Kinsley High School
Kinsley, Kansas
Teacher: Dr. Galen Boehme
In the World of Technology
By Ashley Burkhart
12th grade
At the high school level, being over-reliant on electronic technology can most definitely decrease a student’s personal responsibility, social responsibility, and involvement. Electronic technology plays a major role in the existence of personal responsibility and the common good.
Electronic technology at the high school level can range from the compact electronic dictionaries, to calculators, to the multi-functional computer. Personal responsibility is defined as taking responsibility for ourselves, having the motivation and control to act appropriately. Social responsibility is defined as contributing to the well-being of one’s community. Last, I define involvement as the effort to take on a project.
Unlimited use of electronic technology at the high school level is gradually contributing to the decrease of personal responsibility in students. Today’s technology is steadily increasing each day. As technology increases, our efforts decrease. We no longer have to actually hassle with finding a writable pen or pencil and a sheet of paper because of the technology at hand. What will a classroom look like in ten years? I picture the teacher’s desk with a nice computer, a palm pilot, a calculator, electronic dictionaries, and maybe even a few remotes. Students will not need book bags filled with today’s school essentials anymore, just a laptop. The future sounds extremely simple and effortless, but where is our personal responsibility?
Students do not have to worry about bringing their homework to school. We can log onto the computer and open up the saved file of homework in our email accounts and simply print it and hand it in. No hassle required. What about math? Today students have wide access to calculators. We hope teachers will force students to actually perform the steps in a problem, instead of allowing students to work straight from a calculator. School work and homework are for stimulating the mind and helping students learn. What we learn from using a calculator to perform our work is nothing more than memorizing the keys. In most classes, we will have to type reports. Students can simply search the internet for information and copy and paste. Students have become so dependent on electronic technology for school that they would not know what to do without it.
Unlimited use of electronic technology at the high school level is decreasing social responsibility. Who would rather contribute to the community than stay and work with a computer? Not many students. A high percentage of students after school can be found sitting in front of a computer screen. For one, homework is easier and faster to perform on the computer. Also, far more than a word processor exists. Most students become sidetracked when doing homework by instant messaging and games. With all the electronic technology surrounding us, we seldom find time to do what we should. Working in the community builds experience and responsibility. Community also gives us a sense of belonging. Too many students miss out on the experience because they are too busy with electronic technology.
Unlimited use of electronic technology at the high school level decreases student involvement. Involvement is doing anything from work, in or out of school, to extra-curricular activities. Students have become so preoccupied with electronic technology that they pass up many opportunities. Students would rather sit and stare at a computer or TV screen than be involved with a school play, a school club, or a sporting event. It is not only high school students who can identify with this. Electronic technology is introduced to children at very young ages. Children easily become hooked. What will they enjoy in life besides an endless video game or a computer game? Nothing! Parents should make their children do something constructive. What we discourage lessens, as Reed expresses. When parents begin discouraging technology for their children, the children will be able to experience the real world. Children spend countless hours on this kind of technology everyday. It is an unhealthy and addictive behavior.
We should limit ourselves with electronic technology and instead concern ourselves with matters around us. We should respect the future. What the future holds for us right now is nothing more than endless technology that makes life simpler. First, we must not rely as much on electronics. Students, for their own good, must know how to perform without the technology. Second, we must discover a constructive project to do. Students will gain work experience for the future and will be able to rely less upon electronics. Last, parents should set time limits to spend on electronics. Students will then learn to use their time more wisely and will not become addicted to electronic technology.
One sure way of controlling our use of electronic technology is to control our purchasing of electronics. School systems and parents must consider what technology will be beneficial to students and children and what could be harmful. Not being dependent upon electronic technology makes a person more responsible. We will complete jobs as we should. No longer will we be sidetracked. We will gain better understandings of our work, without having our electronics perform the work. We will be more concerned with the common good, as we will not be preoccupied.
Having a school, house, or society that is not fully reliant on technology will produce benefits as well as drawbacks. One benefit that could exist would be improved individual responsibility. We will all be able to function without having to fall back onto electronic technology to do our work. Without electronic technology, the school, household, or society may experience a set back. Therefore, we cannot eliminate electronic technology fully, but just encourage individuals to know how to function without it.
Technology will become so complex in the future. It is almost scary when we think about the possibilities. Will students have any sense of responsibility? Right now, we must focus on the present and push responsibility and involvement into the lives of today’s children and teenagers. The common good and personal responsibility will increase when we are not all concerned with electronic technology.
Answers To Questions Triggered by the Required Reading
Welfare State on the Street Where You Live (Tibor Machan)
Q1- Why does Machan use “steal” in his statement: “Private property solves this problem, but was abandoned a long time ago when taxes reached the point where we can steal our way to being provided with all sorts of things we desire, never mind thinking about paying for them or long-range budgeting.”?
