Neil Postman's Technopoly

The World State: The Ultimate Technopoly

Technopoly: “The submission of all forms of culture life to the sovereignty of technique and technology.” (Technopoly Postman) This is the definition of Neil Postman’s idea of a “technopoly.”  In other words it means that everything that humans do they have found the best and most efficient way to do it with the latest and constantly mounting technology.  This idea is can even be seen in today’s modern world and Postman describes how the world has moved from a technocracy to a technopoly.  A technocracy is the stage before a technopoly and this transition occurred around the early twentieth century.  “The citizens of a technocracy knew that science and technology did not provide philosophy by which to live, and they clung to the philosophies of their fathers.” and the end of this technocracy is seen mostly when Fredrick Wilson Taylor describes how humans are inefficient and that they should be made more efficient through machines and technology. (Technopoly Postman) Taylor came up with the idea that started the technopoly and this idea is one of the central points of a technopoly.  This idea is also the central point of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.  Brave New World is essentially a perfect technopoly.  Is follows that main ideas that everything has become as efficient as possible through the help of technology.  They even went as far as to engineer humans to be the most efficient at the job which they are predestined to do.  They way they did this is through the use of new technologies which also plays a vital role in a technopoly.  Neil Postman’s  theory of a technopoly is the best description of what the human race in the World State is trying to achieve. 

Singularity: The Inevitable Truth

Technology is growing exponentially and this is an irrefutable fact.  The question that mankind should be asking is how long till this technology becomes smarter than human intelligence.  This could lead to no more disease, no more getting old, no more dying; but it could also lead to the destruction of the human race.  There are many people that are skeptical of this idea and fear it but some people embrace it much like Raymond Kurzweil.

            Kurzweil is the father of singularity:  the idea that technology grows at an exponential rate and that this will create artificial intelligence that I smarter than human intelligence.  He has predicted that AI will have been created by the year 1239 but in order for man to prevent the AI from being smarter he must “[use] computers to extend our intellectual abilities” to become “super-intelligent cyborgs.”(Grossman)  Some people believe this to be a bad thing like Bernard in 1984 because they think mankind will lose its humanity.  This might be partially true but when humans merge with the machine they do not loose there consciousness or their morals but they just become more intelligent then any natural human is.  I believe it is necessary for humans to merge with the machine to prevent the machine from becoming too intelligent and turning on the humans.  This newfound intelligence is also essential for mankind to make new discoveries at a pace higher than no other.  This idea of singularity is inevitable and mankind must be ready for it.

            There are also many parallels seen between the novel 1984 by George Orwell and the ideas of singularity.  Disease has been irradiated from humans and now humans don’t even give birth to other humans anymore; machines do.  

Critical Reading Essay

Cody Brotter’s essay Immigration, and What it Means to be an American analyses two pieces of literature that describe the same thing but they are written practically two centuries apart.  Both describe immigration but Crevecoeur’s describes the immigrant much more favorable than Fallows does.  He reveals through rhetorical strategies how Crevecoeur’s What is an American? And Fallows’ Immigration: How It’s Affecting Us are practically contradicting themselves because of how time has changed the view on immigration in America.

     These two pieces show how immigration has changed greatly from the nineteenth century to the twentieth century.  Brotter shows how Crevecoeur depicts the American immigrant as someone who has done everything possible to get to American and that their life outside of America was an atrocity compared to their life in America.  On the other hand he show’s how Fallows depicts the immigrant as someone that was more resourceful than most Americans and that would benefit America with their resourcefulness.  According to Brotter this change in attitude had simply occurred because of the great changes that took place between a couple of centuries.  

Although the author is not as credible on the subject as Crevecoeur or Fallows is but he certainly provides enough evidence to seem credible to the reader.  He uses many quotes from both pieces and this shows that he has closely read both passages.  From his constant reference back to the two texts makes the reader feel knowing and comfortable with the subject even though they could have never read either of the texts or have no idea about the subject.  The author therefore proves his credibility and is able to write an essay that the readers will believe and accept.

     The author’s language also plays a vital role in the essay itself.  Diction like differentiation, assimilation, and ample subsistence are used throughout the passage. This type of elevated language gives his essay even more credibility that the author is well read and has a wide and diverse vocabulary.  Although the language is slightly elevated it is still perceivable by the audience and gives the essay more depth.

     The views on immigration and on immigrants themselves have changed greatly and Brotter makes this apparent in his essay.  Immigration, and What it Means to be an American shows how time truly changes everything.

           

           

      

 http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/176/immigration-and-what-it-means-to-be-an-american