Social and Political Implications of Technology

[ben23]

How do Marx and/or Lessig's articles contribute to your understanding of the social/political implications of your group's chosen object?

Both Marx's and Lessig's articles contribute to the my understanding of social and political implications because first, they talk about how technology has impacted and changed the future. With technology came progression and when there was progression, society's adapted and began to conform to the new technology. The object my group has chosen is the Condom. Thinking back to hundreds of years ago, the condom was not nearly as popular as it is today. Today, adultery isn't seen as such of a crime that it was years ago. Years ago, women would be killed or sent to prison if found guilty. Nathaniel Hawthorn's The Scarlet Letter, is an example. Hester Prynne almost lost her life because she committed adultery and had conceived a baby with a man that wasn't her husband. Because Marx and Lessig believe that with technology, there is progress, i am able to see that society will always find a practical implication for an object and over time, objects that were seen as tools used by the devil now are live savers and gifts from god to others like the condom.

[gmfreeman]

ben23 I disagree with your view on Marx's article. Marx's whole point of the article was to point out that technological advances don't always bring progress to a society.
In the world that we live in today, we expect that technology will advance enough to pull us into progress, but without society goals in other aspects of society, true progress will remain stagnant.

[ben23]

gmfreeman

Good point. After re-reading marx's article, i agree that his point is that technology doesn't always bring progress to society. I believe however that with technology, progress can be made to better our society in certain aspects. If not always in notable ways, there most of the time is a progression.

[gmfreeman]

The invention of commercialized chewing gum began around the same time as the "mechanical age" as described by Marx, and for good reason. Marx's article gives important context information to the invention of chewing gum. Lessig's article about doujinshi, manga, and Disney, also helped find another social implication of chewing gum: inventions. Chewing gum is often an activity that reduces stress, and promotes deeper thinking. This thinking usually results in ideas for new things and very oftenly, the gum is used as part of the invention. Gum has a variety of uses as an impromptu adhesive. These ideas and uses build upon other people's ideas, using "Walt Disney Creativity" as Lessig put it.

[bg6]

gmfreeman I definitely agree that technological advances don't always bring progress to society. It is seen how sometimes technology brings regression when Marx uses the example of how technological progress was negative for humans in the events of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and Three-Mile Island. In these instances, our technological advances had great repercussions on people and our environment for years to come. In hindsight the results of these advances was much more significant in history than their progress was to us. In pointing out these cases, it makes me realize how technological progress is not always a good thing because of the way people decide to use them in different ways.

[els]

Marx has said "technological innovation as a sufficient cause, in itself, for the fact that history assumes the character of continuous, cumulative progress." Marx article states that technologies are sufficient basis for progress. I take this as meaning that technology is essential for social progress, with help from the quote, "technological innovation is the essential criterion for social progress." So, without technology there is no progress. There are many social implications the condom brings to society. In a way, the condom is suggesting that sex can be done more freely. Although, the condom is not a new technology, it dates back. In a way, the condom is not helping society progress. Because when it comes to diseases, the condom is helping to prevent them, so we are not finding cures for the diseases. But that is not true, we are trying to make discoveries to prevent the disease. The condom is helping society progress, especially in disease prone areas like Africa. Another social and political implication of the condom is responsibility. With the condom, men and women are learning about the responsibilities they have for themselves and the people they are with. Condoms are a large progression of their own as well, with the many different types becoming available to men and women. The condom also relates to Lessig's article when it comes to brand names. Companies are taking the ideas of other companies and creating the same thing with maybe a slight difference, and calling it a different name.

[els]

bg6 and gmfreeman
I agree with what you said that technological progress is not a good thing because of the way people decide to use them. With my object, the condom, that is very true. It is a progress, and it is good for society, but it can also be very bad because of the ideas that it gives people. Technology is important for progression like Marx has said, but it not always for the good, it can be very negative as well.

[Jerry]

As of now, our group chose paper. The articles I read make me see paper as one of those technologies that not necessarily is seen as moving us forward, but contributes to us staying where we are and is the catalyst for many other innovations. Although paper is getting increasingly obsolete due to computer usage, it still plays a key role in the maintenance and development of modern society; books, newspapers, officials records, all are still kept in paper form. I assume paper used to be a status symbol, for just like everything it probably wasn't cheap and easy to make before mass production came into effect. Therefore, the ownership and effective use of paper was probably quite the status symbol back in the day. This is in contrast to today when just about anybody has access to paper in industrialized nations. However, paper is still probably quite rare in developing countries, and thus may be seen as a symbol of wealth, power or sophistication there. All in all, in reference to the articles, I see paper as a more of a stagnant rather than dynamic tool of progress, at least in most of the world. It is somewhat similar to air-useless in and of its own self, but indispensable when put to good use.