“Steal” is a harsh word. Machan wants to make us realize that the items bought with funds are “desired,” not needed. “Steal” makes us think of the consequences tied to situations. Machan wants questions like “What will become of the world?” and “How long will it take us to dig a hole we will not be able to get ourselves out of?” to be considered. Government aid should be used to promote justice. It should not be used to fund a town’s entertainment. If individuals would take some responsibility and take matters into their own hands, we would be better off. Why cannot people become creative? We never think of simpler or cheaper ways to do what is desired. Though, before we take action on doing what is desired, we need to do what should be done. Eventually the money used to pay for desired items will be all used up and nothing will be left for the many fixed expenses. Too many of us are so dependent on the government because we overspend money on desired items. We are taking advantage of government aid or otherwise said, stealing.
Q2- Machan said: “For that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it.” Give two examples of this from your personal experience.
I live on a farm. My family has made me realize what a big importance the land is to us. Our lives revolve around the land. Certain city/town people, the majority, have no sense of respect for the land, except for their own. They can simply trash our land without it mattering to them. Everywhere I drive, no matter what road, I see litter. Litter is strung in pastures and fields. It does not only look bad, but it also creates more work for the farmer. We have to pick up behind the city/town people. We cannot leave items trashing our fields. Items easily cause problems with equipment. So, the city/town people have made it evident that they do not care as much as we do about the land.
Money is a big deal to me, especially with college in mind. Running a farm as a source of income is not always sufficient. I have to constantly budget myself so I have a future. It discourages me to see other students going to college that have no worry about funds. A lot of students I know are going to universities. When asked by anyone why I am not going to a university, I do not know how to reply. I am starting out small and close to home, something I can afford. Some students just do not realize that others cannot afford everything. They do not have to conserve their funds. More fortunate students do not seem to care about getting to college more than the less fortunate.
Q3- Do you agree with Machan that “…everybody is more inlclined to neglect the duty which he expects another to fulfill; as in families many attendants are often les useful than a few.”? Give an objective example of this.
Yes, I agree. This kind of situation turns up in almost every household. An every evening chore at my house is to gather the eggs from the chicken house. My mom depends on my little brother to gather them. My brother a lot of times depends on my mom or myself to gather them. When my mom knows my brother is not going to get the eggs, she depends on me to get them. It is kind of like a circle that goes no where. Everyone is depending on someone else and nothing is done. Eventually, one of us goes and gathers the eggs just so it is done and we do not have to worry about depending on someone else to do the job.
Are We Going the Way of Rome? (Lawrence Reed)
Q4- State Kershner’s First Law. Do you agree or disagree and why?
Kershner’s First Law states “When a self-governing people confer upon their government the power to take from some and give to others, the process will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked bare.” I agree with Kershner’s law. We gave up our power to the government. What did we really expect the government to do with all its control? Take from the rich and give to the poor? No! The government does not want to risk its support by upsetting the rich. The government’s support comes from rich businessmen and companies. The petty, poor people of the world are obstacles in the face of the government, though, as Kershner states, the petty people will be eliminated. The government will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked bare. The government can subtly raise a few taxes and have people going broke left and right. The government can become a savage beast, picking at the remains of an animal; it will not stop until all is eliminated. After the beast has eliminated every animal, then what? With the looks of history, we like Rome could fall and never get back up to our previous height.
Q5- What industry was the first to be taken over by government in both ancient Rome and the USA?
The first industry in both America and Rome to be taken over by the government was transportation. In America it was railroads specifically and in Rome, shipping. As Rome fell into the hands of the government, why would the government first take control of transportation? How many modes of transportation were there in those days? Today, we have more than a few types of air, water, and ground transportation. It may not be a matter of how many modes of transportation there was. If anyone today could take control of a single highway, the possibilities are endless. Control of what moves and how it moves or what does not move on that highway lies in the hands of that person. This person could enforce negative regulations, maybe a fine to enter the highway or a tax on what moves on his/her highway. Now, the government today does not only own a single highway but every highway, every railroad, every type of transportation. The power is unlimited. So, taking over transportation first is logical.
Q6- Is cheapened money the cause or the outcome of inflation?
Explain.
Cheapened money is the cause of inflation. Our money has lost so much of its value. When I was a child, I used to think “Wow, a whole dollar for an allowance!” A dollar could buy just what a child wanted. Today, I could walk through a store with a single dollar and walk back out empty-handed. A dollar just does not buy what it used to. Cheapened money has brought us outrageous prices and low-quality products. With today’s technology we would think products would be made of better quality. Instead, we are using technology to make a product that will have a shorter duration that will have to be replaced. Items that used to be made out of high-quality stainless steel or metals are now made out of plastics. These lower-quality items are cheaper to make but more expensive to buy. How far will retailers go? Will they continue to reduce the standards of already low-quality products?
