SWA #3 Am I My Brother's Keeper?

Weisel has survived a significant event in history, one that no one in our generation has experienced firsthand: the Holocaust.  Having survived that, he has a very different view on life and the world than most people.  He defines things in a different perspective to offer insight not often found in today’s society.  According to Weisel, information is only temporary.  He says, “We are informed about too many things” (42).  Once an event occurs, everyone is constantly focused on that one event, but when the next event occurs the previous one is no longer important.   Because communication has improved, information is so much easier to access and therefore is seen as less significant.  Weisel is trying to tell us that information can become knowledge if we absorb it, study it, and try to act out in response to it.  He believes that everyone should have responsibility, but his definition of responsibility is more intense than the one we would think of.  Weisel sees responsibility as being accountable for everyone.  In his eyes, we should try to help out everyone that we can, and if we cannot then we should try.  We should be our “brother’s keeper” to all people, not just to family, friends, and neighbors.  He does not believe that there are strangers in the world, he sees everyone as a brother.  He says, “I always feel strongly about the person who needs me.  I don’t know who that person is, but if the person needs me, I somehow must think of that person more than about myself” (45).  His definition of responsibility actually requires more responsibility!  With the responsibility of being our brother’s keeper for all people, we can gain knowledge.  We can use information that we’ve learned to try and help out our brothers and therefore become knowledgeable and responsible at the same time.   Weisel says that if people “talk sincerely” then they will gain something rewarding out of it.  He encourages dialogue and believes that one’s problems are their own, but they can receive support from others to get through them.  He truly believes that we should all be there for one another, even those we don’t know because everyone needs other people to survive.  We should listen to each other, respect each other, learn from each other, converse with each other, and protect each other.  We should be our brother’s keeper, for all of our brothers all the way around the world.

In Class Writing 8-30

I would say that my family's relationship with technology is pretty healthy.  We divide our time up so we aren't constantly stimulated.  I definitely think that there is a generation gap.  My father works for a business company so he does work on a computer everyday, but sometimes he needs help learning how to do things.  My mother doesn't really know how to do things with technology.  She always asks me to show her how to do something or teach her how to do it.  Most of the time she doesn't remember how to do it once I teach her and I have to show her again, but she knows how to facebook and she regularly checks her account.  My dad has a facebook but he rarely checks his.  My sister and I are very knowledgeable in technology.  We are very similar because we both like to keep up with the new devices, but we also know how to balance our time so that we can do other things.  I like being able to keep in touch with her while shes a couple hundred miles away studying at Virginia Tech.

SWA #2

When Richtel quotes that “technology is rewiring our brains” he is pointing out a shift in the thought-process and attention span of the human brain.  We no longer find interest in simply reading a book or riding bikes outside in the sunshine.  There is a sudden need to always be interacting on an electronic device.  Scientists say that, “Stimulation provokes excitement-a dopamine squirt-that researchers say can be addictive.  In its absence, people feel bored.”  I find this to be very true in society today.  Richtel supports his argument by describing to us the lives of the Campbell family.

The Campbell family represents the future (and families similar to theirs already out there).  The father works with computers all day and has become so addicted to the stimulation that he is constantly with a gadget.  The children are also growing up with these toys and are becoming distracted from normal human-to-human interaction. The mother admits to being distracted when the author mentions her burning the cookies twice while being distracted by the Internet.  At the same time, she struggles to do what she can to limit her kids on their gadgets because she doesn’t want them to be so dependent on them or distracted by them.  This family is a perfect warning for present and future families growing up around all of this stimulating technology.  The author uses the Campbell family as an example to show others that this is a serious issue and that family bonding could be disrupted, and honestly quite disappointing, if people become so dependent on technology.  Technology also encourages another major contribution to our latest generation- multitasking. 

Multitasking is generally seen as a talent or ability to complete more than one task at the same time.  The “myth of multitasking” is the belief that it is an accomplishment.  This article tells us that multitasking is not really a significant skill for one to acquire.   Studies show that people who multitask have a harder time determining what information is relevant and what information is not.  They are less efficient and actually have a harder time switching from one task to another in comparison to people who do not multitask.  Researchers also found that “multitaskers seem more sensitive than non-multitaskers to incoming information.” This definitely changed my view of multitasking.  I can multitask pretty well, but I only do it occasionally.  I understand what Richtel and the other researchers are pointing out.  I think that those who only focus on one task at a time will obviously have a better understanding of what they are doing as opposed to someone working on multiple things at once.  This article did provide very insightful information, but I think it is obvious that multitaskers are less efficient in their work.  Overall, I think that Richtel made a strong argument and supported it well while keeping me interested. 

Get Smarter Response

In the article "Get Smarter" Cascio points out that cognition has been evolving through the ages for thousands of years.  In "Is Google Making Us Stupid" Carr admits that the human mind is changing as well.  Although both articles admit that the brain is adapting due to technology, "Get Smarter" has a more futuristic approach to its explanation while the google article seems to somewhat disappointed, uncomfortable, and even worried about the future.
In "Get Smarter" it states that, "the increasing complexity and range of media we engage with have, over the past century, made us smarter, rather than dumber, by providing a form of cognitive calisthenics."  Cascio attempts to explain the probable outcome of our future.  He also notes different drugs that are currently growing in users who need help with concentrating, studying, etc.  Then he mentions that augmented intelligence "allows us to make ourselves smarter."  All of this information sounds very possible, which is quite intimidating.
On the other hand, Google tries to be smarter than us all.  Carr says, "their easy assumption that we'd all 'be better off' if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling."  Carr ends the article by saying, "it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence."
Both articles state that our minds are evolving and that human cognition relies more on multiple stimuli due to technological advances, but their authors' opinions on the matter are far from similar.

8-23-11 In-class writing

In the essay Is Google Making Us Stupid? the part that stood out most to me would be paying attention while reading books.  It talked about how this guy worked on computers daily and would find himself losing focus more quickly.  As I was reading the essay, it was hard for me to stay focused on the text because I was so distracted by other things such as the Internet.  I also found it interesting that the essay states how companies want to "drive us to distraction."  Personally, it's working.

SWA #1

My best writing experience was most likely writing my essays for college.  I was writing the first drafts for them in my AP English class my senior year of high school as an assignment.   My drafts were proofread and edited by my peers and my teacher.  It was a great experience because I was able to edit my essays using some feedback from multiple sources.  I also enjoyed writing the essays because the topics were very open and I could write passionately about the subjects even though I didn’t have complete control over what the subjects were.

            My worst writing experience would definitely be last year when I had to write a speech for a group project in my U.S. Government class.  The assignment was to write a speech for each political or social issue we were given, resulting in a total of two essays.  They had to be about three minutes long, so about two pages, single-spaced.  I had already written the first speech and completed it after days of working on it.  A girl in my group was supposed to be writing the second one, but waited until the night before it was due to work on it.  She told me that she had finished only a few hours after having started working on it.  I was so surprised that she had finished it so quickly and I asked her to email it to me so I could review it.  When I was reading the speech I could tell that she didn’t write it.  I searched some of the sentences online and an Obama speech appeared.  She plagiarized!  Of course I wasn’t going to let my name be attached to her mistake, so I ended up rewriting the entire speech.  It took me most of the night and I struggled, but managed to finish and deliver both speeches for the project.

            The government speech dilemma affected me the most out of the two experiences.  I have learned that I end up doing most of the work in my group projects.  The experience has also allowed me to see that people cannot always be trusted.  Beyond plagiarism and group projects I have realized that I have high expectations in life and that I am the only one who can determine my success.