1) I would not consider using Wikipedia as a scholarly source, but it certainly is the best starting point I can think of. Not only does it give a base of information that can be considered in most case truthful. It gives you a base of sources you can start sifting through to start your true research. That is the strength of Wikipedia it gives you a great launch pad and helpful clues to start your research with the sources at the bottum. Its weakness tends to be the fact that sometimes information can be misleading or biased. Sometimes there is no reference for an assertion and that can be detrimental if you use only Wikipedia for all your information as a random person can assume anything.
2)These strengths of Wikipedia impact our daily lives in the way that we can attain information in a moments notice unlike anytime ever before. This effects the way we consume information as now more then ever people need to be taught the ways of being a critical thinker because with the relative ease of information comes the relative ease of anyone spreading disinformation. One needs to understand the importance of sources because anyone can spread viral disinformation and if people are gullible to believe exactly what they read from any source word for word without making sure it is legitimate information well then becomes a problem. American culture is in tune with technology for the most part so things are not going to revert back anytime soon, we just need to accept this and as things move along we need to stay fluid and realize that critical thinking of any new information is key before accepting it as true.
3)I learned from this project that any sort of subject that yields controversy is going to be biased in some way shape or form. It is inevitable, especially when the biased information can be true and public opinion agrees with what is being said. To that extent you really have to search to get the flip side of what is being said. I will take away from this project that wikipedia will always be a great stepping stone and nothing more. But even to that extent that is great stepping stone.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Cultural Obsolesence
"When people are persuaded, advertised, propagandized, and victimized into throwing away their cars every 3 years, their clothes twice yearly, their high fidelity sets every few years, their houses every five years, then we may consider most other things fully obsolete, Throwing away... may soon lead us to feel marriages (and other personal relationships) are throw-away items as well and... on a global scale countries, and indeed subcontinents are disposable like a kleenex."----Victor J. Papanek, Design for the Real World, 1970
This man saw this in 1970, indeed these things have come to fruition, people lease cars for a time and get rid of them and get another, more and more marriages end in divorce, people throw away friends like its yesterdays news. Africa and other third world countries are forgotten. What was the "thing" to do five years ago in flipping houses for money is now the banks natural past time. It seems cultural obsolescence has invaded our principles as well. In Giles Slade's book, Made to Break, he uses quotes from many people to awaken us into realizing that we have let the objects we buy and dispose of change the way we perceive the world. Slade states, "Obsolescence began to take on increasingly abstract meaning. Whereas in earlier decades the term applied strictly to physical objects, in the 1960's it became possible to describe peoples knowledge, training, and skill sets as victims of obsolescence." It seems to have gone even further then that. As technological obsolescence had grown exponentially after microchips and computers were invented, it seems culturally, obsolescence has increased and gathered momentum in the same manner. With the rise of E-waste throughout the world an especially in America, we are products not of our natural environment but products of our technological environment. Unfortunately, PBT's (Permanent Biological Toxins) are on the rise and we can not get rid of them. We as a nation, built on our capitalistic tendencies are victims of our own success, our cultural obsolescence has given rise to people who will throw away companions in their private lives and professional lives to succeed, get ahead, or be part of the next big thing. We have let big business with all their "death-dating" of the objects they make, destroy our environment. We have landfills with toxic waste that cannot be destroyed. Imagine that? We have waste that cannot be destroyed. So what to do? Well Slade proposes that inevitably America will have to become "greener" because the waste we generate will be too much for us too handle. Countries will refuse to accept our waste, our bribes, and our proposals of "cheap" material that can be harvested through recycling. Finally the corporate companies of America will have pressure put on them by our Government to make objects that can be recycled and are humane to the environment, to make products that can be last rather then making the "death-date" a part of the design. Hopefully this happens before its too late.
This man saw this in 1970, indeed these things have come to fruition, people lease cars for a time and get rid of them and get another, more and more marriages end in divorce, people throw away friends like its yesterdays news. Africa and other third world countries are forgotten. What was the "thing" to do five years ago in flipping houses for money is now the banks natural past time. It seems cultural obsolescence has invaded our principles as well. In Giles Slade's book, Made to Break, he uses quotes from many people to awaken us into realizing that we have let the objects we buy and dispose of change the way we perceive the world. Slade states, "Obsolescence began to take on increasingly abstract meaning. Whereas in earlier decades the term applied strictly to physical objects, in the 1960's it became possible to describe peoples knowledge, training, and skill sets as victims of obsolescence." It seems to have gone even further then that. As technological obsolescence had grown exponentially after microchips and computers were invented, it seems culturally, obsolescence has increased and gathered momentum in the same manner. With the rise of E-waste throughout the world an especially in America, we are products not of our natural environment but products of our technological environment. Unfortunately, PBT's (Permanent Biological Toxins) are on the rise and we can not get rid of them. We as a nation, built on our capitalistic tendencies are victims of our own success, our cultural obsolescence has given rise to people who will throw away companions in their private lives and professional lives to succeed, get ahead, or be part of the next big thing. We have let big business with all their "death-dating" of the objects they make, destroy our environment. We have landfills with toxic waste that cannot be destroyed. Imagine that? We have waste that cannot be destroyed. So what to do? Well Slade proposes that inevitably America will have to become "greener" because the waste we generate will be too much for us too handle. Countries will refuse to accept our waste, our bribes, and our proposals of "cheap" material that can be harvested through recycling. Finally the corporate companies of America will have pressure put on them by our Government to make objects that can be recycled and are humane to the environment, to make products that can be last rather then making the "death-date" a part of the design. Hopefully this happens before its too late.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)