Saturday, July 31, 2010

The Philosophy of Clocks

Within the first few chapters of Amusing Ourselves to Death, my entire perception of today's communication and methods of expression has changed. We don't realize that it's not just about what we choose to express, but how we choose to express it. How much emotion could a heartfelt moment illustrate if expressed through text message or e-mail?

In the introduction, Andrew Postman wisely chooses to shortly discuss the content of the book, most likely knowing that the youth of today live different lives with new technologies, different from those of the youth of the 1980's. Although so much time has passed between then and now, modifying the world and what people are used to, I feel that the message remains the same. Man has made living about entertainment, fast paces, busy schedules, and hours behind computer screens.

One of the small topics addressed in this book so far that caught my attention was the dissection of clocks and their purpose. When I, or anyone for that matter, glances at a clock, they never dwell on more than the time, how much time they have left, or how much time it's taking to accomplish something. As Neil Postman says,"moment to moment, as it turns out, is not God's conception, or nature's", which I agree with. It once was, but humans have become so engulfed in seconds, minutes, and hours that even stopping to consider this thought might "waste valuable time". It's gotten so bad that a majority of people don't have the standard old clock anymore. Everything is digital, everything saves time, everything is created for instant gratification.

3 comments:

  1. Madeleine, you make sense and I agree. Today, the way people interpret time is entirely different, and Postman is correct (as usual) in what he emphasizes about time. I also found myself interested in this part of Postman's book. The way devices have changed from our parent's time to our time is very frightening. The clock is a fine example, because we go from original to digital. People nowadays are in such a hurry to do this and that, that they just look at the number on a screen, and carry on with their day. They don't look at a traditional hand clock and analyze how much time they have left. Is it because they are lazy? Maybe. However, I think it is more of a time saver for some people. For instance, I run cross-country. Runners are supposed to run with a stop watch (digital) to keep track of the time to see how good we are doing. Are runners lazy? No. It's more of a convenience. It would be hard to run with a hand clock and figure out how long I have been running. Some cases would call for using a hand clock, however. For example, a businessman would look so dim-witted walking into work with a digital watch.

    So yes, I find it a bit scary when I think about how rapidly technology is shifting. Who knows what type of clock inventors will create in a few years...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just like you Madeleine, I was interested in Postman's mention about our influence over time. Due to the hustle and bustle of society, we have become "time keepers" and slaves of the clock. It was not until I read this section of the book that I realized how powerful this invention truly is.

    I also am against the preference of digital clocks over the traditional clock. Just like Joey, there are instances in which the use of a digital clock makes sense; however, traditional clocks should still be superior over digital.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do not believe that the broading of knowlegde in time length is necessarily a bad thing, as Neil Postman believes. In such a fast-moving, media-oriented world there is no time to waste, which is why it is understandable to me how humans create new ways to fill any length of time with a measurement. For example, it begins in more familiar terms on a clock that consist of hours, minutes, seconds, milliseconds;then carry on into more complex apellations such as, microseconds, nanoseconds, picoseconds, femtoseconds, and attoseconds (which is the shortest time now measurable). It helps us more than does harm,and as Angel Mae stated above it is a truly powerful invention.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.