Sharpening My Tools

Works Cited

Bush, V.  As We May Think, The Atlantic Monthly176(1):101-108July 1945. Web.

Boritt, Gabor, and David Eisenhower. War Comes Again Comparative Vistas on the Civil War and World War II.. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Print.

Douglas, Allen. War, Memory, and the Politics of Humor the Canard Enchan and World War I.. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. Print.

Engelbart, D. (1962, October 1). Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework. Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework. Retrieved June 24, 2014, fromhttp://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#6

Gugliotta, Guy. “New Estimate Raises Civil War Death Toll.” The New York Times 3 Apr. 2012, New York Edition ed., sec. Science: D1. Print.

Howard, Blair. Battlefields of the Civil War : A Guide for Travelers. Edison, NJ, USA: Hunter Publishing, Incorporated, 1995. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 24 July 2014.

Licklider, J. C. (1960, March 1). 1 Introduction. Man-Computer Symbiosis. Retrieved June 16, 2014, fromhttp://groups.csail.mit.edu/medg/people/psz/Licklider.html

Riggs, J. E.. “What do you mean, save a soldier from war?: Life’s big small decisions.” Neurology 81: e161-e162. Neurology. Web. 24 July 2014.

Groupthink in Beta

http://rampages.us/alyzh/2014/07/25/inquiry-project-beta/

Zhara had taken a long introduction to ease the audience into her topic. Her thesis was clear and to the point: she prefers tumblr out of all the other networking sites. Her thesis is debatable, because other people with different opinions might disagree with her, saying tumblr is not the best social media site. Plus, she used claims like cyber bullying, which emphasized why tumblr was less of social networking website, and instead a blogging site, where people are free to post what they wish to post without judgements from others. Everything seems good to go with her project. Citations (Bibliography)=check. Her statements are clear and easy to understand=check.

http://morganneperez.wordpress.com/2014/07/24/591/

Morganne is studying the topic of Pandora. She gives us why she wants to study Pandora as an introduction. She questions the legitimacy of Pandora’s technology, whether Pandora itself is technology. It took me some time to understand her thesis, because I was confused as to where she was referring Pandora as technology, the company itself, or the idea and the concept of Pandora music on internet. However, she furthers her claim to tell the readers that she is referring to a question:

Can Pandora really be called technology if it is completely controlled by humans? How do we define technology? I don’t believe that the World Wide Web is as deep as we have been led to think. Something so “ambiguous” as the Internet may actually be in the palm of our hands. I mean, think about it: what would the Internet be without people? It would just be sitting there with no purpose. Yes, we use the Internet, but we have more control over it than most people realize. Some technologies are advanced enough to function on their own, and we will call these products “computerized.” But most things on the Internet, especially for entertainment, are not. We will call these things, such as Pandora, humanized.

It was interesting to read her Inquiry Project, because she believed that we controlled technology, not technology controlling us. (And, I have different opinions from her, but reading through her blog post, I was agreeing with her with many of her statements and points.)

Inquiry Project Beta

I still need to arrange my site to make the layout and the webpage easy to access.  (Lot of cosmetic brushing and touch ups.)

I am still progressing towards editing and revising my argumentative paper (the informations itself).  I am having trouble  relaying my points across to the audience. (Visiting Writing Center to brush up my research paper.)

My citation page and citations within my writing is still unfinished.  Many citations were left unmarked.

**I am looking to further my research over this past weekend to make my argumentative paper stronger, lucid and coherent.  There are many unambiguous phrases that needs to be fixed (needs to get rid of awkward sentences).

One of my sub-claim (topic: soldiers more dependent on technology) needs more evidence and supporting argumentative statements to fully relay my claim across to the readers.

–Still Under Construction–

Final Inquiry Project DRAFT
New Link: http://kimah6.wix.com/univ200finalinqproj

Please don’t hesitate to leave feedback, whether negative or positive.  Thank you!

