tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post1473436570578301287..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: We Do Have a ChoiceGus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-84741526637916291152010-06-09T11:48:35.977-06:002010-06-09T11:48:35.977-06:00Stephen,
You raise two excellent points I wish I&...Stephen,<br /><br />You raise two excellent points I wish I'd mentioned.<br /><br />The article mentions children using laptops, and I have wondered myself about the advisability of introducing children to computers at too young an age. Making them never able to focus sounds like good reason to worry there, in light of the "need" to make all children "computer literate" as soon as possible.<br /><br />And, yes, I would agree that the government would quite possibly end up offering conflicting "incentives" regarding computer use. After all, it taxes tobacco AND hectors smokers at every turn, does it not?<br /><br />GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-35116212538763367282010-06-09T11:28:12.313-06:002010-06-09T11:28:12.313-06:00Good post, GVH, and good point about the temptatio...Good post, GVH, and good point about the temptation the government will likely have to restrict online time to save us from ourselves.<br /><br />Interestingly, the thing that I'm worried about is sort of the flip side of your point--namely, that the government might actually <i>encourage</i> the use of electronic gadgets for exactly the same reasons. For instance, government officials might push programs to get every school kid a laptop, to close the "information gap," etc. (Perhaps both limitations <i>and</i> incentives would exist at the same time; consistency is rarely a requirement of government policy.)<br /><br />I don't mean to suggest there is a conspiracy to "de-focus" people; I'm sure many politicians have good intentions. But I always ask: <i>cui bono</i>? In the normal course of its meddling, a paternalistic government would surely find more of the sheepish pliability it requires from a population that is uniformly distracted. The last thing a welfare state wants is a population of independent, focused thinkers who will not passively accept the politically-correct orthodoxy. Distractions assist potential dictatorships more than they impede them.Stephen Bourquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13699468585645166392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-81445085402438209062010-06-08T15:57:31.925-06:002010-06-08T15:57:31.925-06:00Agreed, but it is much easier to screw around on t...Agreed, but it is much easier to screw around on the Internet than to do so in many other ways. It's also easier -- as the article shows -- to lose track of it or even to write it off as time "working."<br /><br />For someone who is <i>at all</i> out of focus, I'd say the Internet is much more dangerous than many other things.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-13567989485341151472010-06-08T15:35:09.307-06:002010-06-08T15:35:09.307-06:00Misuse or overuse of electronic devices, including...Misuse or overuse of electronic devices, including the Internet, is definitely a philosophical problem resulting from lack of focus and lack of rational goals, and not a problem with the technological product. The same is true of two people tossing a wrench back and forth out of boredom and injuring themselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com