WS 3371 Fall 2007

I agree with the 'Mother' article. I've been trying to explain to my dad why I text so much. He says, "Why not just call the person" and I answer "Because I just want to say one thing". However, at this point, I don't have a sufficient answer on why that single text led to a series of 20 texts. Maybe my dad will understand once he starts texting to. Like the author said it could be a desire he never knew he had.

I also wonder what the next 'big wheel' will be. I'd have to say something in the medical field. Cure for cancer, AIDs maybe.

As for the 'Happiness' article. I always get excited when I get a new cell phone. It lasts only a week or so but I still can't imagine life without a cell phone. Not having one would be more stressful to me. I could never be Amish. I like being busy and messing with gadgets.

“Technology and Happiness”— Does technology buy happiness? This is a tough question that can be argued either way. However, I believe that for the most part, technology does relate happiness. Technology tends to make people more efficient in their daily tasks. Thus, people should be happy that they have more quality time to spend with family or friends. Sometimes purchasing the latest gadget makes people happier even if it is just for awhile. I am not saying that the newest technologies make me a happier person. For example, purchasing a new outfit or the latest cell phone or computer wouldn’t make me any happier than I already am. However, if someone were to take those things away, I might not be the world’s happiest person. I think society relies heavily upon technology. Without it, many people probably wouldn’t be able to function.

“Invention’s New Mother”— Necessity is the mother of invention. Klosterman makes a good point about what happens when necessity no longer exists. Do we, as Americans, really need anything more??? I agree with Klosterman about inane technologies. I mean do we really need TiVo or texting??? Some things on the market are absolutely ridiculous! However, at the same time, I feel there are other possible routes of discovery in the technological field. For instance, medical discoveries and alternative/renewable energy resources are great benefits to mankind.

I thought the article “Invention’s New Mother” was hilarious. I loved the part about the refrigerator keeping things cool and oven making things hot but how could one ever achieve room temperature, “ah! the room”. It is interesting how a new technology will come along that one wouldn’t have thought one would ever need. Freezing TV is not an essential need, but now that it is here I can’t imagine watching TV on “their time”. I think it is interesting to go out to best buy, circuit city, or one of those little stands at malls that show off new wacky technologies and see just what is out there. I can’t think anything off the top of my head, but a lot of times these new technologies will be something like a holder for you cup holder. It reminds me of a TV commercial that I saw “on my time” about a company that has a slogan that says, “We don’t make the things you use; we make the things you use better.”

My last 5 texts:
"Bed me time"
"Party?"
"Party 4th and franklin"
"Tell dem to looook at da menou"
"Hate life. Anger is back"

Last one was when school started again

As far as for the article about happiness I am not sure whether trying to connect technology and happiness is valid. One can generalize to everything that exists rather than just technology. Do material things make humanity happy. One could try and be more specific by saying technology is the specific material thing that is in question; however, I am not sure if you can make that connection. Material things can be correlated with happiness, but the idea of technology I believe cannot. Ultimately everything is a material thing with some being more abstract material things than others. The computers we use to write these blogs and the internet that allows us to connect to the site are no different than a pants we wear or forks we use to eat. I do not see a way that one can isolate “technology” as a source of study without making a connection to other material things.

As far as “Invention’s New Mother” article goes, I have never text-ed and don’t see the point. The author made it clear that he sends pointless text’s that he would normally not even say to the person standing right next to him. So why do people waste their time??? I have a sister that is 27—single mom who is constantly text-ing. She used to have the phone basically glued to her ear but now her fingers are stuck on her phone key pad. My mom always taught me to say something nice or nothing at all—doesn’t that convert to: make a phone call that has meaning or don’t send a pointless time wasting text. I feel text messages are like junk mail, pointless and they take up space.