[Anna11Banana]

Although progress and technology are usually thought of in unison, they don't always come together. Marx points out that because everyone has a different view on what progression is, some technologies aren't considered progress. Marx discusses how some see a technology as progress when it liberates from "political oppression." Marx mentions the feminist movement, which is actually linked to the evolution of our technology, the thong. This ties in greatly with the social and political issues that arise with technologies. While some would view the thong as a liberating object for women attempting to express sexuality, and therefore be technology, others with an antitechnocratic viewpoint would not.
The stance also has a lot to do with culture. Lessig compares Japanese copyright laws with those of the United States. While Japan has more lenient copyright laws (because there are less lawyers), the United States has more enforced copyright laws. But Lessig also points out while these laws have evolved over the years, that doesn't necessarily mean they have progressed.

[elm318]

Reading Marx has showed me that many inventions that seem to be flawless do have downfalls to them. His references to nuclear war and the Nazi Holocaust show that many technological advancements may backfire on society. Our group chose nail clippers so this article has me thinking what the possible negative effects nail clippers could have on society and if anyone foresaw these negative consequences.

[Anna11Banana]

@els
I think it is important to note that progress is in the eye of the beholder. I agree that technological progress is not always a good thing. Every technology comes with social and political implications, but while someone may see the implications as good another person with varying views may see them as bad.

[mrschreck]

My group chose to research the q-tip and these articles make me think about the different uses the q-tip has gathered since its creation in the 1920's. With Marx's piece I thought a lot about how the q-tips most popular purpose which is ear cleaning is also for years been said to be dangerous by doctors. This shows the progress of this invention may not have been all positive because it is now used in a harmful way. I thought Lessig's article was very interesting especially the information about the Japanese comics and how they build on each other even in minimal ways. I think the q-tip did this as well because when it was first created it was not able to be sterilized but with some tweaks to the materials it was created with it can now be sterilized and therefore is able to be used much more frequently in the medical world.

[ucsspirit15]

In Marx's article, he said that society changes in response to the new technology. I think that for our group's object, the nail clippers, the technology came out of a changing society. Without having done any research yet, I can make a couple predictions. I think that society was starting to become more hierarchical, meaning that not everyone had to do manual labor anymore. The people at the bottom who still had to work did not need nail clippers because they were naturally worn down. The people at the top, however, did not work with their hands and such had nails that grew out of control. This change in societal organization led us out of hunting and gathering and into modern civilization. Lessig's article was also interesting in it implications of our project. He hinted that no idea is truly unique, and that there is no real new technology. Everything has always been the same, but the form in which it takes changes. I think this idea can apply to any of our projects, because the items that we use today are clearly not the same that people centuries before us used.

[foresquared]

Lessig’s article focuses on the idea that technology is created and developed based on how society responds. Because technology requires some type of positive reaction to grow, the everyday objects that our class groups are profiling must have at least one positive social purpose driving them to be used. Lessig also addresses the development of technology through the “borrowing” of ideas. As Lessig gives examples of Disney’s sound and motion, borrowed story lines, and Japanese comics, I found myself wondering if every technology was at one point “borrowed” from other ideas or technology. In this sense, our class groups may confront one of the political implications through simple research; accurate historical information about our objects may be difficult to track if our technology was developed from a “public domain.” However, Lessig describes the economic and social benefits of deriving creativity from creativity. In Japan, the doujinshi works against the copyright laws to promote and improve the actual market for comics. The idea of the comic, in Japan, represents social and economic welfare while the political implications are completely overlooked. The importance of the comic in Japan, as well as the lack of money-making lawsuits, incorporates the idea that different cultures have different views of technology. Class groups need to remember that the technology they are profiling also exists in other cultures. Other cultures may think of the technology differently, or have a completely different use for the technology. Also, through his examples, Lessig displays benefits of having cultural “freedom” to “intellectual property.” The collaboration of ideas, as well as other technological designs, presents the best results. Our groups must keep in mind that our technology, at some point, was planted in the inventor’s mind through others’ ideas and creations because people learn through interaction. The “everyday” technologies have many societal, economical, and political influences; we need to discuss and think about all three.

[foresquared]

@ Anna11Banana

I feel that Lessig's article was not focusing on how the laws have progressed (or not) in United States and Japanese society, but more how the laws affect the progression (or not) of technology within the cultures. Lessig describes these relaxed laws as "freedom." Freedom in the sense to use others' ideas or technological designs to add one's own ideas to society, as Benjamin Franklin did, "to serve others by any invention of ours." Instead of addressing the question "How are the laws different?" I feel that we should be questioning, "Have the difference in laws affected the development and improvement of technology?"