This is an add on to the last post about Twitter in some ways, and not in others. The real answer I am digging for with this post is to this question: How are we allowing technology to shape us? And what implications does this have on our society in relation to technological innovation, and the path that technological innovation will take?
To find this answer I would first consider what inherently drives or creates the need for technological innovation. One obvious thing is the market’s demand for it. This demand drives producer’s to continually innovate their hardware or software in accordance to what consumer’s feel the product’s are lacking (in terms of features or capability), or what the producer’s themselves believe is needed to make their product better. The progression of cell phones in our society is a perfect example of this kind of drive. People need mobile communication capability. Then that’s not enough. They need mobile communication capability via text. Then that’s not enough. They need mobile email communication capability. THEN that’s not enough. They need full internet browser capability along with all the other features of the preceding cell phones, not to mention that the phone has to look really cool while they do all this.
But, don’t get the wrong idea, I am not pointing the shame finger at society for this envelopment in a consumer-driven market, I’d like a cell phone with laptop capabilities too. This brings me to the real undercurrent that drives all the technological innovation, the desire for immediacy. People want things done as fast as they can possibly be done. This is better achieved as technology allows us to save more and more time between us having the idea and making it a reality. This immediacy opens up a world of new possibilities every day. But, we can’t fool ourselves and believe that these possibilities don’t come at a price.
In my last blog about Twitter I mentioned a similar concern, and I think we’ve all heard, contemplated, and discussed the idea that as technology progresses, especially in the case of communicative technology, that it increases human isolation and drives our society apart, damaging our inherent ability to truly and intimately connect to each other as human beings. Though this is a debatable idea, it does have some merit. How many times have you needed to tell someone something that wasn’t exactly the most comfortable conversation topic, and so you opted to text the person this thing instead? We have all done it, because technology allows us to. It’s not bad, we just need to remain aware of how we are allowing technology to shape our own societal rules and practices. And, what how our own rules and practices, in turn, shape and teach technology. That’s right…teach.
One very interesting take on this subject is this video article/argument made by Mike Wesch, Assistant Professor of Cultural Anthropology at the Kansas State University:
Of course, I don’t think this discussion is limited to the academic world, I think this is an ongoing dialogue that should be discussed and considered in all facets of our lives. Socrates said “The unexamined life is not worth living.” He wasn’t referring to technology’s effects in our lives, but nonetheless this statement is incredibly relative to our current relationship with technology. We allow these innovations to come like the wind and sweep by us as we grab at each new technology, without considering what kind of dependancy we are creating for ourselves, and how we are affecting our relationships with each other as a direct result of our relationship with technology. In closing, I’d also like to show that this concern is not my own, and is not just of the academic world, but also has already made its way into the mainstream world of entertainment:
Daft Punk’s Technologica, released March 2005:
P.S. It’s really creepy if you play the Daft Punk song over the muted Wesch video, for all you people with too much time on your hands or who are easily entertained.
