Phill Oostdyk
Dr. Adam Johns
ENGCMP 0200
Whether it is realized or not, the unknown is something that every human seems to fear. A new mother fears giving birth for the first time. A freshman fears his first day of high school. Fear of the unknown future always comes to the forefront. It is human nature for a person to know everything about them and around them. When someone is faced with the unknown, the first reaction is, if even for a second, fear.
In Frankenstein, there is fear in the unknown of the technology he developed. Frankenstein blindly creates something not acknowledging his fear of the unknown. When the monster is brought to life and the idea becomes reality, the fear finally sets in. Not understanding what the monster is or what it will do strikes fear into Frankenstein’s heart. His fear initially prevents Frankenstein from sharing the news of his new monster. His fear even keeps him from understanding his creation. Not giving into to any intial fear that Frankenstein may of had allowed him to create life. If Frankenstein's fear had not set in at the end, he could of stepped back and appreciated what he accomplished, both for himself and the human race.
Joy portrays the same type of fear in his essay, only as a before the fact emotion. He fears the unknown of having artificial intelligence and nanotechnology in existence. He fears the self-replication capability of this technology. Joy fears that their existence would lead to the end of the human race. If this technology comes to fruition and his fears are right, then Joy’s fears would be justified. But what if Joy's fears are not? What if this technology could lead to saving millions of human lives? This future technology could be the best thing to happen to the human race, but it might also not. That is the unknown of invention. That is the fear of the unknown. Listening to this fear unknown inhibits the growth of the technology.
What if everyone gave into their fears? Most kids would not make it to high school. Some women wouldn't give birth. If every scientist gave into their fear of future technology, then there would never be any. People should not give into their fears. The unknown is the thing that people are scared of and prevent the feeling. Fear must be overcome to bring about change. If it is not, then we would still be riding horses, using candles, and cooking over open fires.
Today, new technology has the same effect. People like to live their lives in the status quo. Over coming the fear, though, can bring about good things. An elderly woman could take a chance of falling on ice and hurting herself because she wanted to go to teller instead of facing her fear and using a the ATM or a debit card. The excuse may be because she is too old to learn how to use the new machines, but it may not be the wisest choice. Although they do not admit it as fear, it is there.
This is not an essay to promote the complete blindness to this fear. It will always be there, in everybody to varying degrees. This is just to say that the fear should be acknowledged, listened to if need be, and push past it. Irrational blindness to fear of the unknown could lead to chaos. Joy is listening to his fear, but so much that it would prevent technological progress. This future technology could be the answer to things like human disease. If Joy's fear is heeded to the point of preventing progress, then we may never find cures to some diseases.
Over coming one's fears is not also beneficial to the whole, as in new technology. Over coming one's fears could also be beneficial to one's self. Fear can be a prohibitive and restrictive emotion. Listening to your fear is one thing, giving in to it is a is another. If people let it hold them back, then there would be no pilots, astronauts, or deep sea divers. If pushing past your fear can involve the little things like elderly people using modern technology or even starting a new job.
Fear of the unknown can hold people at bay and prevent them from venturing forward. Most people would not enter a dark cave because they do not know what is inside. However, if everyone followed this, no caves would ever be explored. The same is with technology. If every scientist read Joy’s essay and agreed with it, no one would invent the technology. The fact of the matter is that we need to both listen this fear of the unknown and respect it, but push past it and not let it prohibit us. If humans hold onto this fear, then we get nowhere.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Glenn Goss
Blog Response
This was a well written paper with various effective examples. Upon reading it I felt that there was no definite argument imposed. One sentence in the paper, in particular, sticks out in my mind: "The fact of the matter is that we need to both heed this fear of the unknown and respect it". Most, if not all readers, cannot disagree with this assertion. Examples upholding both sides of this statement are present throughout the paper. One way to mend some of the contradictions found in the paper would be to stick to a side and elaborate on it. There are various pathways one could take when discussing human fear. Something that comes to mind is the fact that human fear could make us stronger as people because it gives us the opportunity to overcome our fears. Some avoid their fears, while others face them head on. The human mind is a fragile, yet very complex thing. Making the personal decision to shy away from one's fears or to come into contact with them has the potential to greatly alter the way one lives life itself and interprets everyday things. Overcoming fears can result in a feeling of satisfaction. So I'll ask the question; should human beings face their fears or suppress them as if they were never there?
Glenn - this is a perfectly decent response, especially since you were in the tough position of following up on the class as a whole.
Phil - As in the original version, there's some good writing here. Unlike in the original version, you've developed a much clearer focus, and you're taking a side in this argument. Most of your writing in defense of your side is thoughtful and provocative - but it is still plagued, from beginning to end, by a really problematic vagueness. Look at this quote: "Joy is listening to his fear, but so much that it would prevent technological progress."
It's a good thought - but what is it based on? Nowhere here do you actually mount and defend an argument explaining how and where Joy is listening to his fear too much. Where, for instance, is his analysis of nanotechnology wrong? Or where does he fall prey to fear, by ignoring possible safeguards?
Your writing is good, the idea is thoughtful, and the *theme* of the fear of the unknown here is great. Where you ultimately fall down - badly - is that you don't actually do anything at all to demonstrate that Joy is falling prey to this fear.
I enjoyed reading the paper, but that's because of the quality of writing and the imaginative central theme - not because of the flawed main argument.
Post a Comment