Real Estate Search

I chose Wix to base my research project on.  In a way, Wix is like rampages, but was more pro-folio-ed look.  I wanted to present my inquiry project as presentation slideshows, just like how I would use Powerpoint slides to explain one claim at a time.  I believe Wix’s got me sold on the ability to create slides within the webpages.  I can swipe my mouse to move into different topics, and I would want to have each different claims on different slides (so that my claims would be clear, and the supportive statements would follow through).  In a way, I chose to present my claims on the slides, because my research is organized into chronological order, from past to present.  By sliding the claims tabs, metaphorically, the audience is traveling from time to time, seeing the effects of technology advancement and what it means to be a soldier in 1700’s to present 2014 (like the visual effect of time-traveling).  I liked the way Wix was able to support pictures and videos within the slides, which will be usefully when I need to include visual aids to support my argumentative claims.

Filling My Toolbox

8 Sources:

1.  Vannevar Bush – “As We May Think”

2.  Doug Engelbart – “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework”

3.  Ted Nelson – “Computer Lib/ Dream Machines” (excerpts)

4.  Gabor S. Boritt & David Eisenhower – “War Comes Again: Comparative Vistas on the Civil War and World War II”

5.  Blair Howard – “Battlefields of the Civil War: A Guide for Travelers”

6.   Allen Douglas – “War, Memory, and the Politics of Humor: The Canard Enchaine and World War I”

7.   W. Seth Carus – “Military Technology and the Arms Trade: Changes and Their Impact” Pg. 163-174

8.  Alfred E. Thal Jr. & William D. Heuck Jr. – “Foresight – Military Technology Development: a Future-Based Approach Using Scenarios”  Pg. 49 – 65

 

Nugget Curation: Part Deux

TAGS: #technology, #computer, #robots, #internet, #google, #productivity, #automation, #production, #intelligence,  #military

+ ADD TAGS #soldier, #war, #impactofwar, #death

As soon as I have redefined my research topic to focus more into soldiers and the functions of soldiers in a war, in the past and present, I had to add more tags to mold my research.

1.  “New Estimate Raises Civil War Death Toll.”-by Guy Gugliotta

Even though this is a New York Times article, Gugliotta was thorough in explaining the war casualty rates back in the Civil War era.  (I probably won’t use this article to support my argumentative claim, but this will be useful in using it as an evidence for my sub-claim.)  Since I want to compare the soldiers action from the time of American Revolution war to most recent war in Iraq, I wanted to figure out each wars’ combat deaths.  From there, I can compare the number of deaths caused by military advancement versus the death caused before technology advancement.  This article was useful in helping me guide through the Civil War era, and the actual numbers of deaths and losses.  TAGS: #soldiers, #war, #impactofwar, #death

2.  Boritt, Gabor, and David Eisenhower. War Comes Again Comparative Vistas on the Civil War and World War II.. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Print.

Three authors wrote a book on the comparison on the Civil War versus World War II, which contained informations like military intelligence and military operations.  This book will guide me to find the comparison of different wars that United States were involved in.  (I am only going to research the major wars U.S. were involved in, mainly: American Revolution, U.S. Civil War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Invasion of Afghanistan, and Invasion of Iraq.)  From here, I can relate to what it was like back in the day, and how the military tactics/ operations were before the era of technology growth versus guns and knifes (before military weapon growth). Reference: pg. 52 – 53 for military intelligence. TAGS: #technology, #computer, #robots, #internet, #productivity, #automation, #production, #intelligence, #military,  #soldier, #war, #impactofwar, #death

3.  Howard, Blair. Battlefields of the Civil War : A Guide for Travelers. Edison, NJ, USA: Hunter Publishing, Incorporated, 1995. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 24 July 2014.

Chapter 2: The Civil War Solider & His Equipment

This book chapter was a chance for me to get a better idea of what it was like back in Civil War, as what it was like to be a solider back in the day.  I cannot compare the life of the soldiers in different time frames of war if I don’t know what it was like to be one.  So, this is where I started to research deep into the lives of the soldiers.  From here, I want to prove that back then, due to less technology advancement, soldiers had lower survival rate than today.  However, the death rate would be much higher in present wars (WWII, Afghanistan War & Iraq War).  With better destructive weapons, and faster technology development rate, the more fierce the war becomes, and more casualties within wars.  TAGS: #technology, #computer, #robots, #internet, #google, #productivity, #automation, #production, #intelligence,  #military, #soldier, #war, #impactofwar, #death

4.  Douglas, Allen. War, Memory, and the Politics of Humor the Canard Enchan and World War I.. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. Print.

