For my research paper I chose the topic of technology and military. To get more specific I changed my question to how does lack of technology affect soldiers in basic training? If I do need to expand my question I will look into how civilian technology affects any soldier in the military.
I have always been interested in the military and I knew I wanted to research more on it. However, I came to my topic because recently many of my friends have joined the military. It was hard not only talking to my best friend everyday but seeing him everyday than he left for Marines basic training and I got to talk to him once or twice a week through a letter. I also have many friends enlisted in the Army. They all said the same thing they could handle the physical challenges they experienced but it was emotionally really hard on them. I want to research why it is so important to cut soldiers off from communicating with their family and friends.
I would be a stakeholder in this because I am one of many that is waiting for letters from a friend. My perspective on this situation is that I think while in basic soldiers should get more time on the phone to call their family and more opportunities to call. Civilian technology has increased so much I think it would be great if they even explored web cams in basic for a chance for the soldiers to see there family.
I understand I may not be able to find out a lot about this unless its inside sources but I think it is an important topic.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Blog 7
To be able to successfully write assignment 5, I had to critically read through the sources. I read more than just the passage where Nye mentioned these sources, I reread the chapter so I understood how that particular passage fit in with the chapter. When reading the sources it is important to understand what the author is saying but also why Nye used this author. I concentrated most on the parts that were closely related to how Nye used that author.
I thought that peer editing was just as helpful this time. I like hearing what I did right so I know to add more of that to my paper. Also, knowing what you did wrong helps to know what to change. I feel like when people peer editing they did a good balance of both of these, which made peer editing successful.
I feel it was important for Nye to use sources because it really strengthened his book. It proved that many people agree with him. He not only told you how he felt but by mentioning other sources he showed you. From what I read Nye always used his sources accurately. He never really bashed any source, which worked because he was try to prove his own points instead of trying to prove someone they are wrong. However, I thought some of his sources weren’t as powerful because he assumed we knew what he was talking about. I think he could of done better explaining on a few to strengthen those sources.
I think writers could have a lot of difficulty when uses sources. Sometimes its difficult to connect your own opinion to theirs and you don’t always know when to use quotes or if you are using the right quote to strengthen your topic. The only thing I would do differently with Nye is explain the sources I will be using. I think it is more complicated to the reader if you just throw in a quote, even if fits in, its better to explain it. I think overall putting sources into the paper will not be as difficult as the length. However, if I use the right amount of quotes in the paper it will be easier to add more of my own opinion into it.
I thought that peer editing was just as helpful this time. I like hearing what I did right so I know to add more of that to my paper. Also, knowing what you did wrong helps to know what to change. I feel like when people peer editing they did a good balance of both of these, which made peer editing successful.
I feel it was important for Nye to use sources because it really strengthened his book. It proved that many people agree with him. He not only told you how he felt but by mentioning other sources he showed you. From what I read Nye always used his sources accurately. He never really bashed any source, which worked because he was try to prove his own points instead of trying to prove someone they are wrong. However, I thought some of his sources weren’t as powerful because he assumed we knew what he was talking about. I think he could of done better explaining on a few to strengthen those sources.
I think writers could have a lot of difficulty when uses sources. Sometimes its difficult to connect your own opinion to theirs and you don’t always know when to use quotes or if you are using the right quote to strengthen your topic. The only thing I would do differently with Nye is explain the sources I will be using. I think it is more complicated to the reader if you just throw in a quote, even if fits in, its better to explain it. I think overall putting sources into the paper will not be as difficult as the length. However, if I use the right amount of quotes in the paper it will be easier to add more of my own opinion into it.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Globalization
I didn't finish but this is what i had done.. had a hard time writing it..
In David Nye’s book “Technology Matters” he writes about how technology affects all aspects of our lives. In Chapter 5, he talks about what globalization is doing to us. He says, “Recently, debates about globalization have addressed the question of whether technologies are being used to create a more homogeneous or heterogeneous world.” (Nye 80) I feel like he is wondering if technology is making countries more alike or even more diverse. In this chapter he uses sources to support both ideas. However, neither of these sources talked about technology which I thought was interesting. I did agree with the sources supporting the fact that the world is become more homogeneous.
