Is Technology a Panacea for the Disabled? 38
osssmkatz asks: "I have lived all of my life with a physical disability, and have recently been beset by the typical claims that I am too obsessed by computers etc. This raises an important philosophical question for me. Throughout my life, technology has seemed a way around my limitations, but recently, I have become aware that it may not be. Is technology the ultimate panacea or does it, as Hamlet suggest, only seem to be so? I hope this question isn't too broad for Slashdot which has covered disability, technology and sociology issues in the past."
Re:stephen? (Score:1)
Re:stephen? (Score:1, Troll)
That's horrific: you managed to get both annoying mis-spellings within two words of each other!
Re:stephen? (Score:3, Informative)
Philosophical Questions (Score:4, Funny)
Also don't forget:
Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
Re:Philosophical Questions (Score:4, Insightful)
All he would need to do is type "apt-get install kdebase" after he finishes installing the special blind-unstable branch. Then run the config scripts for all the random stuff that goes into using a computer when you're blind...and bingo! If it doesn't work quite right, he can just edit the source code since it's GPL and he's got a computer doing EXACTLY what he wants!
In my opinion (and based on experience) (Score:1)
Pretty darn close (Score:5, Insightful)
When you're chatting on AIM with a blind person, or a deaf person, or someone with no legs, or a speech impediment, irritable bowel syndrome, in a germ free bubble, etc, there's no way to know. It is the great equalizer.
There is nothing inherently more 'psychologically healthy' about talking to someone face to face than over the wire, or playing basketball over Halflife 2. These are lies perpetrated by ignorant people who have always 'fit in' with society's views on what is normal.
I doubt anyone with a disability has ever told you, "You are too obsessed with computers." And if he has, it is only because he has never extensively experienced the world through a computer.
Just ignore them and keep doing what you're doing. And perhaps one day you will be making a higher salary than them, while they keep your pizza delivered in 30 minutes or less.
More than panacea -- future of humanity (Score:3, Interesting)
I can paraphrase it all for them very simply but rather bluntly: we are ALL disabled, because protein is a really crap technology.
It's not only that we will be able to do better than nature
Nobody's perfect (Score:1)
I have to agree with the parent (yes, I've also read Kurzweil) and grandparent on this perspective.
In particular, think about from another way: Consider a social situation in person. Where you are talking to someone who has a remarkable ability to read body language and other factors like reading eyes. The average person will practically be disabled talking to such a person. Do we look at it this way, generally no. But I'm sure we've
Pretty darn close-Body Talk. (Score:1, Insightful)
Body Language.
Re:Pretty darn close-Body Talk. (Score:4, Interesting)
Body language is a good thing for most people, but not all. The problem is that these 'most' people feel that the way they work applies to the rest of the human population. Body language is good, except when you can't interpret it correctly.
Re:Pretty darn close-Body Talk. (Score:2)
Re:Pretty darn close (Score:1)
Maybe as suggested, one day you will have a high paying job where you sit for hours on end staring at a computer screen, but will
Re:Pretty darn close (Score:1)
Nothing is a panacea (Score:3, Insightful)
I have no way to tell if your are "obsessed" except to ponder the relationship between the incremental time spent on technology versus the incremental benefit. If you spent an hour less on technology per week, would your quality of life be diminished? If you, instead, spent that hour on something else (a non technological hobby, interacting with friends, etc.), would your quality of life by increased? How do those balance for you?
Of course, technology may be a means for you (or other disabled people) to accomplish what others do without non-technological assistance. Then the only issue is in making sure that technology stays in the realm of means rather than becoming an end unto itself.
That is why I say technology is no panacea. It is merely a tool. As with all tools, its value is indirect -- valuable only for the things that it enables, not valuable unto itself.
Re:Nothing is a panacea (Score:2)
It seems like whenever the word panacea is used, it's in the context of "such-and-such is no panacea..."
Computers yes. Technology no. (Score:2)
Today, there is no doubt in my mind that technological solutions are the only way to overcome individual disabilities, be they malfunctioning limbs or poor eyesight or even paralysis. However, there is only so much th
Computing obsession feeds the inner geek in all... (Score:2)
Computing is something useful, educational and fun. If you can overcome physical limitations using technology, this is an excellent thing.
It may not be a panacea if physical health, emotional health, family relationships and/or friendships deteriorate as a result of the passion for computing.
Some people have found a balance, and
Re:Computing obsession feeds the inner geek in all (Score:2)
Re:Computing obsession feeds the inner geek in all (Score:1, Insightful)
Because you want to have friends? I do things with one of my friends that I don't really enjoy, and he does things with me that I don't really enjoy... because we enjoy spending time together. My dad loves to travel; my mom... not really. She goes places with him so he can go and not be lonely without her. I
What is the question? (Score:1, Insightful)
No, computers are tools... (Score:2)
I am always on the computers every single day at work and at home. It is basically with me to enhance my life. I have speech and hearing impediments so I use them as tools like IM/IRC. They are also used for entertainments like gaming.
