the conflict between human values and technological needs is not to run away from technology. That's impossible. The way to resolve the conflict is to break down the barriers of dualistic thought that prevent a real understanding of what technology is-not an exploitation of nature, but a fusion of nature and the human spirit into a new kind of creation that transcends both. When this transcendence occurs in such events as the first airplane flight across the ocean or the first footstep on the moon, a kind of public recognition of the transcendent nature of technology occurs. But this transcendence should also occur at the individual level, on a personal basis, in one's own life."

Wow, wow, wow. My world has been rocked.

Generation Apathy?

So I just got back from voting for the BUSU election and referendum. As I was waiting in line at the polling table, I heard the following conversation between the girl running the polling station and the guy standing in front of me:

Guy: I have no idea who these people are. I'm just going to vote randomly. What's this reefer-endy thing?
Poll Operator: Uhhh...something about fees and how they're spent or something...I just voted no...

I facepalmed so hard.

Seriously? I know school elections probably don't seem like a big deal, but BUSU is spending quite a large amount of your money, and you're rejecting the one opportunity you have to get some say in how it's spent? And more importantly, the decisions made in this election are going to affect all of the 20,000 students at Brock, as well as faculty, staff, and other members of the Brock community, some in a very big way. Maybe you don't care about financial aid, health services, and club funding, but to some people, these are crucial issues that have a profound impact on their university experience.

As students we're all too quick to complain about the services at Brock: the horrible food services, the lack of quality clubs and activities, the transit system, and the library hours, and we're equally quick to demand that we get more for the massive amount of money we're spending to be here. But when it comes to making the tiny amount of effort required to check a ballot and drop it in a box in hopes of changing how these issues are addressed, some people just can't be bothered? Not even enough to know who the candidates are and what they plan to do with your money?

I just don't understand it.

But it seems like it's something that extends far beyond the BUSU election and Brock University. It seems almost like a cultural thing. And I'm left wondering, 'why?' Why doesn't my generation seem to care about anything? Why are we so content to complain about things, demand that we're entitled to more, but not care enough to get off the couch and do something about it? It's easy to get all generation-gap and start with the "this generation is lazy and spoiled, and in my day..." but I mean, there has to be some kind of reason for this pervading sense of apathy.

And I'll admit, I'm as much a part of it as anyone else. I'm not out changing the world, I'm sitting here talking about it. And honestly, it confuses the hell out of me. All I can do, I guess, is to start thinking, start questioning, start wondering why this generation doesn't seem to want a voice, why we don't seem to realize the tremendous amount of power at our disposal should we choose to use it. Why we don't choose to leave our mark on this world we're all living in.

Are we afraid that our voices don't matter? That we'll be ignored, drowned out in a sea of white noise? That we don't have anything worth saying?

Or do we genuinely not care?

Hello, Ghost Readers

The idea of blogging is profoundly weird to me.

I like the idea of being more introspective, of really taking some time to reflect on all the things that make up this human experience: the events that shape our lives, the questions that shape our actions, the ideas that shape our selves...I mean, I'm a lover of words, no arguments. The power of language is something that I am acutely aware of (and enthralled with), so the whole writing thing shouldn't be strange to me. I mean, after all, I've been keeping a journal of sorts for a while now; my handy little Moleskine notebook allows me the small luxury of being able to stow away the fleeting bursts of curiosity, inspiration, and realization that would otherwise get lost in the fray of daily life. In fact, there are few things that are as cathartic as pouring out all of your emotions onto a blank page. It makes the intangible, often fuzzy, internal goings-on somehow easier to wrestle with. More manageable.

And blogging should be the same, right? Same principal, different medium. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that blogging will never be the same for me as writing in the traditional sense. When I write, usually, I write for myself. It is a chance for me to quiet the noises of existential uncertainty long enough to get some real one-on-one time with myself. It's like life is so hectic sometimes that I lose track of myself, become a stranger, and I savor those few hours over tea and pen/paper to reconnect. To keep in touch with myself.

But blogging feels different. Even if no one's reading it, I can't shake the idea of a reader; every word I type takes on a different weight because of the public nature of a blog. There's a ghost of an audience, lurking behind my computer screen, nameless and faceless, but there, listening. And suddenly, my words don't have the same reassuring echo. I'm not shouting into an empty room any more.

But maybe that's just me.

On that note, this has got me thinking about an argument we've been having in class about whether or not technology is 'political.' I think I'm beginning to understand what Professor Joe has been saying. All of this thinking about digital text versus scribal text has made me realize: a book is never 'just a book.'

Take that, Aristotle?