Reading 1 [PDF]

Citation preview

You will read a letter to the editor about technology. Answer the questions based on what you have read.



I take exception to your article last week on smartphones, in which people who don’t use them were branded as “Luddites.” The writer went on to disparage such people as pensioners, set in their ways and intimidated by new technology that looks complicated. It was implied that a lack of a smartphone signified only partial participation in modern life. Since when did the ownership of a smartphone become a requirement for being a fully functioning modern citizen? I don’t use one, not because the concept of a phone connected to the internet is overwhelming, but because I don’t want to be continuously distracted. Nor do I wish to become one of those people who can’t sit still for 15 seconds without looking at a screen, hoping for a message. Even worse in my view, are those who can’t sustain a five minute conversation without constantly checking their phones. I believe that rather than blindly embracing each new thing that comes along, our society needs to have an informed conversation about where this technology is leading us. To this end, an understanding of the terms Luddite and Neo-Luddite will be useful. The Luddites were not some crazy fundamentalist sect who lived in caves, but rather a group of 19th century English textile artisans opposed to some new technologies of the Industrial Revolution such as spinning frames and power looms, which were destroying their livelihoods and producing inferior work in the name of profit. They were active between 1811 and 1817 and their protests took the form of sabotage of machines and burning down factories. In 1812 the Frame Breaking Act made the destruction of factory machinery punishable by death. They were not anxious and apprehensive old fogies as your writer implies, but a passionate and driven group of professionals who drilled and practiced at night in order to fight the English army, which they did on two occasions. After a mass show-trial of 60 Luddites in 1813 in which most were sentenced to death or penal transport, Luddite resistance became sporadic.



Serious questions about the value of technology have been raised ever since. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger did not view technology as wholly negative, but he suggested that the modern technological "mode of Being" was one which viewed the natural world — plants, animals, and even human beings — as resources to be exploited. For him, technology was not just the collection of tools, but a way of being in the world. Technological processes, he believed, create an abandonment of the natural world and the loss of any sense of awe and wonder, as well as an indifference to that loss. The French philosopher Jacques Ellul said that the rationality of technology drowns out human concerns in order to meet the demands of yield and production. Contemporary Neo-Luddites are a widely diverse group which includes writers, academics, families and young idealists seeking a technology-free environment. While they are apprehensive about the ability of any new technology to solve current problems without creating more, potentially dangerous problems, and would like to see the slowing and eventual end of new technologies, they are most critical of the wide-ranging and devastating consequences of our technological civilization, such as climate change, environmental degradation, psychological disorders, social alienation, loss of community, unemployment, economic and political inequality, nuclear warfare and biological weapons. They believe that technology is the greatest threat to humanity and to the natural world in general. Neo-Luddites are not against all technology, only against certain technologies which are destructive to communities and nature. Rather than looking at how technology improves the life of an individual, they would like people to look at the wider social, economic and ecological implications of technological systems. They are also critical of the link between technology, with its values of shortterm efficiency, ease of production, marketing and profit, and the rigid social institutions created around those values. They suggest that the key change required will not take place through conventional politics but by focusing on technology and economics. They favor a return to simple agrarian communities.



The lack of a smartphone or desire for any other new or existing technology should not be automatically viewed as a personal failing, but a choice. And in most cases a sensible one.