Yes, it does. I was a student in the M.A. in Media Ecology during his chariman at NYU. I take the education I poured blood, sweat and tears to achieve there into my intellectual development to this day. Having worked in tech for 14 years -everything he talks about is more and more true each day.
Postman urged us to ask some questions and he was kind enough to sum himself up at 00:50:40. The seven questions Neil Postman throw at technology: 1. What is the problem to which a technology claims to be the solution? 2. Whose problem is it? 3. What new problems will be created as a result of solving an old one? 4. Which people and institutions will be most harmed? 5. What changes in language are being promoted? 6. What shifts in economic and political power are likely to result? 7. What alternative media might be made from a technology?
With advent of the smartphone our quality of life has definitely gone down. We seem to be hopelessly addicted to it. And as usual we only have ourselves to blame.
I’m not so sure. I think any technology transforms life and ‘quality’ is always wondered about. The car surely changed things and you could easily wonder about the quality of life and if we progressed at all with it. I like the smartphone and I think the pro outweighs the con, in spite of, or regardless that … “There is no escaping from ourselves”
Christian universities such as Liberty in VA are reviving Media Ecology principles in a new PhD program (Communication). I love this man. Technopoly, 1993, p.183-4 good place to start a pedagogy.
You clearly haven't read his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, which I had assumed you had read, considering your strong opinions against his ideas. He's nothing against television. Or any other medium of discourse, for that matter. What he has an issue with is when a medium of communication, such as television, tries to become more than it is capable of becoming. Television is no place for rational, intellectual discussions; it's for entertainment. But this, unfortunately, is turning [1/2]
I'm surprised nobody has pointed out the glaring mistakes in the introduction - Prof Postman is referred to as 'Dr Simon' while noting his receipt of the George Orwell Award for Clarity in Language (!), his book Technopoly (1992) is mistakenly named by the speaker, 'Technology', and Amusing Ourselves To Death is erroneously called a '1960's classic' (it was published in 1985).
50:30 - Neil Postman’s 7 questions we must ask about technology… 1. What is the problem to which a technology claims to be the solution? 2. Whose problem is it? 3. What new problems will be created because of solving an old one? 4. Which people and institutions will be most harmed? 5. What changes in language are being promoted? 6. What shifts in economic and political power are likely to result? 7. What alternative media might be made from a technology?
Questions Neil Postman says we should ask when evaluating a technology... What's the problem? Whose problem is it? Does it create new problems? Who will be harmed? What change in language? Shifts in power? Alternative media to tech?
Postman's writings are among the most important things I read during my 40 years of teaching. So much sense there, so challenging at the same time. I wanted to be a better teacher because of his teaching.
Which of his books have you read? So far, I've read Amusing Ourselves to Death, and Building a Bridge to the 18th Century. It would have been a pleasure to meet him. There is currently no one in our culture asking the questions he would about technology. I love this quote from Henry David Thoreau, "All our inventions are but improved means to an unimproved end." If you haven't read Propaganda by Edward Bernays's, do so. It will further open your eyes.
The latest "music" or cat video ? one million views in a week. This gets 45 thousand in five years. No other indictment of the public intellectual capacity is necessary.
Add to this the insane push today towards having a minimalist lifestyle where books are encouraged to be thrown away, and people are actively doing so.
Rentaghost okish Quite possible. It's on us to, first of all, understand his (and others of his ilk) work, and then to share or discuss them with others as much as possible, while also trying to incorporate it on some level in our day to day activities, including the sort lf work we do. I really think Postman is one of the most important minds that few people know about. I fear that most of our society today, even if they were to pick up his works and read them, are so far gone and disconnected from themselves and their humanity, that they won't fully comprehend what they're reading, nor take away enough from it to be meaningful, because indeed, we have Amused Ourselves to Death. Regardless, that shouldn't stop us from trying. I've been trying to get his name out there over the past 4 years or so since I learned about him. Also, and I think most great minds would agree, it's perhaps not so much the personnage or their written works that need to remain alive, but the ideas - and ideas can only stay alive in people who are alive, rather than zombies. We ourselves are living books (we do have a spine, afterall!). So it's up to us as individuals to engage ourselves and one another with these ideas - which are ultimately rooted in truth, and preserving the human spirit.
Hey y'all, we're watching and discussing this lecture using a medium Neil Postman might not have thought necessary. Do you think TH-cam solved a truly important problem?
