In his essay “Visible Man: Ethics in a World without Secrets,” Peter Singer asserts that we live in an age of technology, an age where the government can easily access the personal data of its citizens, whether it is voluntarily given to the government or not. Singer compares our world to a “Panopticon,” a theoretical environment that allows for one-way observation (Singer 85). In today’s world, people are under constant, intrusive surveillance, yet, paradoxically, those same people under observation are able to use technology to view the affairs of their government. Singer claims that the ability to monitor the government 's actions will allow us to become better, more informed citizens which will allow people to make better decisions and
…show more content…
His evidence is convincing and relevant when he makes it apparent just how vast the data collection is. The 1.7 billion collected emails, messages, and posts is data that isn’t willingly given through posting on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. This is the information that is taken from its citizens by the government. In order to further strengthen his premise, Singer addresses the counter argument and common misconception that the NSA only looks at the activity of suspicious people or those who use certain key threat words in their emails or messages. Everyone has the potential to have their privacy invaded because the database and collection agency “... houses information on thousands of U.S. citizens, many of them not accused of any wrongdoing…” (12). Singer effectively communicates the idea that the government’s collection methods are intrusive. The underlying question is whether or not our newfound lack of privacy is worth the …show more content…
With a constant stream of new information, it is hard to decide between what is read and digested and what is forgotten. In his article “Juggler’s Brain,” Nicholas Carr explores the idea that the amount of information is too vast and our ability to decipher between what 's important and what is not is jaded. In order to prove his claim, Carr employs scientific evidence to demonstrate that the amount of information that our “working memory,” the area of the brain that is responsible for comprehension and retention, can hold is very small and can become overwhelmed quite easily (Carr 124). In the digital age, we are consumed by technology, and our working memory is forced to operate at maximum capacity. Carr contends that our working memory can only hold so much before “...we’re unable to retain the information...” and “...it becomes harder to distinguish relevant information from irrelevant information…” (125). This onslaught of technology has reduced our ability to stay informed in all aspects of our lives, and this includes keeping educated on current political events. Singer is not to be held accountable for not acknowledging those who are naturally apathetic or apolitical. Since his argument and main claim is based on technology, however, he must address technology’s broad transformation of society into a more apathetic group of people due to the fact that technology has complicated the information retention process and made it harder to
His evidence is convincing and relevant when he makes it apparent just how vast the data collection is. The 1.7 billion collected emails, messages, and posts is data that isn’t willingly given through posting on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. This is the information that is taken from its citizens by the government. In order to further strengthen his premise, Singer addresses the counter argument and common misconception that the NSA only looks at the activity of suspicious people or those who use certain key threat words in their emails or messages. Everyone has the potential to have their privacy invaded because the database and collection agency “... houses information on thousands of U.S. citizens, many of them not accused of any wrongdoing…” (12). Singer effectively communicates the idea that the government’s collection methods are intrusive. The underlying question is whether or not our newfound lack of privacy is worth the …show more content…
With a constant stream of new information, it is hard to decide between what is read and digested and what is forgotten. In his article “Juggler’s Brain,” Nicholas Carr explores the idea that the amount of information is too vast and our ability to decipher between what 's important and what is not is jaded. In order to prove his claim, Carr employs scientific evidence to demonstrate that the amount of information that our “working memory,” the area of the brain that is responsible for comprehension and retention, can hold is very small and can become overwhelmed quite easily (Carr 124). In the digital age, we are consumed by technology, and our working memory is forced to operate at maximum capacity. Carr contends that our working memory can only hold so much before “...we’re unable to retain the information...” and “...it becomes harder to distinguish relevant information from irrelevant information…” (125). This onslaught of technology has reduced our ability to stay informed in all aspects of our lives, and this includes keeping educated on current political events. Singer is not to be held accountable for not acknowledging those who are naturally apathetic or apolitical. Since his argument and main claim is based on technology, however, he must address technology’s broad transformation of society into a more apathetic group of people due to the fact that technology has complicated the information retention process and made it harder to