“Technology and Happiness” was more exciting to read and I found some information rather interesting. I grew up in a small rural town and we had a sense of community. Living in St. Paul for the last four years, I don’t have that sense of community—it seems that there is a different community. Like the campus community or my sorority community. Technology like the wheel can bring a community closer but technology like the enormous internet can make us feel disconnected from our community (unless it is a community web page being viewed). I feel happiness comes from a sense of connection/community. I also think the older we get the more we understand and worry about so that could decrease our happiness with life.

The article “Technology and Happiness” raises a long debated question; does money buy happiness? I believe that this is a question with many possible outcomes and really depends upon the person answering the question. If someone grew up in a relatively poor family and then got a job where they made more money than they were previously used to, and thus able to live more comfortably then I believe yes it can buy happiness. However, in the case of a money hungry executive of big business who has become so engrossed with their income that they turn to embezzlement and ultimately ends up in jail; I would say the answer is no. I personally believe that having more money makes it easier to enjoy certain things but it does not necessarily equal happiness. If you make enough money that you are able to live comfortably and not have to struggle to pay your bills, while also being able to go on vacation and do the activities you desire then I believe money only enables you to do these things with more ease. It is up to the individual however, to choose to be happy or not within their daily lives. If someone has a disease such as depression, and is unable to be happy because of a physical ailment all the money in the world would not help that person to be happy. It would enable them to get the help they needed in an easier manner, but ultimately their happiness would be up to them.
As for the “Invention’s New Mother” article I believe the reason texting has become so popular is because of convenience. People are often times rushed and they would just prefer to send a quick text to someone else to let them know what they are thinking, rather that go through the formalities that accompany a phone conversation. I think the reason texting caught on so quickly is because it was something new that had never been done before. People always had the option to talk on the phone but never send a message to someone in the manner that texting allows. I think people adopted texting much in the same fashion that email became so popular. It allowed you to talk to someone in a less formal manner but still get a hold of them quickly. Although I do not think this is necessarily a good thing, this disconnected form of communication, I do think it will stick around until something new comes along to replace it.

I think it’s hard to judge whether or not I’m happier with the latest technology. I guess the best I can say is that I would be unhappy if that technology was taken away from me. But the “Technology and Happiness” article suggests that I don’t even know what makes me happy or unhappy. However, one point the article mentions that I think is very true is that people have a hard time being happy when other people have more or better things. As much as you don’t want it to be true, sometimes you can’t help thinking, “I wish I had that…” and I think that’s the reason why people aren’t as happy with technology. There are just so many different technologies out there and each one gets improved in a matter of months that it’s hard not to feel envious 24/7.
As for the texting article, I agree that technology has sort of taken care of those necessities and now we’re left with whatever else we can think of. But I think society adapts to new technology in a way that it doesn’t matter if you needed it, after you use, you’re going to need it (or at least think you do). For example, did I really need a cell phone? Before the time of cell phones, a landline worked just fine and if I wasn’t near my phone, well that’s what answering machines were for. But the minute you start using a cell phone, it’s hard to imagine how you functioned without it. I think text messaging is the same. Sure I could just call my friend and say what I need to say, but that takes effort. Sure it takes a lot of effort to type in letters on a little keypad (and if you’re like me refuse to learn T9word and just type each letter individually) but it also takes effort in dialing, waiting for the person to answer, the exchanging of “hello” and “what’s up?” and finally getting to what you wanted to say. Sometimes I just want to text my dad and say “car needs gas” and have that be the end of it.

I believe that text messaging is a bad tool for society in general, and that it can cause unhappiness for a person. I enjoy talking to people, and if I don't have anything important to say, I usually won't say it. On the other hand, I believe that text messaging invites unimportant information. I feel that if you really need to convey information, it should at least be of interest to make sure the other person receives it. What if my cell phone is off? What if I don't get a signal? The person sending the text obviously doesn't feel that their message is important enough to make sure it was received.

Text messaging also takes the intimacy out of communication. I enjoy communicating with others over the phone, or more so, face to face. A lot of communication is supposedly non-verbal; it is no wonder technology doesn't make people happy, it takes the fun out of something like communicating. Well, at least in the text messaging sense.