The first source he used was George Ritzer who wrote “The McDonaldization of Society”. He says that McDonaldization is “The process by which the principles of the fast food restaurant are coming to dominate more and more sectors of American Society as well as the rest of the world.” (Ritzer 1) Ritzer is stating that many other companies are adapting to the working style of McDonald’s, and the main qualities that they have which are efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control (substitution of nonhuman for human technology). (Ritzer 4) I think the reason Nye mentioned Ritzer at this particular part of his book is because Ritzer is showing how everyone is starting to work the same way so of course society is going to start becoming more alike rather than different. Nye uses Ritzer in his text by saying that Ritzer is “arguing that fast-food restaurants epitomize an impersonal standardization that Western nations aggressively export to the rest of the world.” (Nye 80)
Benjamin Barber also agreed with Ritzer’s concept of McDonaldization. Barber uses the phrase McWorld though. He says that in McWorld “there is no activity more intrinsically globalizing than trade, no ideology less interested in nations than capitalism, no challenge to frontiers more audacious than the market.” (Barber 23) I think Nye brought up Barber as a source because he did capture how people are looking more into what is efficient and consistent to what the consumer likes rather than the company just doing there own thing. Nye uses Barber in his chapter by saying, “Benjamin Barber has attacked the cultural imperialism that, he argues, is transforming a rich cultural variety into a single bland, McWorld.” (Nye 80) I think Nye’s reason for putting Barber’s ideas in his book is because Barber shows how the economy is becoming similar and transforming. He is just showing how yet another thing is becoming alike throughout all cultures.
I feel like Ritzer and Barber left out how McDonaldization can be positive and also how McWorld can be positive. I feel like Nye did a good job at showing both sides and the other authors could of too. However, it was a little confusing as to why Nye didn’t use authors that talked primarily about technology. Once you read through the sources it was understandable why Nye used them. They did a could job on expanding upon his thought of how globalization is making the world homogeneous.
In David Nye’s book “Technology Matters” he writes about how technology affects all aspects of our lives. In Chapter 5, he talks about what globalization is doing to us. He says, “Recently, debates about globalization have addressed the question of whether technologies are being used to create a more homogeneous or heterogeneous world.” (Nye 80) I feel like he is wondering if technology is making countries more alike or even more diverse. In this chapter he uses sources to support both ideas. However, neither of these sources talked about technology which I thought was interesting. I did agree with the sources supporting the fact that the world is become more homogeneous.
The first source he used was George Ritzer who wrote “The McDonaldization of Society”. He says that McDonaldization is “The process by which the principles of the fast food restaurant are coming to dominate more and more sectors of American Society as well as the rest of the world.” (Ritzer 1) Ritzer is stating that many other companies are adapting to the working style of McDonald’s, and the main qualities that they have which are efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control (substitution of nonhuman for human technology). (Ritzer 4) I think the reason Nye mentioned Ritzer at this particular part of his book is because Ritzer is showing how everyone is starting to work the same way so of course society is going to start becoming more alike rather than different. Nye uses Ritzer in his text by saying that Ritzer is “arguing that fast-food restaurants epitomize an impersonal standardization that Western nations aggressively export to the rest of the world.” (Nye 80)
Benjamin Barber also agreed with Ritzer’s concept of McDonaldization. Barber uses the phrase McWorld though. He says that in McWorld “there is no activity more intrinsically globalizing than trade, no ideology less interested in nations than capitalism, no challenge to frontiers more audacious than the market.” (Barber 23) I think Nye brought up Barber as a source because he did capture how people are looking more into what is efficient and consistent to what the consumer likes rather than the company just doing there own thing. Nye uses Barber in his chapter by saying, “Benjamin Barber has attacked the cultural imperialism that, he argues, is transforming a rich cultural variety into a single bland, McWorld.” (Nye 80) I think Nye’s reason for putting Barber’s ideas in his book is because Barber shows how the economy is becoming similar and transforming. He is just showing how yet another thing is becoming alike throughout all cultures.
