technology

As the world progresses towards the advancement of society, technology has gained a more complex intelligence with every step. In his article, “2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal,” Lev Grossman points out that one day computers “could be put in the service of emulating whatever it is our brains are doing when they create consciousness.” If technology ever accelerates to this point, humans can be in danger of their individuality. Computers able to decode something as uniquely human as the thought process and consciousness ultimately degrade the authenticity of being human.

Being authentically human is what sets our species apart from animals as well as machines. Humans are able to appreciate and derive pleasure from fine art forms, such as music, painting, and poetry. In regards to the computer built by a 17 year old that composes music, Grossman states that “to see creativity, the exclusive domain of humans, usurped by a computer built by a 17 year old is to watch a line blur that cannot be unblurred, the line between organic intelligence and artificial intelligence.” Technology, in this case, has robbed humans of their essential humanity. Real music is often inspired by the individual’s emotions and creativity, rather than a multitude of mathematically configured notes derived from a computer system.

 In addition, today, humans are valued more than simply just “workers.” Each person has an individual appearance, personality, emotions, and mindset which adds a variety of different elements to each workplace. Technology has already threatened the human workplace through automation, in which machines that are far more efficient than human labor have caused unemployment. Aldous Huxley’s novel, “Brave New World,” has also demonstrated the lack of human expression in the workplace. Each worker is specifically engineered to perform the job they are designed to do, and these workers are created by identical masses. When Bernard, one of the main characters, flies over the ocean, he notes that “it makes me feel as though…as though I were more of me…more on my own, not so completely a part of something else. Not just a cell in the social body (Huxley 90).” It is evident that he strives for social individuality, rather than being “enslaved by my conditioning (Huxley 91).”

Grossman states that the “Biological boundaries that most people think of as permanent and inevitable Singularitarians see as merely intractable but solvable problems. Death is one of them. Old age is an illness like any other, and what do you do with illnesses? You cure them.” Death and illness is an essential component of the circle of life, and to manipulate its occurrence would be considered unnatural. Technology’s posed control over biological processes in the future further degrades one of the components of human life. In regard to biological manipulation, Bernard even asks Lenina “wouldn’t you like to be free to be happy in some other way…In your own way, for example; not in everybody elses way.” Technology in the novel is exaggerated to the point in which it predestines our mindset and functioning in the workplace, ultimately endangering us of losing “our essential humanity.”

rhetorical analysis

LINK: http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/405/1/cest-moi-gustave-flauberts-madame-bovary

In her article “C’est Moi: Gustave Flaubert’s ‘Madame Bovary,” Rebecca A. Demarest uses a variety of rhetorical techniques in order to analyze Gustave Flaubert’s “Madame Bovary.” The structural methods employed by Demarest to convey her argument throughout her article consists of numerous short paragraphs, characterized by an alternating pattern of commentary in its entirety or context drawn from the novel. This is seemingly unconventional in comparison with the writing techniques advised in the average rudimentary English class. However, Demarest’s avant-garde rhetorical approach towards her article permits her attitude towards Flaubert’s work to be efficiently conveyed.  

Demarest immediately opens her article with a brief account of “Madame Bovary’s” material, describing it as “an intricate and compelling tale of a young woman caught in the throes of romanticism, a tale full of rich imagery and authorial allusions to Flaubert’s own life.” In most cases, this would be considered taboo in a Freshman English class, in which the student is expected to introduce their essay with a “hook” that will supposedly capture the reader’s interest immediately. After a commonly “cheesy” opening, the student is required to elaborate on their saccharine introduction, then follow it with the brief account of the novel/piece of work, as well as stating the title and author’s name. Such a technique should not be practiced by a uniform mass of students, as these “hooks” can make or break an essay. In the latter case, they may instantly create an aura of mediocrity to the work, and can often seem too cliché.

Demarest also includes quotes that serve as supporting context from the novel in her first paragraph, which according to the “Jane Shaffer Format” should be reserved for the body paragraphs. However, even in her body paragraphs, Demarest does not adhere to this format. The standard body paragraph, as we have been taught, should contain a topic sentence, a concrete detail (such as a quote from the text), followed by several sentences of commentary; this should make up the full 8 sentences required for the body paragraph. However, if everyone followed this format, it would subdue the uniqueness and creativity of one’s ideas. For example, it may become impossible to express a brilliant thought in such a rigid format and this in turn may result in the writer assembling an unsatisfactory sentence to satisfy the mandated structure of their essay. The resulting grammatical or structural imperfection ultimately detracts from the true quality of the sentence-and the writer’s method of expression. In addition, Demarest includes a quote from “the critic Bernard Paris, [who] says ‘Flaubert is deluding himself about his personality being absent’ (Paris 7).” Literary criticism is an especially crucial component to include in an essay, as it can considerably strengthen the writer’s argument, while also adding credulity. However, if one was to follow the commonly imposed Jane Shaffer format, where would they fit such literary criticism? It would be very difficult, as the “concrete details” need to be just that- “concretely” from the text in which the writer is discussing. Therefore, the quality of the essay would not be able to reach its full potential.

            Demarest’s essay demonstrates that unconventional structures and use of rhetoric can be far more efficient in conveying your argument. By refusing to adhere to a uniform format, Demarest is given the freedom to convey her points much more clearly and her arguments are strongly supported.