CH. 9 Between Cannibalism and Resurrection

The Body of the Unknown Soldier

Douglas, Allen. War, Memory, and the Politics of Humor : The Canard Enchaine and World War I. Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press, 2002. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 24 July 2014.
Copyright © 2002. University of California Press. All rights reserved.

Allen Douglas, in Ch. 9 of his book, “War, Memory, and the Politics of Humor the Canard Enchan and World War I”, had a funny way of describing of soldier’s death in wars.  He compared killings at war as cannibalism.  The cannibalism itself describes a gruesome and inhuman activities that goes against our society’s morals.  In a way, the author separated soldiers into two categories: those who gained the title of heroism, or those that were “unknown”.  I can use this to support my arguments on the topic of soldier heroism: the definition of a hero returning back to U.S. after serving his duties versus the unwelcome state  of finding the “unknown” soldiers with no appreciation for their service.  (Need to clear out my argumentative supporting claims.  Not sure how I want to incorporate the topic of heroism into my argument…)  TAGS: #intelligence,  #military, #soldier, #war, #impactofwar, #death

 

5.  Riggs, J. E.. “What do you mean, save a soldier from war?: Life’s big small decisions.” Neurology 81: e161-e162. Neurology. Web. 24 July 2014.

Captain Jack E. Riggs writes about his life as a doctor in Navy Reserve during the time of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  He goes through step by step of an incident that occurred to his patient.  What’s interesting about his story is that his patient (U.S. Military officer-19 years old) had intentionally shot himself in his leg, so that he could be sent home.  To cut the story short, the patient was prosecuted and was sent back to his unit for further evaluation of his service.  It’s just like how technology will change human soldiers into robots.  The military men are commanded by the upper division of leadership, and the soldiers have no option but to obey the commands set forth by the leaders.  In a way, the soldiers are turning into stiff robots, unable to express their empathy and emotions.  TAGS: #technology, #computer, #robots,  #military, #soldier, #war, #impactofwar, #death

Week 6: Reflective Post

It’s actually Week 7 into UNIV 200 course, even though I am writing Week 6 reflective post.  This post is past due date. I am a week behind in my UNIV 200 course load, due to the fact that I had an internal break down.  I had many dilemmas (let’s say happy/ depressive dilemmas) as to what I exactly wanted to study .  Original intention of my research topic was to prove the readers about the great advances of technology and how technology had a positive effect on military advancements.  However, as irony it may sound, the “positive” effects on military technology is actually pretty depressing.  The major discoveries or inventions that were made for the military were majority used as a weapon against our enemies, which consisted of IEDS (Improved Explosive Devices), atomic bombs, and tanks/ jets, etc… which were made to terminate entire colonies of humans when possible.  I was fairly not happy with my research topic, but I couldn’t change my research to a whole different topic, because then all my research that I had done past 6 weeks will go to waste.  So… in the end, I had decided to keep the topic of war, but took a different turn: I want to research more into what it means to be a solider in America, and how technology growth will have impact on soldiers alone.

Colin McLaughlin had the same concept as I intentionally had in mind.  As much as I love technology advancement, I wanted to inform the readers that not everything about technology is pretty smooth sailing.  I wanted to show, specifically in my research paper, the topic of military technology advancement, and how much innovation in military weapons and gadgets will inevitably destroy humanity without us knowing.  It is comforting to know that I am not the only one who is against technology advancement, and to see a fellow classmate in support for anti-technology. (Not saying all technology is bad… just few consequences of something good.)

While I may be anti-technology growth, the blogger, cabouniv200, explains the future of Facebook.  The blogger states that there is uncertainty that lies within the growth of Facebook and whether or not Facebook is at its prime state of demand.  And, I have to agree with the blogger that uncertainty is what lies ahead of us.  We will never know for sure that Facebook is in decline, or whether Facebook will be the hype for next generations.  Although, I doubt that, since MySpace (similar networking/ blogging concept as Facebook) had declined over the years.  I think, in the near future, there will be a new networking site that will replace Facebook, just like how MySpace has over-thrown Facebook.  It will be our constant strive to up-grade and evolve what we have, because it’s our instinct to want what we can’t have.  Maybe Facebook will change for the future generation to keep up with the hype, or maybe new website will be the new playground for us in the future.