As of this reply, we are 17+ years into the new millennium. The problems with inventions have multiplied exponentially. All this new stuff just doesn't improve the human dilemma.
Postman is our ages Nietzsche. His brilliance will be appreciated long after his death. Thank you postman for breaking the very structure of the medium we live in for me. I understand so much more now but have even more questions 😂
His reason for doing so was that he saw those media of communications as a decadence in the most basic form, straying from more intellectual media. I would love, no sarcasm intended, for you to reference me to something which would help me to better understand your reason spewing invective.
Technology is a tool like a knife, and it's up to us how to use it. You can use it to become more enlightened and wise or can use it to become more dumb and lost. You seem to be using it the right way:)
our supposedly intellectual discussions on TV into nothing more than entertainment, since television isn't capable of hosting such discussions. The written word can, however, since what you experience is simply the bare information, without any added functionality, which only lends to become a distraction. [2/2]
The Amish communities are the only societies I know of that are able to slow themselves down enough to evaluate the new technological gadget and then decide whether or not to adopt it. They are very practiced in the process. Does anyone else know of any other societies that are good at consciously adopting or rejecting the latest new thing?
this lecture leaves out a couple major questions to the contrary. 1. Will this technology be made regardless of what choice I make. 2. Who will make this technology if I do not? There's a clear potential downside to making an atomic bomb (end of life on Earth), but would that bomb inevitably be made if we didn't make it? Would the makers be more irresponsible than us?
I'm sure some cavemen argued against the prolonged use of fire against fire-wielding cavemen. Are we to limit the use of our progressive tools in fear that it is taking away our culture from us, that in doing so would slow our adaptation to such tools, making it extremely hard to express our thoughts and perspectives in the most simple efficient rapid convenient way that may have ever and will be possible for human beings.
@Keith Jones plus fire was not life altering; it was and still is one of the fundamental building blocks of life on earth according to the chinese Wu xing at least
The most simple rapid convenient way of expressing thoughts is through audible verbiage. Speaking to another will not be surpassed as it is the conveyance of thought and emotion in exact immediacy.
Postman disappoints me as more of a Luddite than his writing ever let on. Amusing Ourselves to Death seems to have a McLuhan style reservation on judgement with a cool observational democratic view. He seems to have a much more haughty, arrogant conservative-authoritarian view of technology and society. Great insights, but I find him more convincing without conclusions.
I certainly don't miss him. He was a Luddite when it came to any kind of new story telling medium and a enemy to writers and the creative class everywhere.
![Math for Game Devs [2022, part 1] • Numbers, Vectors & Dot Product](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fjOdtSu4Lm4/mqdefault.jpg)
![Math for Game Devs [2022, part 1] • Numbers, Vectors & Dot Product](/img/tr.png)
everything he said over 20 years ago rings so much louder and truer today
Yes, it does. I was a student in the M.A. in Media Ecology during his chariman at NYU. I take the education I poured blood, sweat and tears to achieve there into my intellectual development to this day. Having worked in tech for 14 years -everything he talks about is more and more true each day.
Yep you got that right. It was better 41 years ago things were normal as when I was a kid.
Postman urged us to ask some questions and he was kind enough to sum himself up at 00:50:40.
The seven questions Neil Postman throw at technology:
1. What is the problem to which a technology claims to be the solution?
2. Whose problem is it?
3. What new problems will be created as a result of solving an old one?
4. Which people and institutions will be most harmed?
5. What changes in language are being promoted?
6. What shifts in economic and political power are likely to result?
7. What alternative media might be made from a technology?
You're awesome, Thomas; thank you!
@@MSHembree yes good questions leads to better comprehension,.. although perhaps not always wide acceptance : (
A sane voice in an insane world.
With advent of the smartphone our quality of life has definitely gone down. We seem to be hopelessly addicted to it. And as usual we only have ourselves to blame.
I’m not so sure. I think any technology transforms life and ‘quality’ is always wondered about. The car surely changed things and you could easily wonder about the quality of life and if we progressed at all with it. I like the smartphone and I think the pro outweighs the con, in spite of, or regardless that …
“There is no escaping from ourselves”
Postman always delivered 📮
amen!
He was first class.
Neil Postman is right; "technology" has become today's religion. It's so sad that today's people are so confused and lost.
what do you mean ?
Neil Postman's wisdom is sorely missed in our current technology driven culture.
