According to this chapter entitled "From Technocracy to Technopoly," a "technocracy is a society only controlled by a social custom and religious tradition and driven by the impulse to prevent." This writing basically states how 19th-century technical skills have cntinued to shape the rest of technological society to this day. It also demonstrates that technocracies and technopolies have completely erased our ongoing tradition throughout history in the world by creating new invention after invention, where we are now finding it difficult to keep up. "Alfred North Whitehead summed it up best when he remarked that the greatest invention of the nineteenth century was the idea of invention itself."

2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal

After reading only a snippet of the article, “2045: The Year a Man Becomes Immortal,” I quickly concluded that the proposals that Kurzweil expressed are borderline insane. I believe that his opinions on our future technology are definitely not healthy for society at all. I am a true believer in Jesus Christ, and I will stand firm when I say that I personally would not want to have artificial intelligence or live for the rest of eternity. I believe that one should be proud to age gracefully, and if they want to become more intelligent, they don’t have to have something put into their brains to progress their minds. They are perfectly capable of sitting down and reading an actual book, knowing and being proud that they did this on their own. I believe that people who want the impossible (i.e. to become immortal) are trying to cheat their way out of the system, the system being content with aging and progressing through life, gracefully and naturally. I think the whole idea goes back to the all-famous theme of never being fully satisfied with what you have. People have now begun to think that they are capable and deserving of living for all of eternity, when they really don’t need to. I’m not saying I believe that these philosophies aren’t realistic, because “it’s not a fringe idea; it’s a serious hypothesis about the future of life on Earth”. I think that we have made it this far technologically, so there’s really no stopping us now. But I do believe that such extremes as these are pointless and not needed. Pretty soon we won’t know the difference between what’s real and what’s made from a computer…there will be a “transformation of our species into something that is no longer recognizable”. I believe that God intended for this earth to be something beautiful that HE created, just like the earth was 6,000 years ago when Jesus walked on it. 

Critical Reading

90 Minutes in the Badlands

The author's purpose for this writing was to critique a movie, Badlands (1973), that is out of the ordinary, but that is what makes it special. It is meant to show the audience that not all movies have to be the traditional "boy meets girl" type, but they can have the same meaning when you don't have the same kind of plot. The author is attempting to critique a movie that isn't like every other movie out there, but this gives it a unique taste to it. Hollywood is now able to not have to "play by the rules," but they are able to slowly come out of their shell and create something that an audience wouldn't expect. The flaws and differentiaries of this movie make it a wonderful work of art. The audience of this article would be the type that are looking for a movie that isn't the classic "cookie-cutter" type of genre, but it gives a different look on modern Hollywood. People want something that is different, not like something they've seen a hundred times before. This article says that the movie gives a unique spin on American films, and how it can change the image of Hollywood as we know it. The author intends for her audience to have a sense of spirit, and a willingness to experience a change in something they've known of as a certain way, for once. The author wants people to know that there are American movies out there that aren't like everything else that we know of, and have known of for years. She points out that if we are willing to take a chance on changing how we know everyday movie-making, then "it really doesn't get any better than Badlands". This main subject is the fact that this movie shows diversity in the movie-making industry, and that is what makes it great. The subject is appreciated by the target audience because it critiques a film that made history for being completely out of the ordinary, and the audience would admire that. The thesis for this article is that if you strive and crave something rare or original, then this would be the movie for you. It critiques the parts that aren't exactly ideal, but also the plots that people appreciate to this day. The author proves that movies don't all have to be the same for the rest of American movie-making-eternity. Certain films, like this one, can give you a sense of commendability for its complete diversity. The evidence that is considered appropriate in this article is the fact that she gives both points a say in it. In other words, both opinions for the film are addressed. Some points that would be considered inappropriate for the evidence for this article would be how she words certain phrases, such as "predictable at best" and "forgettable and cheap." This gives the article a dramatic sense of cockiness towards the audience, because it gives off an emotion of knowing film-making to a higher extent than a professional would. The transitions from subject to subject run smoothlyand unified. The article starts out with a short summary of the plotline, and follows along with a critique on how the film was handled and how the storyline was brought upon to the audience. The author's language gives the article a feel of it possibly being written by a college student for an assignment meant to being turned in. Some terms gave the feel a little less maturity, and it threw me off slightly while reading. The author seemed to have little knowledge on the subject from recalling to her writing. This would be because some of her only remarks would be negative, and how the death-scenes would be considered "cheap." But if she really grasped the concept of not having a lot of technology when the movie was made(1973), she would be able to understand how the film changed much ciritcal thinking within Hollywood directing, because of its unique ideas presented throughout the film, both inside the camera and out.

The insights I gained from this assignment gave me a much more broad thought-process about critical thinking. It gave me more freedom to say what I want to say, without worrying about it meeting certain expectations, which ultimately results in better writing, in my opinion.