Technology: A Benefit or a Bane?

A major theme of this class (and a theme of our entire school!) has been the effect of technology on society. This theme has added urgency as we move into the Cold War era and the nuclear brinkmanship that marked that time, and still continues to mark our own, to a lesser degree. In a lecture we looked at the following quote by Albert Einstein, a crucial figure in the development of the atomic bomb: "Technological progress is like an ax in the hands of a pathological criminal." Is that true? Is it so simple? Most Americans today believe unequivocally that technology is a good thing. Is this true? Is it so simple? Technology is never neutral in how it influences human society, and here is where we come to the crux of the issue. Has technology helped or hindered our progress as a people in American history? Was Benjamin Franklin right in restlessly attempting to make life less painful and less difficult with inventions such as the Franklin stove, bifocals, and the lightning rod? Was he correct to focus on material improvement of himself and his community? (i.e. the Enlightenment.) Or was Thoreau correct in claiming that we Americans have become "the tools of our tools"? That we Americans are overworked, overfed, and overly concerned with material objects at the expense of our spiritual lives? (i.e. the Romantic) Do, indeed, the mass of Americans you know lead "lives of quiet desperation"? Or are we doing pretty well? What do you think? With the immense technological breakthroughs of the last century, these questions acquire additional relevance. Public health and vaccines? Cloning? Stem cell testing? The mass media? Nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons? Terrorism? The destruction of the environment? Genetically modified organisms? Gene therapy and genetically enhanced human beings? How will all these dramatic new technologies impact human civilization? Will we soar to new heights? Or is the entire edifice of modern civilization unsustainable and moving towards disaster? Are we simply improving our society and moving forth into a more modern and improved world, as our ancestors have done before us? Or have we, in our arrogance and pride, erected a Tower of Babel which will come crashing down to the ground? Lost the wisdom of our traditions and our forefathers? (I know it sounds familiar!) Will humankind control its creations or be controlled by them? Is human freedom endangered by ascendant technologies? Will humanity ascend to new heights? Will life in the future be longer and happier than before because of technology? Or will it be the opposite? Why? EXPLAIN! Perhaps this is all too much for one blogsite posting! Fair enough. Let us refine the question down: In your life as a high school student, does technology help to make you smarter, healthier, and happier? Able to connect better with the past, present, and future? Touch the hearts, minds, and souls of other human beings? Or does technology contribute to a sedentary lifestyle and poor health, waste your time on activities that ultimately do you no good, that in effect make you dumber, actually isolate you from other human beings - dragging you down in the end? Or is it a complex mix of ill and good? Why? EXPLAIN! In your blogsite posting, please feel free to take these questions and answer them wherever they pique the interest. The door is open for you to comment on what interests you most. This posting offers you a great opportunity to tie themes and ideas together not only from this year but from all throughout your high school experience here at Foothill. I look forward very much to reading your responses. Your blogsite posting is due Friday morning April 15, 2005 at 8:00 a.m.

Truman and the Decision to Drop the Bomb...

Was this decision to destroy the cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima the "right" and "best" decision? Or was it a "war crime" that History will condemn? This argument has raged ever since the tragic events which ended WWII in August 1945. Now we shall argue over it. The argument has crucial important to us and our time, too, as ever since August 1945 humanity has lived nervously in the shade of the "nuclear shadow." The world would never be the same after the first detonation of an atomic weapon on July 16th, 1945 at 0529 HRS, in the Jornada del Muerto desert near the Trinity site in the southwestern New Mexico desert. As J. Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientist on the Manhattan Project, claimed as he watched the first ever mushroom cloud: "...now I am become Death [Shiva], the destroyer of worlds..." World history was changed forever on that White Sands Missile Range desert floor that fateful morning. But what about the decision to use the bomb in combat against imperial Japan? Think deeply about the dilemma that faced President Truman as a possible invasion of the Japanese home islands approached, and then consider the positions of the Imperial Japanese government and the Allies. Was the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan the "right" one that ultimately saved more lives than it cost? Or were the atomic bombings "war crimes" that were unpardonable under any circumstances? (Or were they both? Could that be possible?) Our discussion on this topic should embody practical and philosophical principles, firmly embedded in the historical realities of late-1945. Be sure and examine the sources posted here before you comment publicly on these complex yet crucial historical events. Resist vigorously the temptation to be SIMPLISTIC or REDUCTIONIST - do your research before you post. Your blogsite posting is due Monday morning April 11, 2005 at 8:00 a.m.