I have a lot of respect for Postman. A true genius!
I have recently read a few of his books and wish I could have met him. As with all fine writers, he doesn't make his ideas unnecessarily obscure.
This man's work should be better known.
But that would be like asking people to actually think for themselves. And that's a very, very, very tall order.
Christian universities such as Liberty in VA are reviving Media Ecology principles in a new PhD program (Communication). I love this man. Technopoly, 1993, p.183-4 good place to start a pedagogy.
You clearly haven't read his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, which I had assumed you had read, considering your strong opinions against his ideas.
He's nothing against television. Or any other medium of discourse, for that matter. What he has an issue with is when a medium of communication, such as television, tries to become more than it is capable of becoming.
Television is no place for rational, intellectual discussions; it's for entertainment. But this, unfortunately, is turning [1/2]
I'm surprised nobody has pointed out the glaring mistakes in the introduction - Prof Postman is referred to as 'Dr Simon' while noting his receipt of the George Orwell Award for Clarity in Language (!), his book Technopoly (1992) is mistakenly named by the speaker, 'Technology', and Amusing Ourselves To Death is erroneously called a '1960's classic' (it was published in 1985).
Hahaha, you are right, and that's what technology does to people
50:30
- Neil Postman’s 7 questions we must ask about technology…
1. What is the problem to which a technology claims to be the solution?
2. Whose problem is it?
3. What new problems will be created because of solving an old one?
4. Which people and institutions will be most harmed?
5. What changes in language are being promoted?
6. What shifts in economic and political power are likely to result?
7. What alternative media might be made from a technology?
Questions Neil Postman says we should ask when evaluating a technology...
What's the problem?
Whose problem is it?
Does it create new problems?
Who will be harmed?
What change in language?
Shifts in power?
Alternative media to tech?
thak you vm
watching 20 years later
even for the March,2020
Amazing speech from an inspiring mind. Will be greatly missed...
14:35. "i have no interest in the internet."
on the other hand, we learned this via the internet.
Thank you so much for sharing this lecture with Mr. Postman.
Postman's writings are among the most important things I read during my 40 years of teaching. So much sense there, so challenging at the same time. I wanted to be a better teacher because of his teaching.
Which of his books have you read? So far, I've read Amusing Ourselves to Death, and Building a Bridge to the 18th Century. It would have been a pleasure to meet him. There is currently no one in our culture asking the questions he would about technology. I love this quote from Henry David Thoreau, "All our inventions are but improved means to an unimproved end." If you haven't read Propaganda by Edward Bernays's, do so. It will further open your eyes.
Technopoly, 1993, is a must-read. pp183-184 for example. Reading it again.
@@MSHembree currently reading technopoly 👌
The latest "music" or cat video ? one million views in a week. This gets 45 thousand in five years. No other indictment of the public intellectual capacity is necessary.
"Amusing Ourselves to Death," where can I find the whole lecture ? (C-SPAN ?)
A book he has written
17:45 - porn, conspiracy theories, online gambling, narcissism (facebook).
Such a lovely voice he had.
There is some serious salt in the TH-cam section of a lecture condemning overzealous internet use, who could have seen that coming O_O
He was right. Look at what has happened to us, the vast majority of people look at a phone every two mins, even while driving.
MUCH better than a Ted talk!
Add to this the insane push today towards having a minimalist lifestyle where books are encouraged to be thrown away, and people are actively doing so.
I believe "they" put this man in an early grave because he was beginning to influence too many people into questioning the current paradigm.
Rentaghost okish
Quite possible. It's on us to, first of all, understand his (and others of his ilk) work, and then to share or discuss them with others as much as possible, while also trying to incorporate it on some level in our day to day activities, including the sort lf work we do.
I really think Postman is one of the most important minds that few people know about. I fear that most of our society today, even if they were to pick up his works and read them, are so far gone and disconnected from themselves and their humanity, that they won't fully comprehend what they're reading, nor take away enough from it to be meaningful, because indeed, we have Amused Ourselves to Death.
Regardless, that shouldn't stop us from trying. I've been trying to get his name out there over the past 4 years or so since I learned about him.
Also, and I think most great minds would agree, it's perhaps not so much the personnage or their written works that need to remain alive, but the ideas - and ideas can only stay alive in people who are alive, rather than zombies. We ourselves are living books (we do have a spine, afterall!). So it's up to us as individuals to engage ourselves and one another with these ideas - which are ultimately rooted in truth, and preserving the human spirit.
