Why The Future Doesn't Need Us Part 2

Joys thesis is that one day robots could dominate and humans would become obsolete. His fear is that with all of our new technologies and us working to make computer's "smarter", one day humans will have no purpose. He questions whether or not we should be continuing the advancement of technology if one day we will become obsolete. He suggests that if this is a real danger then we should stop this advancement. Huxley would disagree in the sense that technology will not make humans obsolete, rather it will allow for humans to live happy lives with less work. He would agree with the idea that in order to stop this inevitable future we must stop the advancement in technology, but he would not see technology as a bad thing. I do not think Joy is a fear monger, he does not want to make us aware of possible outcomes of our actions. Joy uses literary devices such as rhetorical devices such as "Given the incredible power of these new technologies, shouldn't we be asking how we can best coexist with them? And if our own extinction is a likely, or even possible, outcome of our technological development, shouldn't we proceed with great caution?" (P.7 para.6), metaphors such as "...to lift a million tons of rock in the sky..." (P.12 Para.9), similes such as "... superior robots would surely affect humans as North American placentals affected South American marsupials (and as humans have affected countless other species)" (p.3 para.6), and personifications such as " It is most of all the power of destructive self- replication in genetics, nanotechnology,and robotics" (P.10 Para. 4). These literary devises emphasize Joy's thesis that technology is not always a good thing. Take Brave New World for example, the society is controlled by technology. Everything down to humans being born is due to technology, but the price is that there is no freedom of though, no alone time, no history, and no science in which the society revolves around. The people there are genetically conditioned to be happy no matter the circumstances. Technology makes them artificially happy because their lives have no purpose any longer, humans have, in thought, become obsolete.

HARRISON BERGERON

Vonnegut shows that equality is a good idea, but does not always work in reality. Equality made smart people dumb, beautiful people ugly, and fast people slow. If one had a characteristic that made one better than someone else, that person was handicapped to maintain equality. Vonnegut shows that inequality makes life interesting and exciting. The theme of the story is that individuality is a good thing. Individuality may maintain inequality, but it keeps life from becoming boring. The story is told from the point of view of Mr. and Mrs. Bergeron. It is more effective to tell the story from their point of view rather than Harrison’s, because Harrison is smart and the reader would not get the full effect of the invasion of privacy or handicaps placed upon advanced individuals. Diana Moon Glampers is not realistic, because one person cannot go around shooting people for breaking the law. She does not need to be realistic, because keeping her unrealistic emphasizes a point. The point Vonnegut emphasizes is of one person ruling everything. In today’s society, Diana Moon Glampers represents George W. Bush. Bush now had the power to invade our privacy by tapping into our phone lines without a warrant. Glampers invades privacy through the earpieces the smart people have to wear. Glampers will always be in the heads of the smart people. Vonnegut shows that men and women will always be equal despite technology through Hazel. Hazel says, "I mean-you don't compete with anybody around here. You just set around" (HARRISON BERGERON). This shows that as a married couple these two individuals do not compete and without competition there is equality.

Why The Future Doesn't Need Us

1. Why are we, as a whole, continuing to attempt to devbelpo newer technologies if they eventually will overtake us?
2. What whould the author do to prevent robots from taking over?
3. Do you think that the author will continur to develop new technologies?
4. What would make someone want to continue creating?
5. Who can stop the process?
6. How can the process be stopped?
7. What did the author do to convince the reader of his point

The Ones Who Walked Away From Omelas

As I was reading this piece I was mortified by what this little kid had to endure to allow everyone else to be happy. I wonder what the purpose is to having a child sit in a room and be miserable. Although the child does have to endure isolation and starvation I thought that the town seemed like a peaceful place. The society there was orderly, but was also relaxing and fun.

1984 and The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas are very similar. In both stories a “higher power” controlled society. In 1984 the “higher power” was Big Brother and in The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas it is the maker. Blind acceptance was in both novels. In 1984 the blind acceptance was that what ever Big Brother said was true and in The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas it was that this little child had to suffer to allow everyone else in town to be free. As I read The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas I noticed that if one did not believe in the torture of the child, they were allowed to leave, but in 1984 it was believe or be killed.

When the author used personification when “the horses rear on their slender legs, and some of them neigh in answer”; the author says this as if a something can prompt a horse to answer. The author’s style made it clear that this was a peaceful town. The author’s metaphor, “Omelas sounds in my words like a city in a fairy tale, long ago and far away, once upon a time” makes the reader picture a fairy tale.

1) What is the purpose to having on child tortured for the benefit of others?
2) What were the themes of the story?
3) Was there a “God” is the story? Who?
4) Who controlled society?
5) Where could the people who walked away from Omelas be going?

Asimov Reading Response

1984 and Robot Dreams depict a future different from today. 1984’s dystopia showed the result of Big Brother running the nation, while Robot Dream’s technologically advanced time showed a glimpse into robots running the world. The theme of both novels was, having one person or group in charge would be unbeneficial. An underlying theme in both novels was the “God” theme. In 1984 “God”, who sat around all day, ruled and decided who lived or died, was Big Brother and in Robot Dreams “God” was Dr. Rush. While George Orwell emphasized the probability of a government with Big Brother, Asimov showed how to prevent a dystopia. Orwell and Asimov would discuss government and the future of society. Orwell would suggest a Big Brother government Asimov would suggest a government run by people today because of prevention. Both make points that are similar, but in different ways.

Goals

Top 3 College Choices:
University of Texas at Austin
Penn State University
The University of Miami
Drexel University
Illinois Institute of Technology
(so I can't count)

GPA Goal:
English: an A- (4.67)
This Year: 4.2
Overall: 4.0 or higher

Exam Goal: 4

Person helping with college essays:
I'm not sure yet, but Mr. Brater is doing my reccomundations and I thought I would ask him; would you be willing to look them over too. That is, when I get them written.