Aldous Huxely - Brave New World, Island Summary 1 (pages?) 10/10. Summary 2 10/10 -- Interesting how both of your articles discuss the technology aspect. You might consider something along these lines. Think about an aspect of the technology in the book and focus on the larger moral implications. The second summary, really, is a discussion not just of the drug, but how much responsibility should government take. Summary 3: 10/10
Summary 1
Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson.by Tom Hodgkinson
Hodgkinson, Tom. "Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson." New Statesman 4 May 2009. Questia. Web. 29 Jan. 2010. <http://www.questiaschool.com/read/5031944587>.
“Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson.” By Tom Hodgkinson is an article about the effects of the vast improvement in technology on humanity. People think they have more control over the nature and lives around them by having advanced technology, but the point Hodgkinson claims is that it’s the technology that is destroying the humanity. We’re turning more inhumane and letting technology have control over us. It appeals to our self-importance, and make us feel more important and busy. His example of people staring at their Blackberries during conversations supports his point “Far from making good on its promise to release information to the people, technology makes us into stupid slaves with the concentration span of a two-year-old.” (Hodgkinson). “Brave New World” by Aldoux Huxley is a prediction and warning of the mechanized world. Technology has reached its ideal level in the story, but the lives of human beings aren’t like what we dream of.
It was interesting and shocking to look at technology in such an extremely negative perspective. However, the truth is that it actually makes sense and I get the writer’s point. It is a clear fact that nowadays, human beings, including us KIS students, are highly dependent on technology unlike the people from the past. The more advancement we face in technology, the more it replaces our roles in the society. It is hard to imagine a day without getting on the computer or contacting people with a cell phone. Our chances to have to face-to-face conversation have significantly decreased due to the online devices. We, as human beings, are losing our value and characteristics by being replaced by machines. What Aldous Huxley wants to tell us is that the improvement in the quality of our lives is not based on the technology. “It is drummed into the popular mind, not by the representatives of state or church, but by those most influential of popular moralists and philosophers, the writers of advertising copy.” (Huxley) The reason we think that way is because that’s the trend and we tend to believe in what the majority does, or what is taken as the social norm.
I personally disagree with the writer’s approach. Huge improvements or changes always have consequences that can have a negative impact, but it’s usually the positive one that covers it up. It’s same for technology. Although there had been issues, it is clear that technology has improved our lives. Aldous Huxley seems to describe the future in a way that is too cynical and negative. But his book definitely made me look at the other side of technology. John, who’s the main character of “Brave New World” also benefits from such improvements, and it’s not a surprise that the cultural change in the world portrayed in the book sounds wrong for us. Do you think people from the past would understand our culture right now? I don’t think so. Sex and drugs are growing up issues in our society and who knows? Maybe we’ll end up resolving them just like the “Brave New World”.
Summary 2
Whose Idea of Utopia Is the Nanny State? by Allan Massie
“Whose Idea of Utopia Is the Nanny State?” by Allan Massie is basically dealing with the writer’s idea about how the world is following the steps of Aldous Huxley’s Utopian society portrayed in his books. The use of drugs such as Ritalin is being common in medical treatments, which reminds drugs that come out in Huxley’s novels such as Soma. The government is trying to resolve a lot of social issues by intervening more into the public and taking the responsibilities. People are depending more on the government, and the government is having more control over the privacy of society. No one opposes the government’s plans that are made to solve problems, but in this rate, the world will end up being like the “Brave New World”. The government is being more like a “Nanny” than a leader. People aren’t following the government, they’re just relying on it.
I thought drugs were a problem that only has something to do with illegal trades or addictions. However, after reading this article I realized the dependence on drugs held in hospitals and other places that are legal with healthy purposes. It is shocking how so many people in the world nowadays are irresponsible and weak. The fact that 8 out of 10 families that the government is helping are single parented families shows the irresponsibility of the parents. Without the help of the government, the kids will suffer and end up as a failure. In “Brave New World”, babies are separated from their parents and taken care of by the government even before they’re born. They have selected jobs and roles to play in the society, which is the ultimate solution Huxley suggests for problems such as unemployment and parenting. It is kind of frightful to find how we’re actually following the steps of the world Huxley idealized because I thought we wouldn’t end up that way.
Although it’s shocking, it’s a fact that the world is changing into something close to the “Brave New World”. The government is developing into something that does the parenting, not the leading. They’re getting more power over private issues such as birth. However, it might be true that this is the ultimate solution for all the problems the society is baring with these days. I agree with the writer of this article, even though it’s sad to admit.
