Shauf “Problem…Argument”
The point of Shauf’s argument didn’t really hit me until the end when she actually went into detail with her thesis. I had never really considered the nature of technology discourse and what we are focusing on in any classroom when we discuss computers and “going beyond” the boundaries of literacy. Yet, Shauf examines an issue/tendency that I have scarcely encountered, inherent in the discourse of explaining media technologies: lack of rhetorical exploration and emphasis. According to Shauf, we are so enwrapped within the progressive technicalities of technology, we ignore humanist inquiry. For example, the notion that visual discourse/computer design, can be “over” or left behind for new “cutting edge” technologies (Siegel 367). Viewing computer advancement in “generations” as a linear process that only moves forward, ignores the “humanist point of view” that always glances backward in an effort to understand and question the present. It is significant, as she mentions, to emphasize not merely “technical invention,” but to “foster […] rhetorical intention” in the humanities (367). Interesting points.
Katie said,
June 4, 2008 at 1:51 am
I, too, really appreciated Shauf’s “humanist” perspective – a much needed reminder as humans traverse into a transhumanist and posthumanist existence. I didn’t really think of the humanist perspective as a look backward, but certainly it does accomplish trying to understand the present via the past. What Shauf also accomplishes is noting that the humanist perspective puts “life” into technical perspectives – that they function just to function and function for larger, more meaningful purposes. Meaning seems a core element for Shauf’s argument.