The effects of education

“Up From Slavery” by Booker T. Washington is a very inspiring text. The benefits of an education that includes practical experience as well as book learning have always been evident in my reading and in the courses I have taken, but this text has not only made it clear, but also provided a clear real life example of it. The use of autobiographical writing in this case has made the Washington’s position much more clear than it would have been otherwise. In regards to the concept it is quite evident that being taught personal hygiene and being given a work ethic has a major impact on the abilities of a person. The question is why this is. Possibly the reason that it has such a differing impact than an education that only involves theoretical book learning, is the sense of confidence that it gives the student. This reaches back to the discussion that took place over the last text, “Prologue from Race, Rhetoric, and Technology”. Being literate does not only involve knowing how to use a technology, but also understanding how the concepts behind the technology work. In reading a textbook it is possible to learn how something works, but the knowledge does not connect very well with the real world. However when a student actively works with something be it a piece of technology, a certain process, or even animals while at the same time receiving the book learning, they can see how the knowledge in the book applies to real life. Once they gain this knowledge they become more confident in themselves when they face other challenges. Because once they connect one piece of book learning to real life by working with it, they come to learn the process of how that connection is made. This makes it easier to make connections to other pieces of book learning no matter how much real experience they have had with it. Also the ideas in this text are quite similar to what was in the first text of the class, "Engineers and the New South Creed". Georgia Tech was founded with the intent of educating southern students not only in the theory of engineering, but also, in the actual use of the equipment.

"Diary of a shirtwaist Striker" Edit

The writing style of "Diary of a Shirt Waist Striker" makes it harder to analyze than most texts, but there was one point that stood out. That was the transformation of the narrator from having only a passing interest to becoming an active participant in the strike. Mostly this was because the strike brought into focus for her the conditions that the other girls worked under. Still the question is if this is very realistic. Given the same situation in real life would a person who had only a passing interest become almost a leader of their section of the movement, or is this a convenient plot device to allow the narrator plausible access so that all areas of the strike can be shown in the text. I’d say yes this is entirely plausible. Given the proper circumstance humans can transform themselves incredibly. If anything this transformation is on the lower end of that scale. One other question that occurs though is how much of the reference to the Jewish girls being the main part of the strike is bias. Admittedly my knowledge of this strike is limited. But the Theresa Malkiel, the author of this text, is Jewish herself. Given that how much of the repeated mentions of the Jewish girls being the driving force is real and how much is inflated bias. There is no idea denying that the Jewish girls were the driving force, the question is simply to what extent bias on the authors part inflated their role. The answer could range from none at all with them playing just as important a role in reality as in the text to a significant inflation of their importance. Without a deeper knowledge of the author, the author’s writing style, and other sources of information on the strike the answer is uncertain. The text does not only deal with the strike though. It also approaches the question of gender equality, and the differences in views of how male and female workers should act. The main point explored seemed to be that most people regarded the concept of females working being improper. Even male workers who strongly supported their own unions right to strike viewed this as improper. This goes back to the text we read on social reproduction. Women are the main workers in social reproduction. Meaning that their role is to produce new generations of workers by raising and educating children and by taking car of the household. So any females in the workforce are regarded as being outside the norm. As long as no crisis's arise the extent of female participation in the workforce can be ignored, but if a crisis like the strike occurs, then society can gauge the amount of women who are not doing what society expects of them, and in light of this it will respond in a matter designed to re balance the population into accepted cultural outlets. In the case of females this means trying to put them back into a position where they manage the household. This is illustrated in the text by the narrator's father and Joe deciding to marry her to Joe and move her into a new household in order to remove her from the strike.

"Diary of a Shirt Waist Striker"