Summary 3
"Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion." by Tierney, John.
“Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion” by John Tierney is an article about the morality regarding cloning. Cloning is one of the main fields of science nowadays. It’s a technology that can be very helpful when applied in crops, animals, and even human beings. However, people around the world have different opinions about the cloning of human beings. If applied, it can heal diseases, extend our lives, and keep us healthy. The major factor that decides each person’s view on this is his or her religion. Christians think that cloning is “Playing God”, which basically means that human beings are trying to become god and control lives. On the other hand, Buddhists and Hindus think that cloning applies the idea of “Reincarnation” of their religions. It can be something that can improve the humanity and make them prosper. That is why Asian countries are so supportive comparing to Western countries. When Dr. Hwang in Korea was researching stem cells, the Buddhist community was very supportive. Cloning will always be a hot topic due to its morality.
It was very interesting to see how powerful religions are in the trend and ideas of a country. The attitude towards cloning totally differed depending on the cultural regions, which also share the similar religions. I thought people would deal with such issues with a scientific perspective rather than a religious perspective. It’s pretty clear that if scientists succeed in developing this technique, it will improve the life of humanity. However, just like the world portrayed in Brave New World, or movies like I-Robot, the world might turn into a place like a factory, where people are more like machines with no emotions. Everyone will be born to serve a purpose decided before birth. They will have no choice but to follow what has been determined. But then for people who are disabled or are suffering from diseases, cloning or stem cells are something desperately needed. This is such a hard problem to come up with an answer that is better off for everyone…
I know this is a sensitive topic, but I also think that it’s wrong to purely value it based on religious values. I disagree with the author on focusing on religion when looking into such an idea. Brave New World seems to portray Aldous Huxley’s concerns of how the world will end up when this technology is actively used. Birth won’t be controlled based on relationships out of love, but it would be simply used as a tool to fill up or solve problems such as unemployment. That kind of sounds morally wrong.
Summary 1 (pages?) 10/10. Summary 2 10/10 -- Interesting how both of your articles discuss the technology aspect. You might consider something along these lines. Think about an aspect of the technology in the book and focus on the larger moral implications. The second summary, really, is a discussion not just of the drug, but how much responsibility should government take. Summary 3: 10/10
Summary 1
Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson.by Tom Hodgkinson
Hodgkinson, Tom. "Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson." New Statesman 4 May 2009. Questia. Web. 29 Jan. 2010. <http://www.questiaschool.com/read/5031944587>.
“Don't Sell Me Your Dream: Far from Liberating Us, Technology Isolates Us and Makes Us Stupid. I Want No Part of Your Sterile, Bloodless Brave New World, Writes Tom Hodgkinson.” By Tom Hodgkinson is an article about the effects of the vast improvement in technology on humanity. People think they have more control over the nature and lives around them by having advanced technology, but the point Hodgkinson claims is that it’s the technology that is destroying the humanity. We’re turning more inhumane and letting technology have control over us. It appeals to our self-importance, and make us feel more important and busy. His example of people staring at their Blackberries during conversations supports his point “Far from making good on its promise to release information to the people, technology makes us into stupid slaves with the concentration span of a two-year-old.” (Hodgkinson). “Brave New World” by Aldoux Huxley is a prediction and warning of the mechanized world. Technology has reached its ideal level in the story, but the lives of human beings aren’t like what we dream of.
It was interesting and shocking to look at technology in such an extremely negative perspective. However, the truth is that it actually makes sense and I get the writer’s point. It is a clear fact that nowadays, human beings, including us KIS students, are highly dependent on technology unlike the people from the past. The more advancement we face in technology, the more it replaces our roles in the society. It is hard to imagine a day without getting on the computer or contacting people with a cell phone. Our chances to have to face-to-face conversation have significantly decreased due to the online devices. We, as human beings, are losing our value and characteristics by being replaced by machines. What Aldous Huxley wants to tell us is that the improvement in the quality of our lives is not based on the technology. “It is drummed into the popular mind, not by the representatives of state or church, but by those most influential of popular moralists and philosophers, the writers of advertising copy.” (Huxley) The reason we think that way is because that’s the trend and we tend to believe in what the majority does, or what is taken as the social norm.