I couldn't find myself seeing how legit the argument was about how happy we are today compared to people in 1946. A lot has happened since then. The population of the world nearly doubled since 1946. Now I am positive that making babies does not require any technology. People can simply get stressed out by one another with less and less personal space. I guess the point I am trying to make is that there are other factors that are making people less happy besides technology. There is no doubt that technology around us is creating an environment that is stressful. The article compares technology negatively with happiness. However, imagine if we took everything away and live simpler than the Amish (I am talking about bow and arrows). What kinda of chaotic world would we live in then? People fighting over who gets to pick the apple off the tree. I bet people would be much happy to just go and buy an apple at a market and pay for it with a credit card.

"Technology and Happiness"
I don't think technology itself has anything to do with how happy or sad people are in society. In my opinion, I would say happiness comes from achieving a goal, getting an A on a test, earning a high paying job, or just living the life you wanted. If I'm not the only one that feels this way, then that could be the reason why the happiness percentage is still the same as in the 1940's.

"Invention's New Mother"
Relating to the first comment made, my mom also asks me why I would ever need to text. And honestly, I don't really have an answer for her either. Whether it's the new cool thing to do or whatever, I don't have a clue.

In response to Surowiecki’s article, The Amish live in their own communities and, therefore, they are not able to meet as many people or make as many friends as a normal person in today’s society will have the opportunity to. As the numbers in the article suggest, however, the Amish apparently do not need to meet people they otherwise would not have met in order to be happy. However, to counter that point, I do not understand how one could not want to take the initiative to use modern communications devices to meet new people and keep track of those who are so distant from you? I will admit that I am not the most outgoing person in the world, but through online forums, phone calls, and online networking sites I have met so many people that I would not have if I were part of a community that rejected many modern communications devices. Consequently, I’m not sure that I would agree with the assertion that technology is holding us back. If anything, I think it has helped us expand our communities and friends – a quality that Surowiecki attributed to the tech-free Amish. I do agree that technology can distract us and make us lose focus of what’s truly important in life, but I do not think that technology is the variable that makes us so much less happy than the Amish.

I think the most interesting finding from the article “Technology and Happiness”, was the fact that most people are not happier than they were in the past (and in some cases, even less happy/satisfied with their lives). It seems that these technological advances such as cell phones and the internet add a little bit of efficiency in our lives, but come with much stress as well. I think too, that much of the reason that technology takes such an importance in our lives is because we rely on it to help us keep up with the rest of society. I mean, no one likes to be thought of as “that person living in the 1920’s. Technology, I believe, resembles a type of “keeping up with the Jones’”. Here, we spend so much time trying to like, as good, as technological as everyone else, that it drives people crazy and frustrates them. Technologies can offer such great things… but when we start to use these items as the ever important tools of life, we become challenge with the extra stress and uncertainty that these items bring.

I find many of Surowiecki's ideas, as strong points. It is hard to deny how fast-paced and chaotic life in the information age is. Patience is a dying virtue, victim to the capitalist monster of a competetive market. If it can be done faster people will not wait. I feel the advancements are not making us happier, it just allows more of us to be happy. Technology allows many more people to exist. Even though technology seems to do little for individual levels of happiness, it allows a far larger population to be moderatly happy. I feel this may be one of the driving forces behind the technological jugernaught of modern science.
I, on the other hand, I am a gadget junky! I love new techy toys just for the awe inspired by inovation. But I do find it only makes me happy because I enjoy the discovery of new capabilities rather then the actual application. (I never really need everthing I want/purchase). Therefore, I do believe that technology does contribute to people's happiness, even if it is not in a concrete way.

