...memoria is "the firm mental grasp of the words and things for the purpose of invention."
- in Mary Carruthers' How to Make a Composition: Memory-Craft in Antiquity and in the Middle Ages
However, for me there is a tension when I think about whether this technological revolution we're experiencing will significantly change our capacity for innovation and intellectual exploration or not. In part, we can't deny the power of technological advancement as a way to advance society (e.g., consider the role of the printing press in providing access to information and helping to quickly disseminate ideas). At the same time, I like to think that human intellect and curiosity persevere even in austere communication environments. I want to keep the tools of communication that we've developed in perspective and not elevate them onto a pedestal that may in the end give us limited foresight. I fear the belief that the power of The Cloud can fix much more than it actually can.
During last week's class we didn't really discuss the fact that scouring information in books or online requires a skill-set that we acquire (including literacy at its basic level) and that not everyone has. This may be deviating from our primary interest in this class, but the issue of equitable access to information and these communication tools that are so revolutionary is a problem (dare I say an issue of justice?) that we haven't resolved yet.
I absolutely agree with you about the importance of equity in thinking about communications. FYI I took a great course last summer with Howie Budin on the topic--it's in MSTU, Equity Ethics and Social Issues. We spent the entire course grappling with just a few of those issues--and really just came to two conclusions:
ReplyDelete1) There isn't enough research out there (quantitative or quailtative) to reasonably make predictions or draw conclusions about what's happening with technology.
2) Much of the research (that we read, found, etc.) seemed very much slanted by the author's perspective, rather than any kind of objective "truth."
Personally I tend to think that the advent of technologies serve to create new potentialities and possibly steer us away from old ones--but not eliminate them. Without computers, for example, conceptualizing real-time exchanges of information among large groups of individuals--with each as a contributor of information--was unthinkable. Yet with Twitter, Facebook, and hundreds of other applications crowdsourcing has become a legitimate source of information. While we may not be as likely to pick up a telephone 5, 10, 100 years from now, I wonder: will be still having the same conversation, just in different ways?
I tend to agree that we should be suspicious of utopian visions that assume technology alone will save us. It's not the tools, it's how we use them that matters, and rhetoric that elevates specific tools or digital technology in general to messianic status lets us off the hook when it comes to responsible application of these tools. That said, I think we can talk about possible changes to our mental habits - and other habits, for that matter - that our use of certain technologies may encourage without necessarily adopting that utopian rhetoric.
ReplyDelete