One blog that caught my eye was blogger: The Khan Quest.  The Kahn Quest blog  contained information like the ever-changing Wikipedia.  I just assumed that Wikipedia will forever be in constant change due to the nature of the site performance.  However, the blogger states that he/she does not see a change for the Wikipedia site in the future.  In a way, this blogger can talk about the stableness and the firmness of the site’s name, but at the same time, can’t explain much about the purpose of the site due to broad spectrum of the topic itself.  This is what I struggled with my past research topic.  I wasn’t sure whether consistency would help support my argument, or whether I needed to find a different subject that I can counter-attack the differences within the subject itself.  This blogger reminded me of my struggles with this research paper writing, and how much I was inconsistent with my arguments.

In a way, I am glad to be “almost” finished with my research paper, but at the same time, it’s hard to let go of a project that I have worked over a month.  Honestly, I don’t know how my research writing will turn out, but I know for sure that there will be a lot of revision and modification till my final research project becomes finalized.  Can’t wait to see my finished 7 week long project.

Some Assembly Required

Even though technology had helped aid in brining war victory, we can’t say that technology brought out the best in soldiers.  There are definitely negative effects of military technology advancement, like higher soldier’s death rates compared to the past death rates, when military technology was at its budding stage.  However, now that military technology is in full advancement, the creation of gadgets and machines that helps aid soldiers in war is actually causing more harm to the soldiers than good.  The soldiers become too dependent on military technology, and as a result, the soldiers slowly loose their intellectuals and their minds.  It could be said that they are slowly brainwashed by the effects of technological effect.  As Douglas Engelbart have stated in “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework”, “… man’s problem solving capability represents possibly the most important resource possessed by a society” (Engelbart).  The soldiers have the highest power of authority over themselves, and they have the capabilities to drive the military operations during wars.  However, by using military gadgets and tools, the soldiers loose their ability to think for themselves.   The soldiers rely heavily on physical mechanical aspects of military technology, instead of believing in a man’s problem solving capabilities.

Investigators Assemble!

Our world today is in constant change due to the introduction and upgrading of military technology. The idea of improving social well being in our societies, such as improving communication and transportation introduced by the military technology advancement, was a huge positive leap in our society. The invention of telephone and telegram in 19th century has enhanced modern life. And, in early 19th century, no one would have known the possibilities and capabilities of telephones, or having a global news network created by mere communicating phones. No one would have realized in 19th century, the capabilities and the potential power of simplified lives due to technology. In a way, technology productivity had lead to greater educational systems, improved comfortable life styles, and higher healthcare qualities. However, now, in 20th century, technology had integrated into our society’s system. We are too dependent on technology, and technology became the norm.

In today’s society, we are warped in sense of reality. The pace at which military technology is accelerating is ever so fast, that we cannot put a numerical value to its speed, nor can we predict the consequences of military technological growth. However, this was not the case back in the period of American Revolutionary War. The Revolutionary War was the first battle carrying the title of the “first ever victory won by the Americans” (Wright).   The American Revolutionary War lasted from 1775-1783 [note the years of the war]. In 1700’s main weapons used during the wars were: “muskets, pistols, swords, and cannons” (Wright). It would be a mistake to deny 1700’s military technological growth. Past developments may not have focused on drones and high technological electronic machines, but the introductions of weaponry, like cannons and pistols, have introduced the growth of military technology. And, the lack of knowledge in science and shortfalls of military technology’s growth, and the inadequacy of weapons, lead to less deaths in war zones compared to World War II death rates.

