Our series of six formal writing assignments is a developmental exercise designed to improve your analytical reading, writing, and thinking skills. To complete the assignment, you must write an essay answering a question about an assigned reading that we do not discuss in depth in our class discussion.
For your first essay, please write a two- to three-page (600-900 word) response to the following question:
In "I'd Hammer Out Freedom: Technology as Politics and Culture" (pp. 75- 82), Richard Sclove argues that we should do more to acknowledge technoogy's 'polypotency.' What does this term mean, why does Sclove think that it is important to acknowledge this characteristic of technology? Do you agree with Sclove that technology has this characteristic? Why or why not? If you agree that technology is polypotent, do you agree with Sclove that it is important that we address this fact as we reflect on our relationships with technologies? Why or why not?
2nd assignment Due 11-9-2010
For your second essay, please write a two- to three-page (600-900 word) response to the following question:
In "Technology and Social Justice" (pp. 132-141) Freeman Dyson expresses a deep optimism about humans' ability to use technological innovation to increase social justice. Exactly how does Dyson answer pessimistic doubts that technological innovations frequently serve to increase social oppression and inequality? What is your assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of Dyson's response to that pessimistic perspective?
Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the assigned question and that your answer is well-organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence.
third essay, Due 11-9-2010 please write a two- to three-page (600-900 word) response to the following question:
In "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love (Some) Government Surveillance" (pp. 236- 249), James Stacey Taylor argues for the optimistic conclusion that, with the right legal and procedural safeguards, large-scale governance surveillance would have many positive consequences. What are Taylor's best reasons for rejecting the pessimistic worry that such surveillance could lead to an "Orwellian nightmare" that Taylor discusses at the beginning and end of his article? Do you find these considerations persuasive? Why or why not?
Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the assigned question and that your answer is well-organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence.
fourth essay, Due 11-16- 2013 please write a three- to five-page (600-900 word) response to the following question:
In "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" (pp. 285-301), Bill Joy expresses a powerful pessimism about the dangers of technologies that may be developed later in our century. Joy also a muted optimism about humans' ability to use ethical principles to avoid those dangers. What are Joy's best reasons for being pessimistic? What are his strongest reasons for expressing optimism? As you consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of those reasons, explain whether and why you find yourself more pessimistic or more optimistic about the issues that Joy raises.
Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the question assigned question and that your answer is well- organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual l evidence.
fifth essay, 11-23-2010 please write a three- to five-page (900-1.500 word) response to the following question:
In "Preventing a Brave New World" (pp. 317-329), Leon Kass concludes that reproductive and therapeutic cloning of human embryos is unethical. What are the exact steps in Kass's argument for this conclusion? What is your assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this argument?
Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the question assigned question and that your answer is well- organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence.
sixth and final essay 11-30-2010 , please write a three- to five-page (900- 1.500 word) response to the following question:
In "Ethics and Global Climate Change" (pp. 362-386), Stephen Gardiner argues that the richer nations should pay most of the costs for addressing global warming. What are Gardiner's strongest reasons for believing this? Do you find his rationales singly or collectively persuasive? If so, please explain exactly why. If not, please explain exactly why not.