The human mind as a machine

The most clearly stated metaphor for the human mind in this collection of quotations is that the human brain is a machine. This machine as argued by Rosenthal is a washing machine that has broken. The machine cannot get enough water so the washer is broken. Burns next argues that the human mind is like a radio. He says that the cause of depression is because the knobs of the radio aren’t tuned just right. Once you get rid of the static you are capable of being happy again.

Freud tells us that we can determine the root of hysteria by trying to “uncover what is buried” in our minds. He argues that once we trace the problem back to its roots, we can fix the problem in our minds. This follows the idea that the mind is a machine, this time one that is capable of being fixed by tracing the problem back to its roots.

Tichi argues in Shifting Gears that the true purpose of the mind is to be molded into “a certain form of energy…” focused on one primary goal. I feel that Tichi is trying to tell us that the machine of the brain has to be trained into a certain way of thinking so that everyone finds their place in society.

Based on all of these arguments, the mind is not a definite thing. It can be changed as required, broken and fixed. These authors are trying to relay the idea that the human mind is not perfect, but can be perfected if so desired.

In the days of old, people had to follow the ideals of the community. People had to believe in the same religion, follow the same traditions, and act in the same manner in order to please both community and church. Following this idea, if a person were to break away from the norm they were considered to be sick. Thinking about this idea of “strange actions = illness” gives us the idea that the person that is sick can be healed, and that the strange actions are only temporary and have been brought about by an outside force.

Along with this idea, we can also consider the idea that “strange actions = possession”. The concept of an individual being possessed by something implies that the person cannot be saved. That the person is no longer acting on his own terms and are instead acting on behalf of someone else. The difference between illness and possession is that the “sick” person is still sane and is only temporarily acting out of character. The idea of possession tells us that the person is being acted upon by an outside force and is unsalvageable.

Following this idea I think we do treat these people differently on some levels. We hold a person who is “sick” accountable for their actions, whereas a person who is “possessed” cannot be considered normal and we expect them to act out of character.

“I’m in a world of hurt.”
“You really cut me down tonight”
“You got to the heart of me”
“My gut said I was wrong, but my heart said that I was right.”

These are all metaphors we use in everyday life that we never consider to be regular and used in human interactions. These quotes specifically speak to the pain of an individual; however, these lines could be applied to any application of a conversation. Unfortunately, these lines seem to apply to the negative side of our conversations; meaning that when we speak using these particular sayings, we are only speaking with a pessimistic tone. If we follow this idea, everything we think about has a negative connotation.

As we think about talking in every conversation with a negative connotation, we soon realize that we speak with a negative tone towards regular topics in everyday life, whether it is the line at Starbucks or the wait in traffic on the way to class.

“I waited forever!”
“She just wouldn’t stop talking!”
“And she just stood there like I didn’t exist…”

Everything we see and do in typical life we retell with a negative tone, which gives the people we encounter in life a negative feeling towards situations. My point is that we pass negativity from person to person without realizing the detrimental effects of it.

When we think of the metaphor that anger = dynamite, we are using the idea that anger can be stored for any amount of time until something triggers it. We also use the idea that it is potentially hazardous if released haphazardly. We all agree that dynamite is a dangerous material that should be handled with care, the same goes for anger of an individual.

In his poem, I think Blake is trying to compare anger to a plant. Blake is saying that his anger can be controlled if he desires it so, however, if his anger is directed at a foe then it can be watered and nurtured into something much larger. Blake says in his poem that he can turn off or “trim” his anger if need be. In this way, Blake isn’t saying that anger is explosive like we often suggest, he is saying that anger can be grown intentionally into a dangerous plant.

The similar idea between our common conception of anger and Blakes suggestion is that anger is dangerous and deadly in both metaphors. Both suggest that anger is fragile and requires great care to control it.

“My anger grows inside of me”
“The despise for him/her took root deep inside of me.”
“My anger sprouts new limbs frequently.”

Technology 4-5-06

Technology can be defined as any “application of knowledge… to accomplish a task” (Merriam-Webster online). So when questioning our idea of progress based on the use of technology, we would normally think of things like computers, cell phones, and possibly even travel tools like the car or the airplane. But if any application of knowledge is considered a technology, is something as simple as tying your shoes not technology? We do simple things and use items regularly that are considered a technology. I feel people overlook the obvious in our current comprehension of technology. We overlook items like the ballpoint pen, the chair, and even our clothing as examples of technology that we do not regularly consider. New gadgets are not the only form of technology, however they are the most commonly thought of. Innovations like these that are in fact considered a technology help determine who we are as a society. Technology does include writing as well as other means of thinking.