In "Technology and Happiness" it is important to notice that the author said that prosperity does not necissarily make people unhappy, just not happier. If people are not more unhappy then I don't see what the big deal is. I don't think that it is fair to suggest that more technology could make a person less happy. It's all in the way the person uses it. For example, I have a friend who says "I am so stressed out; people won't stop calling me." I just say to her "Well, stop answering your phone. Let them leave a voice mail; call them back if it is important." In "The Technological Imperative" the author says that today we are inventing solutions to problems that don't exist. That may be so, but I think that we have to. We can't just quit thinking because we don't have to. Today, we all say "I could never live without (technology X)", but we all did live without it. The same thing was probably said after the invention of the wheel.

I really enjoyed both of these articles and thought they had very valid points. "Invention's new mother" was actually pretty funny while still making a good argument. I truly believe that we are running out of unsolved problems. This reminds me of those stupid late night info-commercials. They are trying to sell some of the dumbest things lately. The one product that sticks out most in my mind is the Silver Bullet. The commercial is on all the time and it is just a small blender with a removable cup and multiple blades. The people (actors) pretend that it makes life so easy because it takes less time to cook. Now I would never think of needing a product like that. Like the article says, "We now have to make up solutions to problems that don't exist."

The most interesting part to me about the technology and happiness article is how we take our technology for granted. I like how the author says DSL users should use dial up every once and a while to appreciate high speed internet more. This is so true, I don't even have the patients in DSL takes more that a couple seconds to load a page. I agree that more technology can make us unhappy. I can see it in my own life sometime, because I am so efficient using a lot of technology I now can do more. I often find myself stressed out and tired because I am trying to pack so much into my schedule.

“Technology and Happiness”

Throughout this entire article the author continually references different studies that were executed by respectable universities and research centers, however failed to truly ever cite any of theses studies. There wasn’t ever any true support for the opposing viewpoint either, I mean, sometimes attaining that new bit of technology makes people happy for more than just a week. I’m currently sitting and typing away on my computer, which may not be brand new, however it still makes me happy to see it sitting on my desk when I come home… loyal little bugger. It is easy to see the point the author makes about how easily angered we are by technology if it’s not fast enough or makes a mistake. I have found myself cursing at a blown speaker or two in my time, or the blue screen of death that accompanies any windows operating system.
If the surveys were valid and there was more proof of these studies on development of technology over time in Japan in relation with the happiness of the people, it would be a good indicator that the acquiring of technology did indeed not aid in people’s overall happiness, but we do not know the validity of these surveys or what types of questions they addressed. I also find it hard to believe that the level of happiness has not increased in the U.S. from 1946, and had fallen from 1970. At the same time though I wonder if technology has taken away so much of the work that used to have to be done by hand that it has created a restless society that may have the advantage of working longer and have a higher level of productivity, but does not receive that physical stimulation that comes from doing manual labor.

“Inventions New Mother”

This article allowed me to look around and notice just how many people are continually texting, myself included. The author is correct when they speak of texting as one of those bits of technology that you never knew that you wanted, but find yourself feeling benefited from having it. I wonder what would happen to the world if all of a sudden all instantaneous communications such as this were taken away in an instant. Would it cause a collapse in order and cause a massive riot? Or would people be able to shrug it off and go back to writing letters and using maps to navigate roads?

Both of these articles were quite interesting. Jenna Pomerenke posted a great question that I'd like to speak to. She stated, "do we need anything more?" Well the answer to that is HECK NO! TiVo and text messaging are examples of luxaries and wants -- there's a big difference. I, too was a person that vowed to never get into text messaging, using the camara on the phone, and even getting a MySpace page. But guess what? I use my camara phone, I text message and I have a MySpace account. And you know it's bad when you have unlimited text messaging per month. I think our society tries these new features and gadgets out and get addicted. I know that's my case.

In Technology and Happiness, Surowiecki raises a great debate. I will say that I agree with the fact that money does not buy happiness. It seems as though we [the fans] are seeing that famous people aren't as happy as they portray themselves to be. Examples? The infamous Britany Spears, Nicole Richie, Paris Hilton, Olsen twins, even the great comedian Owen Wilson. The list could go on and on. But these people are rich, famous, and have everything given to them, but they're unhappy. I think about the show that comes on VH1 that discusses how these stars live and how they're pets are living larger than us, etc., but then when you see them being discussed negatively on the news, you know there's something wrong. I said all of that to say that I agree with this author. Money does not buy happiness and technology certainly doesn't either. I think they serve as temporal distractions.