I personally disagree with the writer’s approach. Huge improvements or changes always have consequences that can have a negative impact, but it’s usually the positive one that covers it up. It’s same for technology. Although there had been issues, it is clear that technology has improved our lives. Aldous Huxley seems to describe the future in a way that is too cynical and negative. But his book definitely made me look at the other side of technology. John, who’s the main character of “Brave New World” also benefits from such improvements, and it’s not a surprise that the cultural change in the world portrayed in the book sounds wrong for us. Do you think people from the past would understand our culture right now? I don’t think so. Sex and drugs are growing up issues in our society and who knows? Maybe we’ll end up resolving them just like the “Brave New World”.
Summary 2
Whose Idea of Utopia Is the Nanny State? by Allan Massie
Massie, Allan. "Whose Idea of Utopia Is the Nanny State?" The Daily Mail Aug. & sept. 2006. Questia. Web. 1 Feb. 2010. <http://www.questiaschool.com/read/5017057866?title=Whose%20Idea%20of%20Utopia%20Is%20the%20Nanny%20State%3f>
“Whose Idea of Utopia Is the Nanny State?” by Allan Massie is basically dealing with the writer’s idea about how the world is following the steps of Aldous Huxley’s Utopian society portrayed in his books. The use of drugs such as Ritalin is being common in medical treatments, which reminds drugs that come out in Huxley’s novels such as Soma. The government is trying to resolve a lot of social issues by intervening more into the public and taking the responsibilities. People are depending more on the government, and the government is having more control over the privacy of society. No one opposes the government’s plans that are made to solve problems, but in this rate, the world will end up being like the “Brave New World”. The government is being more like a “Nanny” than a leader. People aren’t following the government, they’re just relying on it.
I thought drugs were a problem that only has something to do with illegal trades or addictions. However, after reading this article I realized the dependence on drugs held in hospitals and other places that are legal with healthy purposes. It is shocking how so many people in the world nowadays are irresponsible and weak. The fact that 8 out of 10 families that the government is helping are single parented families shows the irresponsibility of the parents. Without the help of the government, the kids will suffer and end up as a failure. In “Brave New World”, babies are separated from their parents and taken care of by the government even before they’re born. They have selected jobs and roles to play in the society, which is the ultimate solution Huxley suggests for problems such as unemployment and parenting. It is kind of frightful to find how we’re actually following the steps of the world Huxley idealized because I thought we wouldn’t end up that way.
Although it’s shocking, it’s a fact that the world is changing into something close to the “Brave New World”. The government is developing into something that does the parenting, not the leading. They’re getting more power over private issues such as birth. However, it might be true that this is the ultimate solution for all the problems the society is baring with these days. I agree with the writer of this article, even though it’s sad to admit.
Summary 3
"Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion." by Tierney, John.
Tierney, John. "Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion." New York Times. New York Times, 20 Nov. 2007. Web. 7 Feb. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/science/20tier.html>.
“Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion” by John Tierney is an article about the morality regarding cloning. Cloning is one of the main fields of science nowadays. It’s a technology that can be very helpful when applied in crops, animals, and even human beings. However, people around the world have different opinions about the cloning of human beings. If applied, it can heal diseases, extend our lives, and keep us healthy. The major factor that decides each person’s view on this is his or her religion. Christians think that cloning is “Playing God”, which basically means that human beings are trying to become god and control lives. On the other hand, Buddhists and Hindus think that cloning applies the idea of “Reincarnation” of their religions. It can be something that can improve the humanity and make them prosper. That is why Asian countries are so supportive comparing to Western countries. When Dr. Hwang in Korea was researching stem cells, the Buddhist community was very supportive. Cloning will always be a hot topic due to its morality.
It was very interesting to see how powerful religions are in the trend and ideas of a country. The attitude towards cloning totally differed depending on the cultural regions, which also share the similar religions. I thought people would deal with such issues with a scientific perspective rather than a religious perspective. It’s pretty clear that if scientists succeed in developing this technique, it will improve the life of humanity. However, just like the world portrayed in Brave New World, or movies like I-Robot, the world might turn into a place like a factory, where people are more like machines with no emotions. Everyone will be born to serve a purpose decided before birth. They will have no choice but to follow what has been determined. But then for people who are disabled or are suffering from diseases, cloning or stem cells are something desperately needed. This is such a hard problem to come up with an answer that is better off for everyone…
I know this is a sensitive topic, but I also think that it’s wrong to purely value it based on religious values. I disagree with the author on focusing on religion when looking into such an idea. Brave New World seems to portray Aldous Huxley’s concerns of how the world will end up when this technology is actively used. Birth won’t be controlled based on relationships out of love, but it would be simply used as a tool to fill up or solve problems such as unemployment. That kind of sounds morally wrong.