en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1651180 Comments by bch5087 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/12/technological-rationality-revisited.html#IDComment114413153 I agree with you that Marcuse seems overly optimistic with regards to technology. We have seen his optimism before with regards to a civilization in the absence of surplus repression. Freud's view concerning the benefits of technological progress was more pessimistic. He said that although these things may seem to increase our happiness, most of them are a sort of “cheap enjoyment” similar to that “obtained by putting a bare leg from under the bedclothes on a cold winter night and drawing it in again”. This can relate to the discussion we had last class where the point was brought up that technological progress can create new problems that are solved with more technological progress and so on. In the future, there may be an unfixable problem that has terrible consequences. The quote that you posted by Dyson seems to address this. It should be noted that advances in technology are usually looked foreword to and seen as a good thing in our civilization. Wed, 8 Dec 2010 03:32:46 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/12/technological-rationality-revisited.html#IDComment114413153 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568537 If all of this is even possible, it would be very difficult to do, and is not likely to happen. I find academic cheating repulsive. An easier solution would be for people to just stop cheating. All freshman could be required to take a course which discusses ideas such as honesty, integrity, virtues, community, courage, justice, truth, etc. Fri, 3 Dec 2010 17:19:35 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568537 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568525 1. For all academic writing, everyone has an online portfolio where all of their writing is submitted. 2. No one is allowed access the entire user profile accept for the user his/herself 3. professors/graders/reviewers can access documents only for their specific course or with permission 4. Technology compares a student’s paper to all of other papers, as well as all other students work submitted in the entire system. 5. System maintains an updated and accurate account of users writing style. 6. System tracks IP locations and would flag users for suspicion of cheating if, for example, a person submitted a paper from Boston for review in State College and then added further comments from Beijing. 7. When a person is proven to be a cheater, the writing style of the paid for material is flagged and is used to further identify individuals who have submitted work with that writing style profile. 8. Other security measures are added to create a systemic system capable that can accurately detect defects in academic integrity. e.g.: one specific and identifiable writing style profile that is found to be present in many different user submissions would raise suspicion and merit further investigation. Fri, 3 Dec 2010 17:19:29 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568525 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568487 This comment was two long for one block, but I did not find it worthy a actual post on the main page because it is a subset to Dans post. This comment block, along with the next two comment blocks below should be seen as one comment. We came to the conclusion in class that the solution to this problem was not technological, or at least that this solution is not what we should be focusing on. There may be a technological solution. Fri, 3 Dec 2010 17:19:12 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/deep-glimpses-into-the-academic-underbelly.html#IDComment113568487 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/buy-nothing-day.html#IDComment112769052 In class we discussed the inability to escape from the structure of society. We noted how a persons ties to society would likely remain even if they tried to escape. An example discussed was of a person becoming a hermit. A similar idea is mentioned by Henry David Thoreau who says that"our wild apple is wild only like myself, perchance, who belong not to the aboriginal race here, but have strayed into the woods from the cultivated stock". In a sense, a person can try to leave society and become a hermit, but he will still always be a part of the "cultivated stock". It is likely that many of the people who participate in Buy Nothing Day simply make their purchases on a different day. If a consumer was to purchase some good "x" at a particular time, they would be acting most rationally if they purchased "x" when it was at it's lowest price. Imagine a likely case that the lowest price for good "x" was available on black Friday. Instead of taking advantage of this low price, a consumer participates in Buy Nothing Day and purchases "x" on a different day. This person is still a consumer. All else being equal, , they would have been better off if they made the purchase on black friday. It is a nice thing to have an event that may raise awareness to certain criticisms of consumerism. But if you must participate in the system, it is best that you make wise purchasing decisions. Also, a good consumer should not fall for advertisements and selling techniques that attempt to attack his impulses and his pocket book. Tue, 30 Nov 2010 01:36:21 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/buy-nothing-day.html#IDComment112769052 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/podcast-eros-and-civilization-part-ii.html#IDComment107705228 To answer your question sre5023, surplus repression is at an all time low. Our lives are cake compared to the past. I eat a variety of delicious foods every single day. I do not grow or produce any of these foods. I have access to millions of books, and a machine that contains much of the span of human knowledge. I usually enjoy some kind of entertainment or leisure daily. I bathe daily. I have a closet full of clean clothing that is washed by a machine. I