Let's talk about the problem with Polemic

So I'm sitting there, reading about what it means to be technologically literate, when these two brothers, Polem and Mick come up behind me.

With one on each side, onion and garlic breath battling for dominance, they ask me what I'm reading.

"Oh nothing," I reply, "just some stuff about technology."

"Tech-NOL-ogy?" Polem exclaimed, sounding out the word with a look of disgust, "Oh I know all about tech-NOL-ogy."

He spits on the ground just left of my foot. It's a faint greenish color.

"THAT'S what I think of tech-NOL-ogy." he said snorting.

"Shut up buttface!" Mick punched him in the arm.

"You're so dumb! Technology is the best! It helps EVERYBODY!"

I sit there and sigh as the two brats break down into a squabble. Eventually, as it always does, they both turn to me and ask me.

"What do YOU think Daniel?" Mick asks eagerly, "Isn't technology the greatest?"

"No WAY! You agree with me, right buddy?" Polem enthused, "That stuff is EVIL, right??"

"Look, guys," I say, standing up, "Technology isn't good OR evil. You can't just look at everything in black and white. Polemic arguments just don't work here."


It's just not that simple

In Technology and Literacy in the Twenty-First Century, Selfe discusses two opposing points: technology is a boon, or it is a bane. The problem with this view is an issue of polemics. Polemics is essentially the concept that there are two absolutes, and one has to be right. An example is the aforementioned concept that technology is either inherently good or bad for society. Another example I want to discuss is religion.

Not so long ago, someone on facebook linked me to this completely awesome music video from the band Rise Against, discussing bullying against homosexual students within schools. When I watched it, the most upvoted comment was from a person whom I will paraphrase, because he had awful spelling and grammar:

"This is why I hate religions, all they do is cause hate and violence and war. This just shows that religion is truly an evil tool."

Above: EVIL. PURE EVIL.

 There are so many things in this statement that make me angry. First, the video doesn't have anything to do with religion. None of the people in the video, the bullies or the bullied, are portrayed as Christian or any other faith. It really irks me when people take things tenuously related to things they dislike and use it as a soapbox to spread their (usually idiotic) opinions to others. Second, if you actually believe wars are instigated and fought over religion, you're a dumbass. Simple fact of life.

But the part I really want to focus on, the part that ties back into polemic arguments, is the phrase evil tool. How can a tool be evil? A tool can be used for evil means, absolutely, but can the tool itself be evil? No. Religion is no more evil than a wrench is. This is a perfect parallel to the argument for or against technology. Technology is also a tool. It is not inherently detrimental, nor is it inherently beneficial. It can be used both in powerfully good ways to advance society, or it can be used to hurt others or damage oneself.