Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Paolo Ruffino]

I hope you're enjoying reading McLuhan for next Thursday!

Here are a couple of questions, let's start a discussion on this forum about the reading.

1) Do you think it is useful or productive to think of different technologies as extensions to some existing human ability of faculty?  Are wheels (car, bike, bus) really an 'extension' of your feet?

2) Are you a servomechanism?  How many technologies do you serve?  Do we need a Neo to rescue us from the Matrix, or do the machines already serve us? 

[Bubu]

Initially perhaps it seemed a little daunting to allow machines to aid us during our daily lives. However in today's world I think it is virtually impossible to imagine our lives without machines. With airplanes able to fly without pilots if necessary or doctors using robots to operate for them, machines have become part of our lives whether we like it or not. With obvious differences between machines and humans, I think it is necessary to overlook these differences and accept machines to be an emotionless version of humans that have been designed for almost any occasion. From cleaning, travel and communication to cooking, entertainment and building, machines have simplified our lives tremendously allowing for us to remain in the background and control the motions of the machine. I do not believe that this means we are slaves to machines in any way. I am simply arguing that we can use machines to our benefit in extremely positive ways (obviously there are extreme negatives as well) and choose to use machines to enhance ourselves instead of rebelling against them and choosing to be without any kind of machine. 

[Paolo Ruffino]

Hi Bubu,
can you think about a period in human history when there were no machines? It really depends on what you intend by "machines", but if you intend them as technologies then we have always used them, in any moment of our history. Language itself can be understood as a technology.

Also, pay attention to what McLuhan says when he describes media. He has a very specific definition of media which is not limited to what we might intend today with "the (mass) media" (TV, radio, newspapers, etc.), and definitely not just airplanes and robots. Media are extensions of our faculties. As such, McLuhan intends roads, coins, clothes, numbers, houses, written words, clocks and many other things as media.

When he says we are "servomechanisms" of media he does not mean that we are becoming slaves, but that we have always been narcotised (as was Narcissus - in McLuhan's reading of the myth) by our own extensions.

[Bubu]

Of course "machines" in the sense I previously described have not been around for as long as other technologies such as language, numbers or even time; however, this should not mean that they are not as applicable or influential as earlier technologies. Each "machine" is an extension of previous technologies where they have collected a number of technologies to create one that is applicable for the modern world. Technologies such as language or numbers are always considered important because of the way they organize society so that we are all able to interact and have relationships with other people. With regards to McLuhan's "servomechanisms" argument, I do agree with the myth of Narcissus and how that in a way represents us today in modern society due to the machines and technology around us; however, I do also believe that there are many positive aspects of these elements that are not as "controlling" as McLuhan suggests.

[confused.com]

In reply to Babu:

The idea of machines becoming more 'developed' than the human race is both an exciting and scary thought. As a machine is an extension of not only previous technologies, but also ourselves we must consider the consequences of the loss of control. A plane that does not require a pilot is an extremely risky development: a machine has no rational thought, reaction or emotion- therefore in the situation of a malfunction will not consider the ways in which it can react for the safety of the people aboard. It will simply do what it has been programmed to do- and no one thinks of every situation.

On the other hand without machines we would still be in an era where a simple cold could kill us. Modern society relies on technology in order to develop and lengthen our life time span. With McLuhan's idea of control in mind- i would rather lose this control than die at a young age.

[maryjane]

I believe that any technology can be the extension of humans. The phone for an example makes the world into a smaller space, due to the communication with my phone I can talk to anyone around the world no matter how extended the world is. By extending my self into electronic technology I dedicate time and money to it, which implies that I rely on my phone in every possible way. It carries the memory which is replaceable, the memory that I cannot carry as a human.

[popcorn]

Already in this age technology has far to much of an influence over our society and the pace at which this has happened and the tolerance of it in our communication especially to me is rather disconcerting.I think that ourselves will naturally be extended and exist amidst outside ourselves is not a too disturbing thought. AS humans we impact even beyond ways of that we are aware of. Technology has a parts of us in because we allow it to just as non technological artifacts such as a letter contains some of our words or thoughts but not so that it has the real live present being of ourselves but just something of which we have chosen to give away. Our human bodies have abilities and we are able to influence and mark the world in many ways.

[mouse90]

Reading the above comments it is noticeable to see that people are beginning to foucs on technology and machines as extensions. Whilst i agree with this concept (especially in the modern society we live in) i am also interested in a more general approach to the extended subject whereby McLuhin in particular argues that all media is an extension of some human faculty; psychic or physical. Arguably, everything is an extension of one of our sense e.g. the clothes are an extension of the skin and eyes.

its also interesting to ask 'why' do we consume and have these extensions? The global village concept suggests that Media creates an environment, and we live in it. We gain a sense of identity and community by consumption e.g. the notion of Facebook (which is extremely popular in today’s society), has become a community that we exist in. Those who don’t exist within it are unable to engage within this community, often missing out on current populous and isolating themselves from a vast and ever changing society. They become the ones talked about and seen as ‘different’. In the same way, those who do not consume themselves with the beauty and fashion age that we see in magazines, on the cat walk, and in high-street retail shops, become ‘outside the fashion community’

[BJRushy]

In response specifically to question two above, I do not feel that I am a servomechanism; whilst some may argue that we serve various technologies I believe this is an overly deterministic view. I feel that this perspective of man as server of technology links in with strands of cyborgology, and the deep rooted social anxieties specifically machines one day ruling over man; as demonstrated by innumerable examples from popular culture from films such as A.I and the common perception of technology as humanised and ever-evolving.