can talk to my friends and family whenever I want; even if I am on the other side of the world. I'm 23 years old. I don't work any of these things, nor have I ever had a serious job. I am not really forced to do anything I don't want do except to follow a few rules which I don't really want to break anyway. I have never fought in a war, and I have never experienced famine. After saying all these things, and then if I were to say that I was the victim of a repressive civilization, the average person at any point in history would likely say that I was crazy jerk. Our standard of living is much higher than it was in the past. We have the opportunity to pursue our own interests and make our own lives. Most of these good things that I have discussed are not enjoyed by everyone in the entire world. There may have been a handful of people 1,000 years ago that had comparable luxuries and opportunities as the average American. We have come along way, so is there any reason that the trend of increasing standard of living should stop? One reason it may stop is a due to a finite amount of resources. Another reason is greed and cultural habits. Most people desire more stuff than is actually practical, and they have many things that they don't rally need. Another reason is that in order for us to enjoy all of the junk that we love to buy for low prices, someone needs to be repressed into making it. It is absolutely, 100% possible to reduce the amount of repression globally. It would, however, require a huge lifestyle and attitude adjustment by the "haves" in the world. This might not even be that bit of a change, but It would be one that most would be unwilling or unable to make. Maybe these changes will take place over a long period of time, with advancements in technology, and better education. Thu, 4 Nov 2010 02:37:56 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/podcast-eros-and-civilization-part-ii.html#IDComment107705228 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/podcast-eros-and-civilization-part-ii.html#IDComment107251491 I wanted to clarify my last point. After a second listen, some of the claims that I made at the end seem to me a bit rash. The point that was made was intended to say that a certain kind of civilization can effectively increases it's members allotted time to peruse their pleasure principles. It is true that we cannot constantly pursue our pleasure principle; for if we did we would not tend to our body's needs, and we would die. From this, we can say that there is a certain base line level of repression needed for the sustainment of life. Once this base line is satisfied, people could spend the rest of their time pursuing the pleasure principle. If people worked together in the right way, they could lower this base line. They could do this by doing the life sustaining requirements that they are good at and trading for the life sustaining things that they are less good at. This would provide everyone more time to do the things they actually wanted to do, and thus could be excepted as being good. (The key economics points that make this possible are comparative advantage, opportunity cost, and increasing returns to scale.) Mon, 1 Nov 2010 23:10:34 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/11/podcast-eros-and-civilization-part-ii.html#IDComment107251491 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/10/what-to-read.html#IDComment106486216 I suggest that we read "Answering the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" by Immanuel Kant. It is a very short essay that is available online. Thu, 28 Oct 2010 03:07:43 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/10/what-to-read.html#IDComment106486216 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/10/in-the-section-titled-gala.html#IDComment103855958 We live in a society that generally considers new stuff to be good. This new stuff is also highly valued. There are many fads, trends, and fashions that have no practical advantage over the old stuff, but have greater value due to intricate social and cultural phenomena that we are all aware of. An excellent example of this is popular music. I am sure that the most popular stars of today’s mainstream music world can not even come close to attaining the complexity, genius, and musical ideas found in classical works and possessed by classical composers. Most people would agree with this last statement, but the majority of young people would likely be unwilling give up the new stuff to listen to the old stuff. I assume this occurs because it is not “in”, advertised, or repeated as much. This is certainly not true across all boards. Maybe there was a person in the 18th century that did not like music at all because the music that he would like did not become available until 200 years later. The question then becomes “Do you like something because it’s good, or do you like it because it’s popular.”? Or “is it popular because its good, or is it good because it popular?” There are many new things that come out today that are good because they either are new original ideas or improvements on existing ideas. We continue to benefit from these things such as new and improved software, better transportation, and improvements in medical technologies etc. These are real improvements that are good to purchase and spend money on. However, buying a striped scarf the one you have now is a solid color and is not cool anymore is something different that is also a large part of our economy today. Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:16:57 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/10/in-the-section-titled-gala.html#IDComment103855958 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/thoughts-on-the-odysseus-example-and-other-possible-decisions-they-could-have-made.html#IDComment101531393 Dr, Long, You are right that my arguments support the very thing that Horkheimer and Adorno criticize. I tried to use a system in order to calculate the utility of different decisions. I did this in an attempt to show that using my assumptions we could say that some decisions were better than others. Could our reasoning methods really be based simply on the goals of our system of rule? As you pointed out, Horkheimer and Adorno say on pg. 81-83 that the "formalization of reason is merely the intellectual expression of mechanized production." I'm not entirely sure what he means by this but maybe he is saying that it is just the application of a certain process that yields results that are simply based on that process. There is also a quote on pg. 81 that says "good things were once considered evil and evil things where once considered good.". If this were the case than my utilities could be totally different at different times in history and men may actually prefer to die or refrain from listening to the sirens. There is also a discussion of pleasure on these pages where they say that it is a social object of manipulation. Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:19:49 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/thoughts-on-the-odysseus-example-and-other-possible-decisions-they-could-have-made.html#IDComment101531393 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/mechanical-reproduction-and-its-impact-on-the-individual.html#IDComment97643327 Drew, I enjoyed your Leonardo da Vinci example and have had an experience that you may find interesting. This summer I was on a bicycle trip and passed through DC. I enjoyed stopping at the Library of Congress and the National Gallery of Art. In the Gallery, I saw my first da Vinci painting, Ginevra de' Benci, which you may know is the only da Vinci painting in the States. I don't know all that much about art, but I could defiantly appreciate the detail and mastery that must have gone into this painting. The beauty of this painting, in my opinion, somehow set it apart from many of the other paintings of a similar style that were that were in the gallery. Perhaps the pleasant feeling that I received from viewing this was enhanced or skewed by the fact that I knew it was painted by the Maestro himself, who I am fond of. However, as you also mentioned, I do not get that same feeling when I view this painting online. There is something about certain original works of art that simply cannot be duplicated. If this "something" about these certain works of art could in fact be duplicated, then people might no longer spend money to experience live orchestra's, visit art galleries, or watch evening sunsets. Instead they would sit at their computers, look up pictures of the things they wanted to see, and listen to recorded music all the time. Sure, most of us do these things almost every day, but almost everyone who does still appreciates and seeks to experience the real thing. As I noted above, I am not very knowledgeable about art. It may be true that knowledge of what you are observing is a requite for experiencing the true beauty of the object you are viewing, just as as knowledge of musical theory can allow you to appreciate music in a different way than someone who does not possess this knowledge. However, aside from any requisite knowledge, there are many things that people find beautiful that they know very little about (such as me viewing the da Vinci painting) that comes from the simple feeling that you enjoy it. Cheers, Brian Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:05:11 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/mechanical-reproduction-and-its-impact-on-the-individual.html#IDComment97643327 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/benjamin-on-aura.html#IDComment97607329 There were a few examples about how music related to what we were discussing on the first day of class. I thought of one appropriate example similar to the artificial sweeter given example given above. When a person hears music, they can hear whether a certain chord is stable or unstable even if if they don't know anything about music theory, notation, etc. . This is because we have become costumed to what sounds good and what does not, and over time we have allowed for less "perfectness" in certain sounds and have grown to except, and even expect more dissonance in certain types of music that we listen to. Wed, 8 Sep 2010 12:56:01 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/09/benjamin-on-aura.html#IDComment97607329 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/08/society-modifying-mental-life.html#IDComment95883372 I thought it was interesting that you discussed how the destructive appetites can be held back by an individual’s integration into society and having to adopt its rules or else suffer the consequences. There are also many ways within society, such as winning at sports game or making a great discovery, that some people can obtain pleasures within society that correspond to some of the destructive things that are claimed that we actually want to do (e.g. inflicting pain on someone who makes you angry or has something that you want.) Do you think that, as Freud might say, that when a person is integrated with society, their destructive appetites are still there, and are simply kept in check by other parts of the psyche such as the super ego? Alternatively, would you favor and alternative explanation such as an actual changing of our human desires and appetites that arise when a person becomes more civilized and educated? Francis Bacon has a quote that I like that is as follows: “Seek first the virtues of the mind, and other things either will come, or will not be wanted.” This seems to say that education can reveal what is truly to be desired and pursued. This is optimistic, while Freud’s view is very pessimistic. I wonder if people really always have these claimed “animalistic” desires to sometimes do things that seem so intrinsically wrong to people of society , or can these so called natural human desires be overcome and even changed through habit, custom, and education? Mon, 30 Aug 2010 01:08:27 +0000 http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/digitaldialogue/2010/08/society-modifying-mental-life.html#IDComment95883372