Technology and Happiness
"Easterlin showed that though poverty was strongly correlated with misery, once a country was solidly middle-class, getting wealthier didn't seem to make its citizens any happier." This statement prompted me to wonder whether there is a certain standard of living that then decides whether a person is happy or unhappy. I'm sure there is gray area, but it is interesting to consider what a person truly may "need" to live a happy, healthy lifestyle. Where should we draw the line? Generally, I tend to believe that people are happiest when they find themselves somewhere in the middle. Extremes tend to be over-exhausting for different reasons. Perhaps that ideology can be applied to technology as well.

I could easily think of many examples of "hedonic adaption" in our society today. Practically all of the technology we use is taken for granted by society. We forget that we once lived without it. I don't know if this is necessarily a danger, but it doesn't seem to fit well with a lifestyle of appreciation and thanks for what we have been fortunate enough to experience (If you are one who considers yourself fortunate to have experienced the technology of today- or at least parts of it).

I liked how the Technology and Happiness article chose the Amish community as a specific example of how, counter to the majority of americans, view technology as something to be avoided. I actually had a friend who went and lived with such people and reported it as being one of the most eye opening experiences of his life. He was quite a selfish and materialistic fellow so it must have given him much to think about. If i were writing this story i think i would have chosen to focus more on the buddhist community, in particular people who have chosen to take up the monastic lifestyle. As most people know, monks live with only the neccesities of life i.e. an alms bowl, two changes of robes et., but according to a study done with MRI monks seem to be the happiest people on the earth (not quite sure how they determine this with machines)Another story highlighting the message of the reading comes from a little place know as Bhutan. The king there once told two western travellers, horrified by the poverty of his country, they were more concerned with gross national happiness than the western holy grail of simply GDP. Many here seem to have the idea that the two are interconnected and a rise in one will lead to an increase in the other. Wake up people... the sooner you realize this the better.

It seems that the old adage: money can't buy happiness applies to the article "Technology and Happiness". Money can buy technology however. I think it is interesting that Suroweicki draws a parallel between technology and happiness. When i think of the two I don't really see any direct correlation in my own life. I see what the author means by technology being utilitarian, and I guess in that way it could lead to happiness but not be the direct result.

I really enjoy reading the article "Technology and Happiness" written by James Surowiecki. This article recalled one of the psychology I took during summer term called Authentic Happiness. Basically we discussed does materials such as ipod, iphone really make up happier? From the past study it shows, for a short term, yes the person might feel happier when they get the item, however after awhile they are back to the normal level again. Which indicates they aren't truly happy in researchers view. However in contrast, what happen if the person not getting the things they need? They become unhappy, of course same effect its only short term effect, people will be back to their normal level once again.

In my point of view, we will and always be pursuiting something that we call happiness which in this case, we materialize it as technology, when new technology first come out, our eager of want to get that thing might make us short term happiness, however the true happiness relys on how we want our life be like. If we think we get everything we need, like Amish people, we can live happyly without technology. So in my point of view, there won't be an equal mark that states technology bring more happiness to the society

Technology and Happiness- Constitutionally speaking, we all have the right for the pursuit of happiness. Notice how it is the ‘pursuit’ not the ‘achievement’ of happiness. I think from the beginning people have always pursued happiness, in our era it happens to be through technology that we seek happiness. Do we ever achieve perfect happiness? Probably not, but I think it is the journey is what people crave, not the ending. As Surowiecki said, adjusting to technology is very easy and we do take it for granite almost immediately. I believe this is because we are on the constant search for something more.

I don’t believe happiness is necessarily directly correlated to advancement of technology or wealth. Although I agree it does have an impact to a certain degree I don’t think it is the only factor in the equation. Call me old fashioned, but I think happiness should come from within.

