It is my very fervent hope that three years from now I use technology only in ways that enhance my life and the lives of my children. I hope that our family time uses technology to gain access to places we wouldn't be able to go without it (aka travel) rather than just watching a movie together. I hope we learn to enjoy being bored together and talking or reading, rather than being bored together with our various gadgets. I hope that we come to embrace the idea that is actually okay to be bored. Again, enhancements of those things which are good about ourselves rather than feeding into negative aspects like buying gadgets purely out of consumerism, or endless scrolling because we have something at our fingertips.

Having a expanded understanding of what constitutes technology is critical because it allows you to see how interwoven it is with human development and society. It also helps present a more balanced view of both the pros and cons technological advance has to offer, and provides keener insight to times when technological "advance" is actually the opposite.

My children's use of technology and the impact it has on their lives is my primary concern/interest on a day-to-day level. While this course has not changed my divided feelings, I am able to articulate them more clearly to myself and therefore approach them in a better way. I am thankful that my second grader has online systems like iReady which adapt to her needs and learning. However, I have her read paper books and use pen and paper to write out stories and homework. I am glad she has access to things like YouTube and Netflix which inspire her creativity in the realm of baking (I have no skill there), but I wish she would run around with a pack of neighborhood kids instead. Most importantly though, this class has helped me become aware of just how mindlessly I turn to [mindless] technology when I am bored seeking just to kill time rather than stoke excitement. I am still cultivating this habit of reflection in the specific hope that I can relay it to my kids.

Nye and Marquit both argued that humanity and technology evolved alongside one another in a symbiotic way, but Feenberg seems to be arguing that technology is actually the spark for human culture. This lens seems to imply an overarching intelligent design-type assumption, and is therefore difficult for me to swallow. If technology is the "key" to understanding, that implies an organizer of a master plan/puzzle who has imbued all things with their essence and purpose.

example of relationship between technology and society

imagination

important disclaimer

seems to contradict the earlier breakdown of rank, stratified, and state societies....or am I reading this wrong?

I've heard this before...where?? Maybe Art History?

I wonder what is necessary for the spawn of intellectuals...perhaps the presence of technology to figure out? Recalls Nye's arguments re: science/theory trying to explain technological creations

"foraging" technology?

Is then the exercising of coercive power when given the means a part of human nature?

Mbuit mentioned earlier would be a rank society; they have a chief and a shaman but don't value property

doesn't indicate what came first, the technological developments or the social restructuring...seems like technology first from the examples, but not really clear

Contradicts Nye's implications from para. 2 of "Can we Define Technology?" - he inserts the sentence "deadly tools also facilitated murder and warfare." soon after saying "technologies are not foreign to human nature but inseparable from it" which situates murder and warfare right alongside human nature in the reader's mind

in my brain I've always thought of hunting/foraging societies as very separate, but I've never considered what role equality played

songs are not too different from stories

perhaps the paintings show up so long after the fossil because the dexterity required for art (fine motor) is more difficult to master (and, one assumes, develop) than the gross motor skills required to use a spear. Cephalocaudal (head to tail), promixaldistal (inner to out)...fine motor movements of the hands and fingers are the last skills babies develop.

didn't know that

history of storytelling begins orally

interesting argument; while speculative, doesn't leave much room for disagreement

agrees with Nye

Is there a pattern that can be deduced for when it is one versus the other?

key = relationship between technology and society, similar assertion was made by Nye

roots of language...not only allows Nye to discuss evolution of concept of technology but also the actual evolution of the word, subtly (or perhaps not so subtly) harkening back to his connection between stories and tools

first time essay uses the word "progress"

Sociological implications...relates to how different people/cultures can see different (multiple) uses for a single tool. Could not "user" be subbed for "maker"?

Stonehenge is a perfect example of technology being intrinsically linked to culture/social interactions...we are baffled by the why and awed by the how...even though we aren't certain of its purpose, we can understand its importance

We are able to redefine our necessities because we are able to imagine a greater, better existence

wish the author provided examples of this; seems fairly obvious as to how tools/technology [seemingly] enhance/complicate social life in modern times, but historically how was that demonstrated amongst Homo sapiens?

defining feature of tools v. structures addressed at end of para. 1

Immediately frames technology as an interactive entity, also sets the theme/connecting thread the author uses to weave together tools, major historical periods, and linguistics

Yay, I finally got it to work!