Blog Entry #3

For my third blog entry, I will analyze the second book I have read by Neil Postman, “Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology.” Throughout this book, Postman takes a more opinionated stance on the impact of technology on society. There are many areas of the first 90 pages in which I agree but also a few areas where I disagree, mostly where Postman begins to exaggerate.

It seems the main point in which Postman is trying to prove, is that technology has an effect on all things, and that all things are based off of technology. While we all know, Postman’s opinion is not all true; he makes a very good point. Our society has become so surrounded by computers and other forms of technology, they have slowly begun to take the place of many other old fashioned and traditional methods.

The first example that comes to mind when I think about replacing old methods with more modern ones, is Postman’s example involving Televisions. As TV’s have become extremely innovative, modern, and more ideal, they have also become more popular for everyday use. As the use of television gradually becomes more frequent, at the same time it replaces activities such as reading and studying.

Throughout this part of the book, Postman brings about two terms that play a large role in helping understand his view on this relationship between society and technology. The first term he uses to describe the development and process of our society gradually becoming dependant on technology is ‘technocrocy.’ It is described in more detail as the era where people began to recognize that “knowledge is power, humanity is capable of progressing, that poverty is a great evil, and that the life of the average person is as meaningful as any other” (pg. 38). This definition proves there was a time period where a main concern was improving technology as it would bring us greater knowledge, success, and power.

The second term which Postman describes is ‘technopoly,’ where he claims that everything throughout society and every aspect of cultural life is ‘sovereign’ to ways and makings of technology. Although, I agree that our society relies a great deal on technology, I have a hard time agreeing with the fact that our society and cultures are sovereign to it. There are still many aspects of life that have no relevance to technology and would not be affected if there were a breakdown in the world of technology. On the other side, Postman shows a great amount of support in his idea that a whole society can be, and possibly is, completely reliant on technology. He states, “Technopoly…is a state of culture…which means that the state of culture seeks its authorization in technology, finds its satisfactions in technology, and takes its orders from technology" (p 71).  This last quote gives me reason to both agree, and disagree with the beginning of Neil Postman’s book. I do believe that our cultures and society as a whole are very reliant on technology, and do find a very large amount of satisfaction in its many abilities. I don’t, on the other hand, feel that every aspect of society focuses itself on the approval and ‘authorization’ of technology. The beginning of Neil Postman’s book, “Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology,” already, has given me a much better idea of the opinion the author has on the relationship between society and technology.