I believe that until machines are able to develop and learn as humans and other animals do, and until they begin to construct their own cultures, for example, then we have nothing to fear. We do not need rescuing. Rather we need to accept change, and accept the benefits and the shortcomings of modern technology without framing them as something to be feared, as surely these extensions will continue to change, and in turn change man - in ways which we as yet surely are unable to predict as aptly as visionaries such as McLuhan has.

[Artamis]

I believe that until machines are able to develop and learn as humans and other animals do, and until they begin to construct their own cultures, for example, then we have nothing to fear. We do not need rescuing. Rather we need to accept change, and accept the benefits and the shortcomings of modern technology without framing them as something to be feared, as surely these extensions will continue to change, and in turn change man - in ways which we as yet surely are unable to predict as aptly as visionaries such as McLuhan has.


In response to BJRushi, I agree with your point that there are is much moral panic around the idea of the prospective cyborg society, and that in fact reality creates another picture. However going with McLuhan, he said that we always only in retrospective can understand life, that we must look back, but that life itself goes forward. We are therefore arguably at present in the dark of what consequences our current creations and behaviour will have. He argued the idea of the servomechanism in the belief that we are unaware how much any form of medium influences us. As you say, in many ways humankind making use of media is a good thing and has brought human kind very far and supported our continued survival. With the creation of machines that are 'infrastructured' with more 'emotional' attributes, lets say the recent introduction of 'siri' for the iphone http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpcvvHh98E8 It still does not take initiative and has no feelings, but it responds to tactile touch, it answers to our questions. It is not taking a lead, but it will surely influence us - we take an interesting revolutionary step in the relationship between humans and machines. I really wonder where it leads. What do you think ?
 

[mwilliams]

I think Bubu is right in thinking that we as humans are not controlled by machines. Humans are the creators of machines, and it is down to us to decide whether we feel the need to use them and to continue creating them. However,i do believe that by giving ourseves the power to use these machines and depend on them, the control we may have had to begin with, has now dissappeared as what would the world today be without machines and technology?? We would certainly be taking a number of steps back, and for what gain?

[Fúnke]

I think it’s a bit silly to see machines as a possible threat to human civilisation, whilst it does make a good premise for a film - which has no doubt already been used but I'm struggling to thing of any of the top of my head - I just find it hard to believe that they could be the dominant organism or life form in years to come, obviously though this is a fairly uneducated guess. I mean I have no idea what sort of things secret organisations and government branches are able to create and engineer, but I’d find it difficult to think that they’d give machines the chance to think and learn like we do, and if they do, they’d no doubt put parameters in which would prevent them from becoming a threat…unless they learnt to override such security measures?!

The only threat we have is becoming overly reliant on them, which may eventually numb our senses, taking away skills we once held in high regard that are left for machines and computers to do. Such things are already happening and have done for quite some time, but so long as machinery and computers need some form of human input, I reckon we’ll be okay.

[hluiz]

Although I certainly think that the work of McLuhan is very interesting I struggle with his notion of objects such as buses and cars being extensions of my self. To me such technologies are separate entities and although I use them on a regular basis they do not to me become part of my being. Having said this however I do understand McLuhan's concept and his notion that it is not a machine but what one does with a machine that creates any message is one of particular interest as it suggests that the sense of creation is still something human and we have the power to create what we desire. In terms of the question of whether or not we rely on technology I would suggest that whilst that we could function without much of what we determine as 'required' there is certainly a heavy reliance on numerous technologies in the modern world.

[HSB]

I agree that we have become dependent on technology, for example mobile phones. We have constantly got them in our possession. I could safely say that a phone is an extension of myself! However, I agree with hluz's point, as there is certain technology that I do not feel is an extension of myself.. Technology is becoming more and more advanced, and so I think we will become more and more dependent on it as time goes on.

[media2011]

‘As electrically contracted, the globe is no more than a village. Electric speed at bringing all social and political functions together in a sudden implosion has heightened human awareness of responsibility to an intense degree’ (McLuhan, 1964.pg.5) This particular claim of McLuhan’s’ makes the point that modern media brings with it greater responsibilities which we are forces to become aware of. Yes, this new ability to experience the effects of our actions on a global scale almost instantly should be seen as a positive step, but our concerns are not solely in our own smaller physical communities now; they are global concerns. This has sociological implications, such as for example; ethics and morality in the media and in the field of advertising, raising issues as to who controls this etc.
Another issue raised brought about by globalization is the theory of utilitarianism, coined by Jeremy Bentham, which basically states that as a general rule the right action to take is the action that maximizes welfare, however this doesn't necessarily mean it is the right one. This relates to the notion 'the greater good for the greater number'.