"Does technology free us or trap us?"
This question came across my inbox the other day and caused me to pause. At first I thought it was a fairly straightforward and simple query - albeit one without a real answer.
It's like asking: Does clothing free us or trap us? Do seat belts free us or trap us? Bike helmets? Deadbolt locks? Dietary restrictions? Zippers? Mortgage payments? Children? Spouses?
The answer has to do with perception and approach. Most things in life aren't black and white. Shades of gray existed long before the best-selling book. And the technology debate contains layers and layers of gray. It's like opening a can of worms - with an electric can opener or with a rock depending on which side of the technology conundrum you live.
When I originally read the question in question, I envisioned smartphones and computers - newly invented modern techy gizmo.
Technology doesn't always involve megahertz and motherboards; it is anything created to produce useful items, to solve problems, make life easier or - in the case of Candy Crush Saga - make it more interesting. According to Wiki (a technological manifesto in and of itself), technology includes simple tools like a crowbar and fork as well as more complex inventions such as a space station, satellite and the emoji app.
The convenience of having hundreds of icons to express oneself within a text message may be handy, but not everyone is pro-emoji. There are actual movements - organized groups - that organize for the purpose of scrutinizing technology. These opponents say big-T harms the environment, causes nuclear waste, global warming, ozone depletion, extinction of species and modern weapons. Furthermore, they say technology alienates people and will eventually lead to social collapse.
I'm not sure I could say technology alienates me. I do have 459 friends on Facebook, after all. That's at least 458 beyond isolated.
On the flip side (not to be confused with flip phone, which is so 2008) there is a conflicting opinion, which causes complete technology discord. Another group in another camp views technological progress as beneficial to society and believes technology has the potential to improve the human condition to the point that eventually people may be able to live indefinitely.
That's a long time - maybe too long. I don't think I'd want to live to be 200; not unless they find a technological cure for wrinkles.
Lame humor aside, both camps would probably agree that technology is laden with complex issues that have yet to be sorted. Genetic engineering, drones and nanotechnology all create ethical and philosophical dialogues and dilemmas too big to tackle - or even joke about - here.
The idea of stepping back from technology and living a simple, self-sustaining, unplugged life has its appeal, but it would be difficult to completely turn one's back on modern technology. Imagine washing clothes with one of those scrubbing boards or talking to your best friend on a phone attached to the kitchen wall via a 10 foot cord. Computer monitors. Baby monitors. Smart TVs. Smartphones. Garage door openers. Can openers. Crowbars. Barcodes. They all have been or are a part of my everyday life.
The newest technology frees us from multiple cumbersome (old) technological devices like the common wristwatch, film camera, record player, flashlight, calculator, calendar, stopwatch, alarm clock and friend counter. It puts the weather forecast, ability to email, read the weekly grocery store ad and play video poker at our fingertips. And it boosts communication - at least at my house. I'm not sure how I'd ever connect with my teenagers if texting didn't exist. IMHO. (In my humble opinion)
Back to our original question: Does technology free us or trap us? Until today, I naively didn't realize the complexity of the issue. Now I do. And even though I'm uncertain which side of the debate I'm on, one thing's for sure: I won't look at my smartphone - or a crowbar - the same way ever again.
- Jill Pertler's column appears every Thursday in the Times. She can be reached at pertmn@qwest.net.
This question came across my inbox the other day and caused me to pause. At first I thought it was a fairly straightforward and simple query - albeit one without a real answer.
It's like asking: Does clothing free us or trap us? Do seat belts free us or trap us? Bike helmets? Deadbolt locks? Dietary restrictions? Zippers? Mortgage payments? Children? Spouses?
The answer has to do with perception and approach. Most things in life aren't black and white. Shades of gray existed long before the best-selling book. And the technology debate contains layers and layers of gray. It's like opening a can of worms - with an electric can opener or with a rock depending on which side of the technology conundrum you live.
When I originally read the question in question, I envisioned smartphones and computers - newly invented modern techy gizmo.
Technology doesn't always involve megahertz and motherboards; it is anything created to produce useful items, to solve problems, make life easier or - in the case of Candy Crush Saga - make it more interesting. According to Wiki (a technological manifesto in and of itself), technology includes simple tools like a crowbar and fork as well as more complex inventions such as a space station, satellite and the emoji app.
The convenience of having hundreds of icons to express oneself within a text message may be handy, but not everyone is pro-emoji. There are actual movements - organized groups - that organize for the purpose of scrutinizing technology. These opponents say big-T harms the environment, causes nuclear waste, global warming, ozone depletion, extinction of species and modern weapons. Furthermore, they say technology alienates people and will eventually lead to social collapse.
I'm not sure I could say technology alienates me. I do have 459 friends on Facebook, after all. That's at least 458 beyond isolated.
On the flip side (not to be confused with flip phone, which is so 2008) there is a conflicting opinion, which causes complete technology discord. Another group in another camp views technological progress as beneficial to society and believes technology has the potential to improve the human condition to the point that eventually people may be able to live indefinitely.
That's a long time - maybe too long. I don't think I'd want to live to be 200; not unless they find a technological cure for wrinkles.
Lame humor aside, both camps would probably agree that technology is laden with complex issues that have yet to be sorted. Genetic engineering, drones and nanotechnology all create ethical and philosophical dialogues and dilemmas too big to tackle - or even joke about - here.
The idea of stepping back from technology and living a simple, self-sustaining, unplugged life has its appeal, but it would be difficult to completely turn one's back on modern technology. Imagine washing clothes with one of those scrubbing boards or talking to your best friend on a phone attached to the kitchen wall via a 10 foot cord. Computer monitors. Baby monitors. Smart TVs. Smartphones. Garage door openers. Can openers. Crowbars. Barcodes. They all have been or are a part of my everyday life.
The newest technology frees us from multiple cumbersome (old) technological devices like the common wristwatch, film camera, record player, flashlight, calculator, calendar, stopwatch, alarm clock and friend counter. It puts the weather forecast, ability to email, read the weekly grocery store ad and play video poker at our fingertips. And it boosts communication - at least at my house. I'm not sure how I'd ever connect with my teenagers if texting didn't exist. IMHO. (In my humble opinion)
Back to our original question: Does technology free us or trap us? Until today, I naively didn't realize the complexity of the issue. Now I do. And even though I'm uncertain which side of the debate I'm on, one thing's for sure: I won't look at my smartphone - or a crowbar - the same way ever again.
- Jill Pertler's column appears every Thursday in the Times. She can be reached at pertmn@qwest.net.