I think that we use this expanded definition in out everyday lives and never think twice about it. We should be more appreciative when we use our gadgets, our book bags, and even the alphabet because all of these things are technologies that we take for granted on a regular basis.

Advertisements

1) This advertisement for enterasys has a direct aim at the typical college teenager. The saying at the top “Who’s abusing your network” is demeaning to all teenagers. This advertisement assumes that all youth are irresponsible and play on the fears of “adults” that have the job of securing their networks. This ad is saying that if you use their product you will be protected from these “hackers”.

2) This is the cover of the “Miamian” put out by Miami University. I found that these illustratings of President Garland are an advertisement in themselves. This page is trying to convince us that President Garland is a “jack of all traits” that he is a great part of this university. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with this ad, however, this does illustrate a form of advertising to make us feel that we have the best man on the job.

3) “To the future. And step on it.” This advertisement by HP and General Motors simply says that if they together are revolutionizing the future and that you should buy their product because they are the wave of the future.

4) This ad by Cisco says that with them, their hardware, and their software, you can be a one man company. You can be independent and achieve great things. They are saying that with them, you alone can manage your network. The man illustrated is shown as clever and independent. This is conveying to consumers that with them, this is also achievable for you.

5) The stressed man at the top of this advertisement obviously portrays that if you are still using old equipment and haven’t recently upgraded through CDW that you will be stressed out, and your job will be much harder. This is a good ad because it plays on the fears of all men in this position about upgrading their equipment. No one wants to be caught stressed out like this man, so why not upgrade?

All of the advertisements that I found play on the fears of the business minded people that consider network downtime to be a loss of money. All of the ads are businesses minded in the form that they make you think that your biggest fears will be achieved if you do not use their product.
Along with this, all of these ads do affect peoples sense of self. The ads try to imply that without their products you are unprepared for the possible detriments to your network. The ads convey that you are a better person if you use their product.
The idea that these products are required in the business world I do find both reasonable and accurate. However, I think the advertisers take this play on fear a step too far. There are many options for software and I think that the ads should explain why theirs is better… not that you have a need for it. The need is already apparent when you set up a network.

The monsters stigma

Goffman says that the definition of stigma comes to mean the differences between one individual and the accepted “norm” of society. He says that the stigma can range from personality differences, family inequalities (such as class or religion), or even physical variations. The monster in Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein is an example of what we would consider to be stigma. The monster feels normal at first and feels like he should be accepted by society because he was no different than they were. He felt that he didn’t understand their culture at first, but he learned their ways in order to be accepted by them. It wasn’t until the people were scared away by his looks that he realize he had a stigma. So, in this case his stigma is learned only after interactions with people. However, in other situations it could be learned of in other methods. I don’t think the readings the monster read would have given him the ability to learn of his visual differences. There are descriptive parts of books that give insight to the looks of normal people, but his image of “normal” would be different than societal acceptance.
I think that the monster would have felt a sense of accomplishment when reading for the first few times. He would feel like he had learned a new skill, and would be proud of his new ability. We as a society consider reading and viewing movies a norm. We expect that every individual should be able to do these things, and if they are unable then they become labeled with a stigma. I would imagine that these people who cannot read or watch movies, for whatever reason it may be, would feel left out and would expect other forms of entertainment or education.
Pip first achieves consciousness of himself in the first chapter of the excerpt when he talks about standing beside his family’s graves and he begins to cry. We can tell that this is where consciousness sets in because he says that he sees the world with a ”…vivid and broad impression of the identity of things”. He sees the world around him and realizes who his family was, and where they are now. It is here in the story that Pip hits reality. I don’t think that Pip is in anyway like the monster of Frankenstein. The monster realizes his differences through the interaction with other people and has only visual defects. As we talked about in class, the monster was normal on the inside, just not physically. I don’t see Pip mention physical deformity in the story. I suppose Pip is like the monster in the sense that they are both “alone” in the world and that neither one have much of a family alive. Pip realizes whiles standing at the graves of his family that he doesn’t have much left in the world, and the monster realizes in his own story that he is alone, and is shunned by the rest of the world.