Singularity

In Lev Grossman's article "2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal", I feel like the point is partially true but it is way more dramatic or exaggerated. I mean, in today's times, man is already merging with technology in a sense to become better or to improve on certain aspects. In my opinion, this isn't a bad thing at all but instead it is beneficial to our society. To me, authentic means that it is original and I don't think that merging with technology makes us any less authentically human whatsoever. When I started to read this article I immediately thought of the movie IROBOT and that is what Grossman is saying our world will come to. He claims, "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." In our reality, this is just a fictional theory but it lead me to something else that I believe is a form of singularity. Prosthesis. Prosthesis is used to help people who have gone through certain tragedies that resulted in the loss of limbs and maybe even parts of their face. Having a prosthetic allows people to be more capable of doing certain physical things. For example, the video above proves that the merging of man and technology is beneficial. Now, in our world this is a good thing but in the book, it is not. It is obvious in the novel that singularity has already began to occur right from the beginning when the reader finds out that people are created through the use of test tubes. They are born with their whole life planned out such as their job. It is not to the point where the people are literally robots but what they do and how they act are pretty much robotic. Bernard on the other hand, is different. In the book, Bernard said that he was "not just a cell in a social body" (Huxley 90). He thinks for himself and he has his own opinion and take on certain situations, unlike everyone else who just follows the crowd. Bernard is right about the people losing their essential humanity as technology progresses because in the novel, singularity has already existed in a way and it is continuing to evolve. However, in real life, the concept of singularity can only go so far.

critique.

Here is the link.

Usually, it is typical for the purpose to be extremely obvious in the first paragraph of a paper. In this case, trying to find the purpose of the essay was a little difficult but was it because that the introduction paragraph was poorly written? Or was it because it was not structured the way that I am use to? The introduction paragraph to this assignment was completely the opposite of how I have always been told to write it. This one was filled with many quotes and statements from other reviewers of the novel. I was told to never include more then one quote in the introduction paragraph and if I did happen to include one then it was to be the first line of the intro. By the way this person wrote her introduction, I assume that her intended audience is anyone who is interested in the novel and wants a review on it. Based on her intended audience and her thoughts and research on the book, this text was definitely structured in a way to applaud or praise the novel. Her main focus was to prove that The Great Gatsby was a well written book and this intended message would have been appreciated by her targeted audience. The thesis was sort of unclear to me because I was always taught that the thesis was the very last sentence of the paragraph. If I were to guess what her thesis was I would say that “ ‘Its symbolism, allusion, indirection, irony, ambiguity, and mythical dimensions’ (Eble 34), are eternal, transcending times and eras” would be her thesis. This thesis is only partially her own words and again, I was always told to use my own words in the entire introduction.

    All of the content and material that the writer used in her paper was all positive feedback or statements that complimented what she had wrote in the previous sentences. This way, the material she used enhanced her point and benefited her. The evidence used in this paper played a major role because it verified her claims about the novel. The type of evidence that she used was definitely appropriate and the most persuasive because all of the material that she chose to include in the essay conveyed the same opinions and thoughts that she was trying to get across. She used the quotes to her advantage and what I thought was that no more then two or three verbatim text quotes were allowed in a paragraph while in her paragraphs she had more quotes and less of her own writing. The pattern that the writer used in her essay was to state her opinion on the text and then she brings in a statement from a different person that reviewed the novel to carry on her opinion and to improve it. All of the writer’s transitions were done very smoothly because it began with a continuation of the previous paragraph so the whole essay was unified and consistent.  
          The paper had very appropriate and great vocabulary. Everything was easy to comprehend. The writer new how to use words that had positive connotations and that improved the text tremendously. The language used was carefully chosen to carry out  her claims and statements about the novel. This was a clever way to persuade the reader to lean towards her side or take on the novel. I did catch a couple of comparisons in the paper that was made to have the reader lean towards her side of the argument as well. She chose to use them whenever she could to further prove her point. They surely assisted in her writing by enhancing her main goal of persuading the reader that the book was well written and put together. I feel like the author did sort of put herself in a position of authority on the subject by using many great examples of verbatim text by other reviewers but in a way it would have been a stronger position of authority if she had included more of her own words in the text.

After closely examining the paper I noticed that it was very different then what we are usually taught in the beginning years of high school. There was always a specific way or structure to write things. I learned that the rules of writing can be slightly bent and that not very paper has to have the same exact structure to it. The way that this was written did in fact surprise me a little because again, it was written in a totally different way. It contradicted the rules of writing a paper in many ways. First, I was told to not have more then one quote in the introduction. Secondly, I was told that the thesis had to be the last sentence every time. Third, I was told that a paragraph should not be over eight sentences because it would be too long. Lastly, I was told that the author and title of the book always had to be introduced in the first paragraph. Overall, by looking at this essay, I learned that writing an essay with a different structure can result in a well written essay as well.