Academic Equity: Freedom of the Individual Versus the Needs of the Collective

"Resolved, that starting next year we at Foothill Technology High School will eradicate all 'tracking' in academic classes whereby 'advanced' and 'non-advanced' students attend different classes with different teachers with different academic goals. This change will help to reduce and eventually erase the racial, economic, and social inequalities that plague our schools and our entire society. 'Tracking,' indeed, is un-American. Next year, it will end at FTHS." What would you think if you heard this news, my students? What would be your first gut reaction? Your later conclusion, after you had thought about it? Think about these assumptions: If the strongest students self-segregate themselves into separate classes, does this not simply reinforce the existing gaps in achievement in our schools? The intelligent and the ambitious move far forward in separent classes, while the other "non-advanced" classes (with at least some unambitious and unprepared students) get left behind? At any school how much does a motivated and focused student owe to those less strong academically and less motivated? Our blogsite posting this time around will focus on this main question:

To what extent should we as a community minimize the FREEDOM of high achieving students to choose advanced classes in the name of equality of all students? Should we abolish Advanced Placement classes in the name of academic EQUALITY?

What do you think? How much should school be about maximizing the unique potential of each individual student in their pursuit of book knowledge and academic excellence? How much should school be about looking after one’s neighbor and working for the good of ALL students, and especially the weakest students – focusing on others, instead of oneself? Can one have both? Yes? No? To what extent? Should school be about learning how to get along with others? Building equality and “democracy”? Struggling for social justice for all in the community? Or should school be primarily about each individual learning “reading, writing, and arithmetic”? Learning academic content? Acquiring the intellectual skills for success in school and adult life? Getting that letter of acceptance from that prestigious university your senior year? Why don’t we get rid of AP classes and academic “tracking” in schools? Should we integrate, by court order if necessary, high-achieving and low-achieving schools in neighboring communities? Should we bus kids from different socioeconomic backgrounds to other area school to ensure racial and ethnic diversity in school populations? Why should the quality of education one receives depend on one's zip code? Why don’t we force the most veteran and most highly qualified teachers to work in the lowest achieving and most difficult schools? Restrict the FREEDOM of those teachers to choose their schools in the name of EQUALITY of academic offerings? To ensure a measure of academic equity in ALL schools? Should we even go so far as to ban private schools in the name of equality and ensuring similar educational access? What do you think? What should be the policy for our community in these matters? Please publish your comments by 8:00 a.m. on Thursday March 24, 2005. This discussion will serve as preparation for the educational equity Socratic dialogue we will have on that day in class.

The role of "consumerism" and "infotainment" on American life...

... do the "rich and famous" really have more fun? This online discussion will focus on the world of popular culture and "consumerism" in our entertainment driven society and in the context of Gatsby amidst the ethos of the Roarin' 20s.

The following quote is a critical observation of George F. Babitt, a fictitious middle-class American character of the 1920s created by author Sinclair Lewis:

"Just as he was an Elk, a Booster, and a member of the Chamber of Commerce, just as the priests of the Presbyterian Church determined his every religious belief and the senators who controlled the Republican Party decided in little smoky rooms in Washington what he should think about disarmament, tariff, and Germany, so did the large American advertisers fix the surface of his life, fix what he believed to be his individuality. These standard advertised wares -- toothpaste, socks, tires, cameras, instantaneous hot-water heaters -- were his symbols and proofs of excellence; at first the signs, then the substitutes, for joy and passion and wisdom."

The implication here clearly is that individuals in modern America are controlled by pleasure and the experience of buying and consuming - external forces telling the individual what they should think, believe, and buy in a mass marketing consumer society dominated by advertising and other forms of propaganda. To Sinclair the "image" is everything, and Americans are bombarded and finally conquered by what "image" they should model themselves after; few in the end think for themselves. We as consumers thinks we have lives we have chosen, but in reality it is a life dictated for us by others: the elite few opinion shapers lead a mass mob in a giant parade of conformity. Whether selling a politician, a movie, an idea, or a pair of shoes, the emphasis is on earning product loyalty and controlling consumer thought. To what extent is this observation true today in the "infotainment" American economy of MTV, blockbuster movies, rap music, and trendy clothing fashions in a culture of celebrity -worship -- all amidst an advertising presence in the lives of Americans today that dwarfs that of the 1920s? Are Americans today controlled by pleasure and gratifying the ego? The party, the fun, the "neverending excitement"? Are the rich and the famous and the glamorous really "different"? Do they have a better time of it in life? Is the "image" of celebrityhood as portrayed through the media in popular culture really true to life? Is popular culture a vulgarizing influence on America and Americans? Do television and video games turn people's minds to guacamole? Is a constant staring at screens all day long why Americans as a people are so overweight and unhealthy?

Are the mass media and popular entertainment a sewer from which anything that sells will be sold - no matter what the result to the buyer? (Drugs, bootleg gin, violence, sex, jazz, rap music?) Or is entertainment in America a uniquely powerful and positive medium that helps Americans get through the day and find the "fun" in life that is at times unavoidably painful and tedious? (Is this why foreigners love American pop culture so much?) Are the movies and popular music where America tells its more important stories? Where Americans discuss what is most important to them? Or is it merely pandering to the lower interests of viewers? Or is it both?