The writing style of "Diary of a Shirt Waist Striker" makes it harder to analyze
than most texts, but there was one point that stood out. That was the
transformation of the narrator from having only a passing interest to becoming
an active participant in the strike. Mostly this was because the strike brought
into focus for her the conditions that the other girls worked under. Still the
question is if this is very realistic. Given the same situation in real life
would a person who had only a passing interest become almost a leader of their
section of the movement, or is this a convenient plot device to allow the
narrator plausible access so that all areas of the strike can be shown in the
text. I’d say yes this is entirely plausible. Given the proper circumstance
humans can transform themselves incredibly. If anything this transformation is
on the lower end of that scale. One other question that occurs though is how
much of the reference to the Jewish girls being the main part of the strike is
bias. Admittedly my knowledge of this strike is limited. But the Theresa
Malkiel, the author of this text, is Jewish herself. Given that how much of the
repeated mentions of the Jewish girls being the driving force is real and how
much is inflated bias. There is no idea denying that the Jewish girls were the
driving force, the question is simply to what extent bias on the authors part
inflated their role. The answer could range from none at all with them playing
just as important a role in reality as in the text to a significant inflation of
their importance. Without a deeper knowledge of the author, the author’s writing
style, and other sources of information on the strike the answer is uncertain.
The text does not only deal with the strike though. It also approaches the question of gender equality, and the differences in views of how male and female workers should act. The main point explored seemed to be that most people regarded the concept of females working being improper. Even male workers who strongly supported their own unions right to strike viewed this as improper. This goes back to the text we read on social reproduction. Women are the main workers in social reproduction. Meaning that their role is to produce new generations of workers by raising and educating children and by taking car of the household. So any females in the workforce are regarded as being outside the norm. As long as no crisis's arise the extent of female participation in the workforce can be ignored, but if a crisis like the the strike occurs, then society can gauge the amount of women who are not doing what society expects of them, and in light of this it will respond in a matter designed to re balance the population into accepted cultural outlets. In the case of females this means trying to put them back into a position where they manage the household. This is illustrated in the text by the narrator's father and Joe deciding to marry her to Joe and move her into a new household in order to remove her from the strike.

Technophobia

In “Technophobia” the role of technology as viewed by conservative thinkers is dissected and analyzed. The text says that conservatives use technology in film to portray the negative effects of what would happen if technology was allowed to run rampant in society, and that they do this in order to portray the idea of nature and natural forms of society in a positive light. When in fact those very forms of society are in themselves artificial, for instance the text states that in the film Logan’s run patriarchy and the natural deferment of females to males is portrayed to be a natural effect inherent in the human condition that is unfettered by technology, and that a society of equality is an artificial institution imposed by technology. In fact the opposite is true. In a state unfettered by technology of any kind survival becomes the predominant concern. Without the labor saving device and more efficient methods of production developed through technology supplies can only produced on a one to one basis. Each person essentially produces enough food to feed themselves. What excess there is has to be stored against emergencies and to feed children who are too young to help at all. Because of this each individual is extremely important to the society and equality is the norm even between the genders, since every member has an important role to play in the survival of the whole. It is only with the technological developments of agriculture and manufacturing processes that the surpluses needed for more advanced forms of society can be produced. When one person can produce enough food to feed ten then the dependence on that one person is greatly reduced. Even if they rebel they can be replaced. So a ruling class can form and members of society can be treated differently. This however escapes the view of conservatives or is glossed over by them in part because society hasn’t been on the level of where no technology is present and everyone is vital to society’s survival for a very long time, but also because the goal of conservatives is not to promote the destruction of technology. Technology is in fact key to the conservative economic practices, as it states in the article. The threat of technology is an artificial threat generated by conservatives. The reason is that to make one object which is inherently neutral or even has negative connotations appear good, another threat has to appear that is much worse and makes the first option appear good in comparison. The best method is when there is a natural threat, but in the absence of a real one, humans are relatively easily led into believing that a fake one is real. In fact the very values that are portrayed as be evil and heartless about technology, the way no one has individual freedom or thinks for themselves, are the values in today’s society which allow people to manipulate the media in order to lead the public into believing whatever they want. Although the stark uniformity and collective conformity of humanity is portrayed as the main evil of technology, if anything is the natural way of humans it is. In the absence of a prompt that makes them think for themselves, most humans are more than willing to blindly follow the majority. Even people who rebel against the mainstream usually end up forming their own groups and blindly following that. A society of true individuality where everyone thinks for themselves at all times and is completely unique is probably the most aberrant and artificial society there is which isn’t to say it is bad. In fact a society like that would probably be highly beneficial. The problem is that the continued use of natural to label good concepts, and artificial to label bad concepts has had major effects on the way people view those terms. In reality the terms natural and artificial are themselves neutral terms. Just as technology is neutral and can be bad or good depending on the context, so too does the effect of those terms depend on the context. Most of the best poisons in the world are completely natural, but that doesn’t make them good, and prosthetic hearts are artificial, but they have saved lives.