Q7- How did the Edict of 301 affect Rome’s economy?
The Edict of 301 destroyed Rome’s economy. Let us imagine if the President announced today that the world were to end in three weeks and then set price and wage controls. How would people react? Bloodshed would be all around. People would try to get their hands on every last product. Sending products into market would be questionable, for no one could get a reasonable price. Soon a shortage of necessities would begin. Rome experienced this same chaos, just in an entirely different situation. The Edict of 301 turned people into savages. People turned against each other. Greed led the people. The people wanted what they could get, no matter who else wanted or needed it. Eventually, this law caused many deaths. The law was then put out of effect.
Liberty and Individual Responsibility (Dwight R. Lee)
Q8- Lee claims that individuals could be “entirely independent of others” except for what? Explain.
Without scarcity individuals could be entirely independent of others. We could do whatever we desire, without what we do having any effect on anyone else. We would not have to worry about how our decisions affect those around us. We would be concerned with ourselves and only ourselves. However, we are dependent upon others. Scarcity exists so individuals can make a living. Individuals make a living by prospering from others. We all have our own talents. Each of us uses our talents to benefit and prosper. We depend on others to produce what we cannot produce, while others may depend on us to produce what they cannot produce.
Q9- Describe the dilemma concerning rules as discussed by Lee.
Lee discusses the possibility of having no rules in a society and compares it to that of having many detailed rules. Which society will be better off? Let us imagine two separate households. One household has no rules at all and the other has numerous rules. The household with no rules will start with chaos and end with chaos. The household with numerous rules may start out peacefully but then end with chaos. Numerous rules may cause individuals to rebel. When everything we perform has to be performed so specifically, we tend to ignore the rules. In a society with numerous rules, our freedom is slowly eliminated. With no rules, our freedom is too unrestrained. Rules control social order. It takes people’s cooperation to make rules worthy. We must abide by existing rules as much as possible. Though they tend to be too numerous, we have to be the ones to stand up for our freedoms.
Q10- Why is the concept of private property crucial to freedom?
Private property allows an individual to have complete control of a major part of his life. Private property is an important and major responsibility. With private property, an individual has the responsibility of making proper decisions. Such decisions will have a huge effect on the individual’s life. Individuals will learn the concept of being independent, a major step in life. This step must be approached sometime in life by each individual. Taking this step can be considered as the next step to freedom. We are free to control and change our own property. It is up to only ourselves to decide what to do.
Lawrence Reed’s testimony before the U.S. Senate Budget Committee
Q11- Argue both pro and con that in his testimony Lawrence Reed was advocating compassion and aid for the poor.
First, we need to interpret the meaning of selected terms. Compassion, a key term, is defined as sympathy or mercy. Aid is defined as help in the form of services, money, or intangibles. Poor is a relative term, though we can say it is a lower state than someone else.
Reed makes it evident in some of his principles that he is advocating compassion for the poor. He believes, though we are not financially equal, that we can all rise above our status. We must use our resources wisely. We must gain a sense of control and earn our way to the top. Compassion also involves all people. We cannot concern ourselves with small groups continually. Even if we can only contribute a little to everyone, it is a start. It beats contributing a lot to the small groups. If we are willing to take the time to help the poor, why not do something that is worth our time and that will last?
Reed also makes it evident that he is against advocating compassion and aid for the poor. We live in a supply and demand world. Those who put in their efforts will get something back. Those who do not put anything in will suffer the consequences. Are the poor unfortunate for a reason? Are they not motivated enough to succeed in life? Also, if we continually give the poor handouts, they will become dependent upon our handouts. They have to make a start of their own sometime. Why not now? Compassion also leads to weakness. Once we give just one time, we feel obligated to give again. The cycle never stops. All that happens is we weaken and become less of a leader.
It is hard to walk by someone asking for handouts. We must though. It is for their own good. We hope that the poor will find motivation to act, to make a living and to become dependent on no one else but themselves. We must not, however, eliminate compassion for those truly unfortunate. All of us must learn “tough compassion.”
Q12- “If people are free, they will not earn equal incomes; conversely, show me a people who have equal incomes and I will show you a people who are not free.” Explain in your own words Mr. Reed’s meaning.
To be free is to be able to explore us as people and what surrounds us. We can identify our every talent. We can become familiar with what we like and do not like to do or what we can and cannot do. Being free causes inequality, inequality in individuals and incomes. Individuals will put themselves to different uses. Some will earn more money doing what they want to do and others will earn less. If we are not free to do what we can or like to do, we will be equal. No one will be above another. What we do and what we earn will be the same. The result of being equal is an angry and violent society as no sense of competition will exist. Being free results in discoveries, inventions, and endless opportunities.