I feel like Ritzer and Barber left out how McDonaldization can be positive and also how McWorld can be positive. I feel like Nye did a good job at showing both sides and the other authors could of too. However, it was a little confusing as to why Nye didn’t use authors that talked primarily about technology. Once you read through the sources it was understandable why Nye used them. They did a could job on expanding upon his thought of how globalization is making the world homogeneous.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Nye & Vicente
I chose to read the last chapter in the David Nye book, its called “Not just one future”. He says, “We need to consider the questions that technology raises because we have many possible futures, some far less attractive than others.” (Nye 226) Throughout the chapter he explains the positive and negative effects technology will have on our future.
I feel like this chapter relates to Vicente’s chapter “The Human Factor”. I like it relates so much because Nye talks about global warming and humans are definitely a factor in this happening. “Most people refuse to believe that there are imminent limits to growth and do not fear global warming.” (Nye 214) I think if humans were knowledge it would help. However, a part of me still believes that even if people knew they wouldn’t care because society as became so greedy with getting the newest technology that they don’t care of the effects it has on the environment. “By ‘we’, I do mean everyone, because no one is immune to environmental degradation.” (Vicente 26) This is just one of the futures that Nye brings up in his chapter.
Nye also brings up a good point by saying, “It cannot easily be separated from social evolution, for the use of tools stretches back millennia, long before the invention of writing. It is hard to imagine a culture that is pre-technological or a future that is post technological.” (Nye 210) I think by this he is just saying the technology is a part of evolution; it is a part of all of us. Of course, our future is going to be a technological one, it isn’t possible to just stop technology now. I think Vicente would agree with this. He says, “Never before in the history of human civilization have we so quickly amassed so much knowledge of science, mathematics and engineering, and never before have we seen such tremendous advances in technology.” (Vicente 14) I think this shows Vicente agreeing with Nye because as we humans gain more knowledge it just goes hand in hand with technology. Having more knowledge lets new greater inventions to made.
I like how both Nye and Vicente end their chapters, it leads you wondering about technology and where it is going. I feel like Nye is saying its up to you, you get to have your own opinion of it but whether or not you agree technology is going to continue to grow. “By refusing to let any ensemble of objects define our world as already given, we can continue to choose how technology matters.” (Nye 226) Vicente takes the approach saying that since technology is advancing everything else is going to go down hill, it forces his readers to question if he is right or not. “Technology—with all its promise and potential—has gotten so far beyond human control that it’s threatening the future of humankind.” (Vicente 28) Technology has a lot of positive and negative effects but its up to you to decide which one outweighs the other.
I feel like this chapter relates to Vicente’s chapter “The Human Factor”. I like it relates so much because Nye talks about global warming and humans are definitely a factor in this happening. “Most people refuse to believe that there are imminent limits to growth and do not fear global warming.” (Nye 214) I think if humans were knowledge it would help. However, a part of me still believes that even if people knew they wouldn’t care because society as became so greedy with getting the newest technology that they don’t care of the effects it has on the environment. “By ‘we’, I do mean everyone, because no one is immune to environmental degradation.” (Vicente 26) This is just one of the futures that Nye brings up in his chapter.
Nye also brings up a good point by saying, “It cannot easily be separated from social evolution, for the use of tools stretches back millennia, long before the invention of writing. It is hard to imagine a culture that is pre-technological or a future that is post technological.” (Nye 210) I think by this he is just saying the technology is a part of evolution; it is a part of all of us. Of course, our future is going to be a technological one, it isn’t possible to just stop technology now. I think Vicente would agree with this. He says, “Never before in the history of human civilization have we so quickly amassed so much knowledge of science, mathematics and engineering, and never before have we seen such tremendous advances in technology.” (Vicente 14) I think this shows Vicente agreeing with Nye because as we humans gain more knowledge it just goes hand in hand with technology. Having more knowledge lets new greater inventions to made.
I like how both Nye and Vicente end their chapters, it leads you wondering about technology and where it is going. I feel like Nye is saying its up to you, you get to have your own opinion of it but whether or not you agree technology is going to continue to grow. “By refusing to let any ensemble of objects define our world as already given, we can continue to choose how technology matters.” (Nye 226) Vicente takes the approach saying that since technology is advancing everything else is going to go down hill, it forces his readers to question if he is right or not. “Technology—with all its promise and potential—has gotten so far beyond human control that it’s threatening the future of humankind.” (Vicente 28) Technology has a lot of positive and negative effects but its up to you to decide which one outweighs the other.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)