It is just another stereotype. And ye
Depends on your perspective. (Score:3, Insightful)
A man's reach should exceed his grasp. Technology is an extension of ourself to the degree that we use it to further our progress, individually and collectively.
Is technology the ultimate panacea or does it, as Hamlet suggest, only seem to be so?
Panacea: A remedy claimed to be curative of all problems or disorders; a cure-all.
Technology is not a panacea, nevermind the ultimate panacea. With every technological solution comes a broad range of new problems. Just as each drug has its side effects one has to weigh the gain against the loss.
However, if no one pursued the goal of making technology the "Ultimate Panacea" then we wouldn't be where we are today. Depending on your perspective this may be good or bad.
I have lived all of my life with a physical disability, and have recently been beset by the typical claims that I am too obsessed by computers etc. This raises an important philosophical question for me.
It would be convenient, I suppose, to have a nice answer to the "Technology is/is not the ultimate panacea" question. But my suspicion is that the answer won't actually give you anything other than a good response to claims that you are obsessed by computers.
If you are using technology to make progress toward goals you desire to achieve, then the technology is likely as good as the goals you have set for yourself.
Technology, however, can also be used as a crutch or screen to hide behind when real progress may be better made using alternate methods.
This goes towards a whole discussion on goals, comfort zones, and what progress really means. Something which I suspect you've covered before.
Consider a person involved in a car accident who has to choose whether to go through physical rehabilitation to regain use of their legs, or simply become expert at wheelchair use. There are those who choose to go the wheechair route. If one becomes enchanted by and involved in wheelchair sports, to the point of competing professionally in wheelchair sports then one's goals may be achieved through the use of one technology (wheelchair) as an alternative to another technology (rehabilitation) and they may indeed become more "able" than if they had chosen otherwise.
If others continue to worry about your increasing involvement in computers then consider that they may merely be desiring more of your attention. If you have already identified your goals and made plans to achieve them, then discuss these with the concerned individuals to allay their fears that you may be pulling away from them. Of course, if you are pulling away intentionally then you may not care to explain, but it should prevent them from bothering you if you find their concern irritating.
-Adam
Re:Depends on your perspective. (Score:1)
Re:Depends on your perspective. (Score:2)
Technology as the Ultimate Panacea (Score:1)
Some of our brightest minds are extremely dependent on technology. Look at Stephen Hawking. I wonder how he'd be doing with
Re:Technology as the Ultimate Panacea (Score:2)
Really? How many wear glasses or contact lenses?
Is Technology a Panacea for ${ANYTHING}? (Score:1)
Sad but true.
Let me turn this around on you.... (Score:2)
Do you feel your quality of life is better or worse with the technology?
What I think doesn't matter. It is your own answer to that question that matters. Everyone else can take a flying leap.
autism (Score:1)
It helps to see other people have the same issues, and to learn how they solve things.
Depends- what is your disability? (Score:2)
This depends on your disability. Some are such that you can't go outside, while others should be worked around.
For a normal person[1], there needs to be a balance. I spend 8 hours a day at a computer - nothing strange, I'm a programmer by trade. I go home and I tend my garden and things like that, but I still check my personal email. If you spend a lot of time on the computer, but have activities that you do without the machine, then you are fine. If you spend all your waking hours on the compu
finding your personal balance point (Score:3, Insightful)
One of my best friends uses a fair amount of technology to compensate for his cerebral-palsy-induced inability to walk, most notably a rather expensive motorised chair. But he didn't always. When he and I were in college together, he used crutches and a traditional hand-pushed chair. But he stopped, and got a motorised chair that he now spends nearly all of his time in (and it's not because his condition is degenerating; CP doesn't do that). I disapproved, because I thought he was giving up and using tech as a (no better word for it) crutch. But I was wrong: He still pushes to get out, to do things, to see people, to go places. And the quality of his life is better this way.
My own situation is different. I have one of those brains that's not very well adapted to face-to-face social interaction, and it'd be really appealing to stick to online communication. But as difficult as I sometimes find dealing with people face to face, I have to admit that I tend to be happier when I've been doing that. So I do need to put the tech away sometimes.
Technology has never solved anything. But when used appropriately, it makes it possible for people to solve things.
Is technology the ultimate panacea for disabilitie (Score:2)
Technology may be a "panacea" for some disabled and may not be for others. Fact is is that as with all other tools there are tymes when it is helpful and tymes when it isn't, it's just another tool.
Falcon