When comparing the military technology history between Revolutionary War and World War II, we can see an evident spike in military power growth. And, the effect of military weaponry changes from the past defends the alarming rate our military technology is headed towards in creating soldiers, like robots.   In American Revolutionary War, there were no machines used in the era of 1700’s. However, unlike the American Revolutionary War, the World War II used high-powered guns and nuclear bombs that caused more deaths and harms than compared to that of American Revolutionary War period. Also, there was a major change in history from World War II. The women became accepted into the role call of war. In the American Revolutionary War, the American men were willing to serve the country, to help seize freedom under from the English Parliament (Martin 173). However, in World War II (WWII), there were outnumbered death rates versus the men drafted for military that the concept of volunteering to head for war has diminished (“American History in Video”). Instead, most of the WWII men were required to serve, and left the women to play a major role in war. The shortage of military men brought about the idea and concept of Rosie the Riveter, a cultural icon representing the women who worked in factories to make weapons for the soldiers.

Women’s role call into war can be an evidence in proving the soldiers’ death rate differences in two wars: the American Revolutionary War versus the World War II. There were considerably less soldiers’ death rates in the American Revolutionary War due to lack of military technology deviation. However, in World War II, because we had more access to military technology, the more tragic the death rates became, and more likely the soldiers would die from the exposures of machine guns and nuclear bombs. If we solely compared the numbers of death caused by the military technological growth, specifically weaponry growth, we can state that not all changes were for the better. Even though military’s weapon revolution had brought victory overall in a war, but these advancements caused more harm than good. World War II was the start of military’s advanced technological development, and the main cause to blame for our soldiers’ attitudes and their intellectuals to diminish and slowly becoming robots.

Future Thoughts

Topic of war is a sticky subject, because of the devastating depth of cruelty, bloody-murderous results of war, and the merciless, criminal acts occurring without the punishment justification.  If we carefully observe the history of war, it’s saddening to know that there have never been a period without war.  There’s always a constant rage against one another whether in forms of catastrophe, homicide, or even genocide.  As for the future, we will never know what the future holds for us, but one thing is for sure; there will never be a period without war.  And, as dark and depressing this might sound, there will never be a period of peace.  But we hope someday that the word of peace may arise within us, and may peace wash away the fatal war.

As an optimist, I am writing this research paper to, someday find peace, and a world without war and violence.  At this rate of technology advancement, war will never be the same as it has been a decade ago.  And, in a decade later, we will find war as something casual and mundane.  There will be no celebration for winning the war, or time for mourning, for a new war will inevitably creep us back into inhuman war.  War will change the way we think about violence, and technology.  In a next decade or so, drones will replace soldiers, and soldiers will no longer need to put their life on the line for our freedom.  Nor will the “new” soldiers, also known as drones, will replace the concept of death.  Eventually, the concept of war in connection with casualty will decrease; only death we would find are machine malfunction, and in the end, supply and demand would take over.  If we need more drones and robots, because they were damaged in a war, they will create more robots to meet the demands.  In the end, war becomes a game, and a video game fantasy turning into reality.

———————————EDIT—————————————

One thing for sure, I definitely want to show the dark effects of robotic technology on U.S. soldiers by comparing past and present military operations and how they have used soldiers in wars.  Even though robotic technology advancement is proven to improve efficiency and proficiency of military operations, the rate at which technology is advancing, is in reality, a catalyst in producing human robot soldiers.

Through my research paper, I wish to make a statement to the audience (to inform my audience), that not all technology advancement will benefit humanity, especially in focus with military technology advancement.  My argument will lean towards the diagnosis of the problem, and emphasizing the wrong path military technology is changing the concept and definition of an individual soldier.  Diagnosis:  how much technology advancement has changed American soldiers, and how in the future, it will impact soldier’s emotions, empathy, and their will to serve our country.  And, to prove my argumentative points, I will be approaching and tackling my research topic question with evidence and proof to back up my claim: technology will eventually create soldiers, who will act and move like robots.

As for the use of drone, I want to compare drone versus soldiers, to define what it means to be an American soldier.  And, use this part as a back-up statement evidence that someday United States soldiers will eventually become robots themselves due to military’s heavily use of technology and gadgets.  Due to military technology advancement, soldiers will be too heavily dependent on gadgets and machines.  This will inevitably lead soldiers to become the puppets of military operations, and the machines would control humanity without our knowledge.