It seems to me that the confrontation between humanity and technology has always existed, although recently it has acquired a very strong spin. Reading this article I felt kind of inspired.

The article describes the perils or dangers of technology as technology being a process of dehumanization. While it is undeniable that technology has erased some frontiers, the author questions whether technology has gone too far. Have we erased some frontiers that we shouldn’t? As a clear example of the lattest, every geek-businessman has a PDA with wireless connection, pager and a UMTS mobile phone or a Blackberry with constant full access to his/her e-mail inbox. Is 24/7 connection with work and the virtual world increasing and affecting our relationship with the real world? Is it good to be disconnected from time to time?

While I must admit that I feel very interested by new technologies and its consequences, I am still a lover of traditional things. I always carry a notebook, pen, pencil, pencil sharpener, eraser and I don’t own a PDA, but a Moleskine. I think that both extremes (Amish and Techno-freaky-geek) are bad.

1. Mago de la Lluvia Says:
   October 15th, 2005 at 02:13

   Now, the luddite article is really bullshit. He swears against “tech” as if it were an allien kind of virus, which ntered the Earth by chance, bad chance. Tech is just a mean, not an end. The effects entailed to it are just the reflection of OUR choices os usages. Wether we decide to by a book through the net, improve the fabric personel productivity, or launch a rocket aimed at Mars, there is always a stage in which we, the human race, had the opportunity of just unppluging the PC, or turning off the cell phone, or both, and going back to our landscape painting we left behid last weekend. Technology, by construction, is ment to decrase costs, wether these are enviromenta costs or crime costs. We can still take a break, hav some sunshine and communicate with poetry readers; millions of jobs are being destroied, thats a fact. However, I would seriously question a tech blaiming explanation.

2. pau Says:
   October 15th, 2005 at 10:43

   Well, I think the author is saying that technology, as the process you mention, is taking us away from the humanity as we know it. Maybe we will reach some other kind of humanity, or, maybe, we will reach a better world without crime and environmental problems, but I don’t think that in the short term he is being very far from reality. Technology is kind of a trend, I would say that is comparable to the Illustration, were people found a way of thinking that drove them towards a better understanding of the world and a better way to deal with it. But it is a fact that in this process our “humanity” is changing.

   However, I think the author is looking at a short term effect of technology. Is talking about being “burned” by work, because of technology. Because technology allows a 100% connectivity with your job. And by this process you are being “dehumanized”.

   Wow, we are recently having too many philosophical discussions around.

3. Mago de la Lluvia Says:
   October 15th, 2005 at 12:04

   I dont believe he is far from the trend either. However, in my opinion, he is confused about causes and effects. We cant blame tech evolution for junk printers accumulation; surely, they are both correlated, but the latest, and almost ever examle he cited through the article, are a consequence of a consuming behaviour and comercial strategies. However this, there is no doubt that human inter-relations and social behaviours have change (in many cases for bad); though we should go deepe than the explanation proposed by the Ludditle