|
|
|
|
Joli Jensen (1990) [29] argued that, "it is dangerously naive to assume that we will be saved by art, by information, by education, by technology. The implicit hopes of some media critics for redemptive symbolic forms, purveyed by some ideal communication system, reveal a chronic waiting for salvation" (p. 194).
As Postman (1995) asserted, there have been and will be gods that fail us. Utopia does not exist on earth or in cyberspace. If it is true that vigilance is the price of freedom, then vigilance is needed more than ever in this free-for-all we call the Web. The need for vigilance against materialism, commercialism, and decadence may be easy to comprehend. But let us also be vigilant for the more subtle and self-inflicted hurt that we do to our humanity when we participate in virtual community.
Langdon Winner, writing on the Web, observed;
As the twentieth century draws to a close, it is evident that, for better or worse, the future of computing and the future of human relations-indeed, of human being itself-are now thoroughly intertwined. We need to seek alternatives, social policies that might undo the dreary legacy of modernism: pervasive systems of one-way communication, preemption of democratic social choice corporate manipulation, and the presentation of sweeping changes in living conditions as something justified by a univocal, irresistible "progress." [30]
According to Winner, the reality of technological progress has too often been a scenario where the innovation has dictated change for society. Those who had the power to introduce a new technology, also had the power to create a consumer class to use the technology, "with new practices, relationships, and identities supplanting the old." Later he wrote, "those who had the wherewithal to implement new technologies often molded society to match the needs of emerging technologies and organizations."
In a technological world that values individualism and material satisfaction, vigilance must be given to ensure the place of community and sacrifice. In a world where anything is possible, we cannot accept the conclusion that everything is permissible. Moral choices cannot be made by simply observing the state of our surroundings. Or to put it in terms familiar to readers of the 18th century philosopher David Hume, no "ought" from an "is." [31]
You may recall that in the preface to this paper the author argued for writing in hypertext "because it is possible." Now that it has come full circle, one can see how that may have been the least valid reason of all.
Regent University’s School of Communication and the Arts is dedicated to combining quality education with biblical teachings.
We continue to produce Christian leaders who will make a difference, who will change the world.
We offer Master and PhD degrees in Communication Studies, Theater, Cinema Television and Journalism.
Learn more about our Communication and the Arts graduate programs »
Contact us for questions or more information »
Start your application now »