Homework 14, Technology V.S Reading

At first, I attempted to read the long version of the text. I was doing okay, reading, annotating and skimming, yet I ran out of speed. I got up to page 36 before I decided to read the shorter texts. I found the text to be very interesting, but I also lost the determination to read the long version. I thought the conversation between the two scientists was sort of amusing, and that it made fun of humans. The strange food that was listed, and how it is supposed to preserve properties in life, versus foods like steak, which "were thought to be unhealthy." I really liked the quote "This is progress: more sophisticated delivery of stupidity". George Will was saying how over time forms of technology has become more advanced, yet it is still making us stupid.

Games: There were a few arguments for and against video games and other forms of technology which I've heard before. How video games increase hand-eye coordination, which is a plus. It also said that video games increase aggression and violent tendencies. I remember saying this argument about video games, especially shooting games making people aggressive. I can admit that I do not play video games, and have only watched these bloody games. There is a line that says how readers are active, while nonreaders -video gamers- have no emotion and are less active. I feel like some readers can stay in one place and act emotionless, while some people who play video games can be screaming at the tv, and feeling emotions. There is the quote "books are also tragically isolating" arguing that books are bad. The section on games goes back and forth between discussing how books are bad for you, and video games are good for you, and vice versa. The text also says how reading makes you think, and process the information. As well as being able to share the experience of many people reading the same book. Yet this also happens through playing the same video games. The book cannot be changed by the reader, while the game you can choose from several different options to change the course of the video game. The book also talked about spending so much money on cheat sheets to get to the next level, versus buying CliffsNotes for readers. It said how it is okay to buy things like CliffsNotes for books, while the student cannot read the book that the teacher has assigned, while no one has asked the kid to play video games so the cheat books are not okay.

I found the scene with the nephew playing the Sims to be interesting, how he was learning from the video game without realizing, while if he was in school learning the same things he might get bored. The question of why people spend so much time being frustrated by video games, and still continuing to play, is asked a lot. It reminds me how in class Ian said that he can continue for hours not liking the video game, but screaming at it and yet he does not turn the game off. In the book, it said how your brain rewards you when you have gotten a clue, or to the next level, and that is a large reward compared to real life. It also discussed in real life how your brain delivers disappointment: like the person raiding their fridge late at night just to find out someone else has finished the ice cream. The thing inside your brain that controls your levels of rewards and disappointments is called the dopamine system.


Television: This debates between video games and watching television, and comparing those two things to reading a book. It says how watching smart people on the screen does not make you smarter, and how watching someone play football does not make you active. Yet there are old movies like Agatha Christie's Death On The Nile which do make you think out the plot of the murder, who could of been the murderer, and their motive for committing the murder. The book Everything Bad Is Good For Youdiscusses how in some shows there is hardly a change in threads in the amount of time for one show. The Sleeper Curve shows how the plot in movies has changed over the past thirty years, and that "the conventional wisdom among television execs was that audiances wouldn't be comfortale following more than three plots in a single episode.." In other words, viewers of the show would not like watching things that make them think too hard. Like the example of the flashing arrow appearing on screen with the text that stated: "Door Unlocked!" This discusses how some films helped the audience by giving them clues to tell them what was going on. There was also an example of dialogue from ER, showing the difference between the "arrows" that were given, and the medical talk that was difficult to understand. The section on television seemed to argue that the plot of tv shows has become more challenging to understand, and simpler in the past. Yet it also argued that it takes no effort to watch tv or play a video game.

While M.T. Anderson discussed that as time goes by we are becoming lazy and stupid, in the television section Steven Johnson talked about how tv shows have made people think more while time increased. These two arguments are very different; one saying that we are becoming smarter, and one saying the opposite. Yet overall I feel like both authors are at an agreement: that depending on technology is bad. Feed depicted the world around us dying while we are oblivious, caring about the next sale, or party, or whatever else that is useless and not important. Everything Bad Is Good For You also discusses how it is bad to be immersed in technology, and how you are not active. I feel like I missed the point of how everything that is bad, is really good for us. The Sleeper's Curve stood out to me, how movie plots have challenged viewers' way of thinking over time, and how the feed has decreased our way of thinking over time. Another argument may be how in Feed the kids went to parties, and danced, and moved around.. Yet over all they weren't very active.

The pieces of Everything Bad Is Good For You that I read, seemed to just focus on people and how technology influences us. While Feed discussed the news, the stores, the moon, schools, the environment.. Overall, I feel like these two authors agree that technology is bad. Maybe Everything Bad Is Good For You just focuses on television and games, and Feed discusses the bigger picture.