singularity

The article 2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal, by Lev Grossman talks about how “we're approaching a moment when computers will become intelligent, and not just intelligent but more intelligent than humans. When that happens, humanity — our bodies, our minds, our civilization — will be completely and irreversibly transformed” (Grossman 1). He believes that because of the rate at which technology is going there will come a day very soon when we will be over-powered by technology and humanity will come to an end. “He believes that this moment is not only inevitable but imminent…the end of human civilization as we know it is about 35 years away” (Grossman 1). Yes, “computers are getting faster. Everybody knows that. Also, computers are getting faster faster — that is, the rate at which they're getting faster is increasing” (Grossman 1), but I don’t believe that technology will soon take over and become smarter than us. However if this is possible and people are so afraid of this why don’t people stop inventing computers to be better, faster, and smarter than humans? I also think that we are so consumed with technology that we couldn’t live without it. Before technology was taken to an extreme people were fine without it, but once they discovered it they kept wanting more and more. Grossman also believes “all that horsepower could be put in the service of emulating whatever it is our brains are doing when they create consciousness — not just doing arithmetic very quickly or composing piano music but also driving cars, writing books, making ethical decisions, appreciating fancy paintings, making witty observations at cocktail parties” (Grossman 1). This article also relates to Brave New World because of the advances in technology. In Brave New World Aldous Huxley shows what the future could hold if technology keeps progressing at the rapid pace that it is and the article by Lev Grossman does the same. I think that in Brave New World Bernard thinks they are in danger of losing their “humanity” as technology continues to progress. However, in the novel they don’t really have humanity because technology has already taken over their lives.

rhetorical analysis

http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/569/emily-dickinsons-my-life-had-stood-a-loaded-gun--revealing-the-power-of-a-womans-words

In Kathleen E. Gilligan's essay she dissects the poem "My Life has stood-a Loaded Gun-“ written by Emily Dickinson. She writes a very well-educated essay, but there are some mistakes. She has a well written introduction, although it is kind of long, she gives you some background information on whom Emily Dickinson is and the type of poems she writes. Her thesis is very clear and you can tell where he is going with the essay. In her first body paragraph she doesn’t really stay on topic of what her thesis is about. Her thesis is about a specific poem Dickinson has written and her first paragraph is talking about other poems she has written that really have nothing to do with her thesis. While she does a good job on breaking down the poem and explaining what it means, Gilligan does not use very many quotes that are useful to make her point. I noticed she uses examples like “Me”(4). And that does not really need to be quoted because it isn’t showing evidence. She should have used better lines from the poem that actually do something for her essay. She does not have the same structure in her essay that I was taught to write my essays in. I was taught that you give two concrete details in each body paragraph and give a good amount of commentary on each one; She does not do that and it sort of throws me off. However, her essay does show that she has a very good understanding of poems and that she knows how to analyze them. Gilligan’s essay doesn’t flow very well and she does not really have any topic sentences. She basically just makes a new paragraph but does not go to another topic. I was taught that you need to have a strong topic sentence at the beginning of each body paragraph, so for her not to have any topic sentences makes her essay weak. Her conclusion is very good though, she states the main ideas of her essay and she restates her thesis in her conclusion which I was taught to do as well. I feel that her introduction and her conclusion are very strong and for me that is what saved this essay from being a disaster.