Technology a Force for Good: Con

Recently in my English class, everyone got their thoughts in on a debate on whether they think technology is a force for good or not. I was on the opposing side.

Well, unlucky for the opposing side, their were only about six people on it, and the rest of the class was on the defending side (and this is a class of, let's say, 30 people). So, I kind of figured that all hope was lost for me and my teammates. I am usually not a very outspoken person, well, at least not in school, and so for me to get all argumentative on this debate was great (hey, I rhymed)!!! I got really worked up because it was a very powerful subject, even if their wasn't a whole lot to come up with, I still had my reasonings!

And, so, the debate was over in the class, but a person from my team named Mackenzie went on LitTrek (which is something all the Sophomore English teachers came up with; think social network for English) and started a forum called Technology is NOT a Force for Good which was/is for all the opposing members to state their opinions and why they are against technology (and we're not really AGAINST technology, just DEVELOPING technology).

But, then some loudmouthed, rude and pushy guy comes in who is on the other side. And I'm like "Exscuse me..." Yes, he was rude, because he came on our teams side and started bashing our ideas! Here's what he lamely said:

"we would all be living pretty awful lives without technology you cant even
live without a myspace or a phone with texting SO QUIT COMPLAINING! YOU'D STILL BE WEARING LEAVES FOR CLOTHES IF IT WASNT FOR MANKINDS BRILLIANCE!!"

Here is Mackenzie's reply to him:

"Obviously you havent fully read this discussion. I am talking about the technology in the future, NOT what we have now or have had. Life as we know it is pretty good but everyone survived just fine (probably better on a more personal and relationship level) before there was technology that consumed our lives. And FYI I live just fine without myspace and a phone. People have learned and continue to learn to enjoy nature and their families/friends."

And him after that:

"In the future we will cure the worlds most horrible diseases. you dont want to get cancer you dont like being sick nobody does and peole suffer everyday and scientists are working and inventing new ways to fight it all, stop that and we will die out, yes the human body may adapt and build immunities but new diseases form. and FYI technology has been around FOREVER we have always had around technology its what brought the worlds greatest architechtual achievments to life and is also why you things like the computer or the football and other sports items, but the point is mankind could not have survived through the eons without technology or its advancements"

And me:

"Technology is good to a point, and I think this is where we were getting when this original discussion started in Ms. Cummin's class. It's not that this side (which is the opposing side) is totally against technology, because, yes, we do need it for research for medical development, and yes, it does help with things that make it possible for everyone to live a civilized and productive life, but if it progresses at the rate we know it's going to progress, then what's going to happen to human interaction, or what life was made for, to enjoy it without any unneccisary aid? Like I said in Ms. Cummins class, I am a bit afraid of what will happen to the world when technology becomes the first thing you turn to, or when it takes over things that we could do very simply by ourselves. And besides, this economy is already in enough trouble. We don't need to add on to it by coming up with new technology "that could change the country" because it could cost us more than we are offering."

And him AGAIN:

"What was life made for, because i obviously do not know, and afraid to turn to technology? There not AI, machines cant become that complex or sophisticated to think on their own its just sci-fi, we must operate them or turn them on for them to do anything. We fight wars on our own and we lose thousands of lives everytime. Why not have machines programmed to fight for us. No human casualties for us or the enemy if they choose to do the same. Do me a favor if you have comcast go to the science channel 272 on saturday at 6 and watch 2057. Just do that and then respond."

Ande me AGAIN (a battle in the process):

"I'm not saying that these things wouldn't be useful, because, yes, they would. And I didn't really say that there were going to be machines that could think for themselves and control their own actions. I was just stating my opinion. I honestly believe that we won't get that far. I just believe that people who come up with new technology are trying to flaunt their ideas and prove what a "genius" they are. Sometimes new inventions don't really help out life, they're just for profits and looks. I don't know that much to say anymore, really, because this subject could go on forever, with everyone battling."

And him again AGAIN:

"well of course people who come up with something new will flaunt their ideas. Theres compitition and they all what to be remembered for something great"

There was more I wanted to say on my last one...when he was talking about machines taking over for the soldiers that are dying in the current war. It's ludicrous! We are already spending millions to billions of dollars on the war, and he's talking about building machines that will take over for the soldiers.

1. I would just stop all war; peace, man.
2. That would cost more millions to billions of dollars for just inventing them.
3. And then when they all get destroyed because they are not "advanced" enough this nation will be in so much debt it's not funny.

I don't know if he was talking about this being in the future or now, but let me just state that we are on the verge of the next depression. Hello!

There's only one more thing I would say if this guy were here, "What an ass-monkey...seriously."

Chelisa