My first reaction to the "Shift Happens" video was a resounding "WOW!". The numerous interesting facts and information presented seemed almost surreal- even though they are statistics, they really put in perspective the complete transformation that the human race is experiencing. I feel a strange sense of bleakness and apprehension about our future because of the predictions, specifically those regarding technology. If the premonitions are correct, than mankind is at the threshold of developing a technology that can actually replace the human brain, and in essence will be surrendering all of our humanity to a machine. It sounds very sci-fi, but it is truly a scary thought. I do not believe that many people, aware that we are in the post-industrial, "information age", truly understand how rapidly our technology is expanding and in such a short time. The text book really portrays how short of a time human beings have occupied this earth when, in the first paragraph of chapter 20, it refers to the timeline of the history of Earth as a clock. In the 24 hours that represents the existence of our planet, human-like apes have only occupied it for the last 2 minutes, and modern man for only the last 4 seconds (Gidden et al. 655). This is a really scary perspective; it is very humbling to think of ourselves as relatively small and insignificant in the history of Earth. At the same token, it is quite frightening to think of what the human race is capable of doing, and has done in such a short time.
Even the tone of which this video presents this information reinforces the fact that our future is frightening. Simply playing that creepy music in the background sets the mood, and the viewer can not help but wonder if all this mega-super-fast-crazy technology we are all enjoying now will cease to be beneficial, and will we become slaves to it in the future (figuratively or literally)? If it is true that during a student's four-year college career, the technological information learned in the first year will be obsolete by the third, then how can our students truly prepare for anything? The textbook goes into detail about the changes that have taken place in the service sector of industry over recent years, that blue-collar jobs that used to be the most prevalent are now taking a back-seat to the technological service jobs that did not even exist 10 or so years ago.
The technological advances we have made are fascinating: they add a new dimension of accessibility, speed, and convenience that mankind has never experienced before. Globalization is taking on an entire different meaning than it ever has, and the world is interconnected in direct ways that truly tie most of the world together. It seems that soon there will no longer be a need for face-to-face interaction, people meet online, work online, shop online, etc. The human race, being an evolutionary species, will grow and change to adapt to this new civilization, and there is no telling what parts of us will cease to exist in the future. We are at a serious crossroads, sociologically AND scientifically speaking, and it is very interesting to think about how sociologists will have to alter their perspective of human interaction to accommodate the emerging "new" human race.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Urbanization
I grew up in a mid-sized town in Connecticut, a shoreline town located between several larger towns and just 2 hours from both New York City and Boston. This town prided itself on its shoreline beauty, picturesque downtown, and homes that were conveniently located near a major highway but far enough away from the hustle and bustle of the larger cities. Over the years I have noticed changes in my hometown, where I no longer live, and honestly could not afford to live there even if I wanted to!
Several large companies, including Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, experienced rapid growth during the late 1990s. In turn, large amounts of high-salary scientists and engineers relocated to my town in order to be close to the plant yet still enjoy suburban life. Because Connecticut itself is an expensive state, my town was no exception; however, since a large amount of people were moving there at once, property values skyrocketed, many many new subdivisions were created with the richer clientele in mind, and now the mean home value (well, this was before the recession) is around $450,000. Insane! As I had said before, I really love my hometown, but if I wanted to move back there, i would be hard pressed to find a decent home that I could actually afford.
Other changes have occurred to my hometown not necessarily referenced in the text book. An odd amount of housing subdivisions have recently been constructed that cater to the elderly. There are now four new (within the last 7-8 years) "assisted living" communities in my town that are exclusive to the elderly. These also come with a big price tag. It is interesting that, although the book mentions the large amount of aging Americans, it does not mention the financial situation of many of these seniors. Many of them have money enough to retire to a town that the young, working population cannot afford to live in!
