Refuse or Embrace, Technoligically Stumped

The question was posed, do you agree or disagree? I return, with what exactly? More clearly now, do you agree, that we should refuse technology and the direction it’s taken society over the last few decades, and the possible future roads to come, or do you disagree, that we should embrace were we are going. In reading both of the articles, and coming to my conclusions of what the authors were trying to say, and conclusions of my own, I feel that we should actually do both to some degree. Birkerts, to me, is saying that as we have grown, technology has grown, but at a negative rate with negative effects. I felt he made the basic claim that technology was similar to an addiction, and that addiction was a disease that we, the human population, have succumbed to. We have lost ourselves in the "new age" of living, no longer able to survive in what those before us called life. With Birkerts I agree, that we have been completely consumed by our technology, whether it be cell phones, computers, cars, etc., and that we do not do anything like our ancestors did it. We have become so dependent upon these devices of the new world that should we lose technology today as we know it, only a small portion of people would be able to survive on their own given the skills they've acquired from their predecessors. Although I believe we have been consumed by technology, i don't necessarily agree that it’s completely bad. With technology we have been able to improve our world significantly in almost every area from medicine, to transportation, to education. I must agree with Kelly to some degree, that technology is a positive thing, bringing us closer together, as one. This is, I feel a good result of the stage we are in with phones and networks, being able to get in touch with someone across the globe either instantaneously through electronics, or being able to see them by taking a short trip by plane or vehicle. Birkerts idea that we no longer have preservation of privacy to oneself true that most can be reached anywhere now, even in areas that should probably not be reached at, however, the ability to be a fingertip away is not completely negative. I believe interconnectedness is a good thing, bringing all together as a whole. I don't believe the technology and its direction are what is bad and should be rejected by society. Instead, we must consider the users and "abusers" of the technology the make the light of the technology appear negative. We, as a society, should break our dependence of technology, but in that shouldn't refute it completely, embracing the positive results which come because of advancements we have made to date.