Invention’s New Mother- After having a couple of drama full moments through text messaging, I have come to a personal conclusion. Texting is a more passive aggressive way of communicating then speaking on the phone, or in person. It is an easy way out. It is so easy to transmit bad news through a text message, and it is just as easy to ignore bad news on a text message. Perhaps this is not true for everyone but I think many people communicate this way because it is so disconnected yet connected at the same time.

“Technology and Happiness” brings up a point that many of us maybe don’t take time to think about. As technology “advances” and we are able to do things faster and more efficiently than ever before, we are still not happy with it. It seems to me as if technology is only creating more of a headache and frustration for us. There are tons of aspects of technology that we use every day yet most of us know very little about any of them and when they give us problems it is only that much worse. Because our technologies are speeding up everything that we do and how we plan our time, if one little thing goes wrong, if one technology fails us, it can mess up everything.
Technologies we don’t even know we would want them until they are available. Most technologies are improvements upon an original. It works fine how it is but would faster be better? Of course. Text messaging to me is a waste of time. Why not call a person to express information? If it is not worth saying, is it worth typing? Apparently. I think text messaging and other text communications such as instant messaging and even e-mail is impacting social behavior. We no longer have to meet with someone to discuss things over a meal, or even call them to find information. We don’t even have to call someone to find out what’s for dinner or let them know our plans. Yet if someone doesn’t read an email or check their text messages it is suddenly their fault because you contacted them and they didn’t act on it. Our social skills as a society are getting increasingly worse; people can’t even carry on conversation anymore face to face.

After reading "Invention's New Mother," I compeletly agree with his point of view that texting is a desire that didn't exist untill the invention. To the old generation, or people who are not fund of this new technology, texting might seem rediculous. But texting is the only way I get a hold of my good friend. he has a tendacy to not pick up phone calls since he feels he's wasting too many of his minutes, but he has unlimited texting. thus we continually text eachother till 9 pm when he gets free minutes. The point is that texting has become so important as a source of communication that phone companies provide services with unlimited texting. Maybe since everyone else is doing it then we just give in to the society pressure. but we have to realize how long texting is going to be so popular as it is right now? It's possible that texting is another new trend that won't be around in ten years. But at the same time , I think texting is an amazing thing. Sometimes I just want to say a word, or impress a girl, and I just get way more excited when I get a text than a phone call. either way only time will decide whether texting will be as long lasting as phone or other sort of communications.

I enjoyed reading the “Mother” article. I agree that technology has taken care of most of our needs and now what is left is what would be fun to use or make things slightly easier, like texting. I have to admit that I love text messaging; it is so much easier than calling someone most of the time, I can text someone while I’m at work and not disturb the people around me by making a personal phone call in the office. I do not think that text messaging as a technology is either good or bad I think it depends on the person using this particular technology. Take my sister she is always texting her phone is glued to her hand through out the day she will text at dinners and so on which is rude, I think people just need to learn a certain etiquette that goes with cell phones and texting. The technologies themselves are not annoying or ridiculous; in fact it is us that make the technologies annoying.

Does the happiness that I get from my digital camera and mp3 player outweigh the dread that I feel when I think about them getting stolen? And how long will it take for them to become obsolete?? These are things that I sometimes think about when I bring my gadgets with me while I'm either traveling or out wandering the city.

Then there's James Surowiecki's overlying idea that people with more material possessions may be less happy than those with less. As I go through life and collect more and more gadgets that I have to maintain, replace and protect, I feel that Surowieki may be on to something.

I found his comments about the lottery to be very interesting. He cited a study that claims that the initial euphoria and excitement felt by lottery winners wears off after a while. After that stage passes, "their moods and sense of well-being were indistinguishable from what they had been before." (Surowiecki) I'm guessing this is why you hear about the lottery winners that amazingly spend all their money and wind up poor again. Maybe they were trying to get that feeling back again?