An interesting point I noticed in the textbook refers to the suburbs being primarily "white". Especially in recent years, I have not found this to be true. In my hometown there is an increasing number of African Americans, Asians, and Indians, mainly those who are employed as scientists in the a fore mentioned pharmaceutical company. Now that I live in the DC metro area, I can say that these suburbs have a very large ethnic population. There is a huge variety of people living here, and I would hardly call this a "white" area. I find it interesting that the book refers to the suburbs as such, especially since in at least one large metropolitan area, this is not the case.
Several large companies, including Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, experienced rapid growth during the late 1990s. In turn, large amounts of high-salary scientists and engineers relocated to my town in order to be close to the plant yet still enjoy suburban life. Because Connecticut itself is an expensive state, my town was no exception; however, since a large amount of people were moving there at once, property values skyrocketed, many many new subdivisions were created with the richer clientele in mind, and now the mean home value (well, this was before the recession) is around $450,000. Insane! As I had said before, I really love my hometown, but if I wanted to move back there, i would be hard pressed to find a decent home that I could actually afford.
Other changes have occurred to my hometown not necessarily referenced in the text book. An odd amount of housing subdivisions have recently been constructed that cater to the elderly. There are now four new (within the last 7-8 years) "assisted living" communities in my town that are exclusive to the elderly. These also come with a big price tag. It is interesting that, although the book mentions the large amount of aging Americans, it does not mention the financial situation of many of these seniors. Many of them have money enough to retire to a town that the young, working population cannot afford to live in!
An interesting point I noticed in the textbook refers to the suburbs being primarily "white". Especially in recent years, I have not found this to be true. In my hometown there is an increasing number of African Americans, Asians, and Indians, mainly those who are employed as scientists in the a fore mentioned pharmaceutical company. Now that I live in the DC metro area, I can say that these suburbs have a very large ethnic population. There is a huge variety of people living here, and I would hardly call this a "white" area. I find it interesting that the book refers to the suburbs as such, especially since in at least one large metropolitan area, this is not the case.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Who Has the Power?
The governmental power held in the United States today is best summed up by a combination of Weber's democratic elitism and the pluralist theory of democracy. Weber made a good point when he said that a large society (such as the U.S.) is incapable of being a "true" democracy. I think many Americans would agree with this, especially considering that most feel that political decisions are not made for the people or by the people. Our country is clearly bureaucratic, and also follows Weber's guidelines for a multi-party system. The Democratic and Republican parties, by definition, both represent completely different outlooks on America and there is constant conflict between these parties in our government.
The pluralist theory suggests that "individual citizens can have little or no direct influence on political decision making" (400). Again, this is a point that most Americans would agree with. For example, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for one person to rally the capitol for a change in a law or policy. When large numbers of people rally for the law, or write to their congressman, or protest, these social movements do influence governmental decision making. Politicians seek to win over the votes and support of these large groups who themselves influence the rest of America.
Mill's Power Elite theory, in some aspects, applies to our society today: the power elite do comprise most of our government and its decision making. However, the theory's "levels of power" , specifically the bottom level, is where the inaccuracies lie. It is true that the top level holds most of the power, but without the public's needs and support of the masses then there would be no need for any decision making at all. The "lowest" level of power is the support that keeps the pyramid from toppling; in other words, they keep the government in check to prevent the power elite from becoming corrupt.
The pluralist theory suggests that "individual citizens can have little or no direct influence on political decision making" (400). Again, this is a point that most Americans would agree with. For example, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for one person to rally the capitol for a change in a law or policy. When large numbers of people rally for the law, or write to their congressman, or protest, these social movements do influence governmental decision making. Politicians seek to win over the votes and support of these large groups who themselves influence the rest of America.
Mill's Power Elite theory, in some aspects, applies to our society today: the power elite do comprise most of our government and its decision making. However, the theory's "levels of power" , specifically the bottom level, is where the inaccuracies lie. It is true that the top level holds most of the power, but without the public's needs and support of the masses then there would be no need for any decision making at all. The "lowest" level of power is the support that keeps the pyramid from toppling; in other words, they keep the government in check to prevent the power elite from becoming corrupt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
