An Ever Changing World(MARK THIS ONE)

In an Ever Changing World, When it Comes to Keeping Up with Technology, We Just Cant Win

From clay tablets to scribe, from the printing press to computer printing, how we go about attaining our knowledge today is much different then our past.

There are two different societies which man has evolved through when it comes to technology. You have your space binding societies and your time binding societies. I believe the video entitled "Monk needs help opening a book" is a classic example of what it is like transferring from a time binding society to a space binding society, or even just progressively transferring through a society that is getting ready to launch "the next big invention". Even though the next big invention may be coming out you may still be comfortable with the old technology.

Basically a time binding society is a society that uses more older customs such as epic poems, scribes or manuscripts ( what the video is portraying). A time binding society also reaches a limited number of people and isn't intended to mass audiences, and mostly promotes stability and tradition ( Sevigny, 1A03 lecture, Sept 23rd 2009).

Where as a space binding society is the society we are currently living in right now. This type of society is intended to get a lot of information out as quick as possible over a vast distance, and promotes rapid change. A classic example of this would be the emergence of Blackberries ( Sevigny, 1A03 lecture, Sept 23rd 2009).

This video is basically portraying how quickly technology is changing these days. It is going so fast that older people who mostly grew up in time binding societies (newspaper stands and radios) can't understand our technology out these days (Blackberries, i-Phones, laptops).

Now, lets compare the monk in the video to an elderly person trying to use a computer program, lets say Microsoft Word. Then we will compare the book to a fancy new Apple computer.

First off in the video the monk calls for assistance from a younger individual (perhaps more up to date with the times) because he cant figure out how to open the book and once he figured out how to open the book he was afraid he would lose the text once he closed it, or didn't even know where the text went after that page was done.

Now, comparing that to now a days, that would be similar to an elderly person trying to turn on a Mac computer finding and opening Microsoft Word and opening a blank document. Most likely having to call their grandchildren to help them out.

Secondly, in the video when the monk is taught how to turn the page, and is shown how to, he asks now what if i want to go back and get the other texts?

You could compare this to an elderly person trying to open many different windows on a computer at once and then wanting to go back to Microsoft word, but not knowing where it is among the countless number of windows.

Overall what I found interesting in the video is how they compared the book to the scroll. I think this portrays how quickly one invention can become obsolete and how we are quickly moving through a space binding society. At one point in time you may have the newest type of blackberry, then one week later there is a new type of blackberry out, putting yours to shame. The scroll is like the older version of the blackberry and the book is the newer improved version of the blackberry that just came out a week later.

No matter what time period you live in, at one point in time in your life you may think you have the newest form of technology, then all you have to do is wait a week later and you will be sorely disappointed with your now obsolete investment.

Image Reference:

Scott, Jerry and Jim Borgman. Busted!. Cincinnati. Andrews and Mcmeel: 2002. Retrieved from:http://www.minidisc.org/zits_md_cartoon.gif

Scott, Jerry and Jim Borgman. Rude, Crude, and Tattooed.Cincinnati. Andrews and Mcmeel: 2007. Retrieved from: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/maasx003/Vikings/images/Zits.gif

Is Selective Listening Really that Bad?(MARK THIS ONE)

There's Nothing Faulty about Selective Listening

Just because we are not listening, doesn't necessarily mean we are not paying attention.

In lecture seven we talked about listening and the faulty listening behaviors, like selective listening. But just because we are doing selective listening necessarily doesn't make it a "faulty listening behaviour."

I am interlinking this statement with the link called "Resisting Persuasion and Selective Response". This link talks about all the way in which someone can protect themselves from being persuaded by a speaker and using selective response or selective listening is a technique, and yet it also considered a "Faulty" listening behavior.

Selective Listening is when you listen to parts of a conversation that you want to hear, or that interest you (Sevigny. Cmst 1ao3. Oct.14.2009.)

Now under Dr. Sevigny notes it mentions these as faulty listening behaviors, but in the article it mentions these as ways to resist persuasion. Now isn't resisting persuasion usually a good thing?

In everyday conversations between couples arguments are bound to happen and each individual will feel very strong about their opinion or what they are fighting for. They are trying to avoid giving in to what the other person is saying, and how the other person may be trying to convince their spouse to see their side of the argument more, and that maybe, just maybe their opinion was wrong. By using selective listening people can ignore what they feel is giberish and that there spouse is just trying to sweet talk them or lay guilt on them, because in fact they may have no actual evidence, they are just trying to persuade them to thinking that their own opinion and belief is wrong. This is an example where selective listening could save the day and make your argument seem more legitimate because your didn't fall into the trap of them trying to persuade you.

Not only do everyday couples use selective listening when they get into arguments with one another, I personally believe that politicians do a very good job of using selective listening against their opponents. They use it in a way where they absorb the information they want to here but the information that means nothing to them or that they believe has no relevance, they flush away. However, one has to be aware of the amount and degree of selective listening they are doing because personally I believe it could turn into ambushing. Ambushing is where one listens carefully to pick out information to use it and attack and what you are saying ( Adler, Rodman, and Sevigny 135).

You, as a listener have to be able to listen to ones arguments and use the method of selective listening to a point where it is helping you block out the information they are trying to use to persuade you and gather their legitimate information. But, you also must keep in mind the amount of information you are taking in and what you are going to say in response to their statement.

Remember, no one likes an ambushing!

Work Cited:

Adler. B, Ronald, George Rodman, and Alexandre Sevigny. Understanding Human Communications. Ontario. Oxford University Press: 2008.

Sevigny, Alexandre. Cmst 1A03. Lecture notes. Oct. 14 2009.

Image Retrieved From:

Scott, Jerry and Jim Borgman. Rude, Crude, and Tattooed. Cincinnati. Andrews and McMeel: 2007. Retrieved from: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/Listening.gif. on Oct.15 2009.