Is this more of Mr. Geib asking five or six questions at the same time? More of his attacking your brain from more than one direction at the same time? Do you want it boiled down to one specific question. So be it:

To what extent is entertainment in America a positive and helpful or a negative and harmful influence on our national life?

Please post your comments with regards to the above questions by 8:00 a.m. on Wednesday the 16th of March, 2005 by 8:00 a.m.

I look forward to reviewing your ideas!

"E Pluribus Unum" - out of the many, the one.

...But which is more important - the many, or the one?" In at least 250 words, this online discussion will focus on the question that we started last week in the context of the Progressives and the "New Immigration" of the late 19th and early 20th centuries:

Is American society a "melting pot" or a "salad bowl"? Some other metaphor?

And the subsidiary questions still apply to this question: How powerful a solvent is life in America to immigrants, their children, and their children's children? How successful have immigrants been traditionally in preserving their ethnic heritages? Is immigration today any different? How was the "new" immigration of the late nineteenth century different than the "old" immigration of earlier times? Was it, in fact, different? To what exent has American always been a diverse place? A "nation of many nations"? To what extent have Americans conformed to national "mainstream" standards of language, law, and culture? Is there even such a thing as an American "mainstream" culture - or only American subcultures?

This discussion is in preparation for this Thursday's Socratic dialogue for this assignment, as well as the next in class AP English essay. Learn from your fellow students and move down the road towards being able to speak knowledgably and insightfullly about these issues! Good luck everyone! I hope to see the same level of sophistication and passion as in the last postings. And please remember that nobody gets personal in their disagreements - stick to the issues and agree to disagree, if it comes to that. At the same time, please be as honest as possible in explaining exactly what you think and feel. Americans have passionately disagreed on this topic since colonial times, and nowadays is no different. In fact, if nobody strongly disagreed on this topic it would itself be a danger sign, in my opinion. But disagree respectfully, and be mindful that everyone is entitled to their opinion. To put it simply: Attack the opinion stated, not the person stating it. Remember: 250 words, at least - and you have until Thursday morning the 24th at 8 a.m. to post it.

Integrity and right versus wrong

Tonight in at least 250 words please respond to the following question:

"Is there such thing as right and wrong? Applicable in all cases always? Or is human morality simply a matter of custom depending on specific culture? Does it all depend on the circumstances? Is 'right' and 'wrong' always 'relative'?"

The same rules as the last discussion apply to this one, also. Many people had strong feelings when we discussed this in class, and please remember even when strongly and forcefully stating your opinions to be respectful to your peers. Agree to disagree if you have to!

Bartleby question...!

Dear Hardworking American Experience Students: Although feel free to go longer if you feel the need to convey adequately your ideas, please respond in at least 250 words to the following question:

"Why does Melville choose to have Bartleby 'prefer not to' respond to the demands made on him by his environment? What is going on in Bartleby's head? WHAT EXACTLY IS THE THEME OF THE STORY? What is Melville trying to say through the character of Bartleby? What is his point?"

This online discussion is just another way in which students can discuss and learn from each other, and it will lead up to this concluding assignment for "Bartleby." The more "help" you have, the easier all will unfold. Please take into account the following criteria Mr. Geib will take into account when assessing your posting:

• Posting by due date and meeting required length (at least 250 words).
• Reflections must be in response to the question posted and/or responses to other students’ posts.
• Posting indicates significant reflection on text and/or class discussions.
• Posting includes specific details from texts and/or class discussions as support for claims.

Please type up your response first in a wordprocessing program, run the spell check, re-read and revise your words a few times, and then "copy" and "paste" your comments onto the blog and post them. The fluency of your language and profundity of your insights count. Finally, and most importantly, please when discussing online following the same rules in terms of respect and politeness that apply to in class discussions. In particular, feel free to disagree - even to disagree vehemently! Any serious discussion on any weighty topic will by its nature bring strong opinions and debate and disagreement. People see the world differently. But no personal attacks, and respect each other's freedom to believe differently and to find their own way to the truth. Please respect your fellow students and their opinions. Argue the points passionately, but if necessary agree to disagree. This is not the appropriate forum for "flaming" or "flame wars." Enough said!

Please respond to Philosopher King posts...

Dear Hardworking American Experience Students, Please respond in at least 4-6 sentences to the posting of another group's Philosopher King Assignment on their blogsite. Choose a proposal that you find intriguing and about which you have something to say. Worth 5 points!

VARK and EQ Tests...!

MR. GEIB's SCORES: Mr. Geib's VARK scores were: Visual: 3 Aural: 1 Read/Write: 7 Kinesthetic: 2 Test your emotional intelligence (EQ) You scored 80% correct! Mr. Geib's score indicates that he has an above average EQ. Dear Students: Please go ahead and post your test results below....