What a minute Mr Postman!
Visionary. But personally I love cruise control.
ManInTheBigHat My van still has manual windows.
I wish my car still had manual windows. Always having to fix it.
Hey y'all, we're watching and discussing this lecture using a medium Neil Postman might not have thought necessary. Do you think TH-cam solved a truly important problem?
my thought exactly--Postman had a sense of humor though--he would probably smile and say "a silly medium put to it's best use"
or rather "a silly technology as useful medium"
also with its downfalls if you lack self control, getting sucked into meme compilations.....
guilty
As of this reply, we are 17+ years into the new millennium. The problems with inventions have multiplied exponentially. All this new stuff just doesn't improve the human dilemma.
@@pylgrym You were right.
What is his critic to Al Gore?
Homework?
Gabriela Bernal?
Qué se ha cambiado?
no sale o si?
Did you mean: 'What's his critique of Al Gore'...???
Unbeknownst to many Al gore was key in initiating the creation of the Internet. Some people think that's a lie but it's true
Great vid
Here's a great video of Richard Grove going over Neil's book:
th-cam.com/video/37K81nl7Bb8/w-d-xo.html
1:12:53
A lot of what the late Dr. Postman said still rings true today. This was a great talk.
15:30
Postman is our ages Nietzsche. His brilliance will be appreciated long after his death.
Thank you postman for breaking the very structure of the medium we live in for me. I understand so much more now but have even more questions 😂
His reason for doing so was that he saw those media of communications as a decadence in the most basic form, straying from more intellectual media. I would love, no sarcasm intended, for you to reference me to something which would help me to better understand your reason spewing invective.
Can't view any replies to the initial comment of various users...
I’m reading one of his books on my tablet computer and watched this video on the same device. Oooooops!
Technology is a tool like a knife, and it's up to us how to use it. You can use it to become more enlightened and wise or can use it to become more dumb and lost. You seem to be using it the right way:)
If only he would see the world now, he’d be so disappointed
My thought exactly
Somebody slept through McLuhan's the Medium is the Message.
our supposedly intellectual discussions on TV into nothing more than entertainment, since television isn't capable of hosting such discussions. The written word can, however, since what you experience is simply the bare information, without any added functionality, which only lends to become a distraction. [2/2]
Watching this on an iPhoneXR
wowooww!!!
40:35
The Amish communities are the only societies I know of that are able to slow themselves down enough to evaluate the new technological gadget and then decide whether or not to adopt it. They are very practiced in the process. Does anyone else know of any other societies that are good at consciously adopting or rejecting the latest new thing?
sweet
56:28
Respect
Wow
Watched
At some point pen and paper was technology, as was literacy and as was language.
Have you read Amusing Ourselves To Death?
this lecture leaves out a couple major questions to the contrary. 1. Will this technology be made regardless of what choice I make. 2. Who will make this technology if I do not? There's a clear potential downside to making an atomic bomb (end of life on Earth), but would that bomb inevitably be made if we didn't make it? Would the makers be more irresponsible than us?
I'm sure some cavemen argued against the prolonged use of fire against fire-wielding cavemen.
Are we to limit the use of our progressive tools in fear that it is taking away our culture from us, that in doing so would slow our adaptation to such tools, making it extremely hard to express our thoughts and perspectives in the most simple efficient rapid convenient way that may have ever and will be possible for human beings.
@Keith Jones plus fire was not life altering; it was and still is one of the fundamental building blocks of life on earth according to the chinese Wu xing at least
The most simple rapid convenient way of expressing thoughts is through audible verbiage. Speaking to another will not be surpassed as it is the conveyance of thought and emotion in exact immediacy.
Postman disappoints me as more of a Luddite than his writing ever let on. Amusing Ourselves to Death seems to have a McLuhan style reservation on judgement with a cool observational democratic view. He seems to have a much more haughty, arrogant conservative-authoritarian view of technology and society.
Great insights, but I find him more convincing without conclusions.
I certainly don't miss him. He was a Luddite when it came to any kind of new story telling medium and a enemy to writers and the creative class everywhere.
Weird conclusions.
Anyone find it ironic that we are watching this on laptops/computers?
Charlie George no
Yes, ironic :)
I'm watching it on a throwaway phone...!!!