[1476] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: MIT, computers and ethical values.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Roberts)
Mon Oct 6 13:52:50 2003
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 13:27:00 -0400
From: Jeff Roberts <thejoker@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031006105944.02441c70@hesiod>
I don't normally weigh in on these types of issues, but as a humorist of
sorts (and as someone with too much time on my hands), this kind of struck
a nerve with me.
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Aaron D. Mihalik wrote:
> The second half of the article is particularly interesting (and relevant to
> MIT).
>
> Towards the end, there is this choice quote: "Some of these young people
> have spent large parts of their lives in front of computer screens. As a
> result, their social and ethical values have never fully developed."
I would say an even more choice quote is this one:
> This experience was a clear example of how the "digital divide" is
> impacting the thinking of young people on the cutting edge of technology.
Is this true? Obviously there is a divide, and there are racial and
ethnic characteristics to the divide, but was this 2001 incident, along
with the more recent one, a result of that? Is it racism?
Looking at this from the perspective of a humorist, it seemed to me that
both indicents were not the result of living in a racially isolated
environment, but living in a world replete with social stereotypes,
sometimes racially-based, that flood popular media. It's clear that humor
is reflective of society in some way, but what it MEANS depends on how one
characterizes humor. If you hold to the point of view, as some theorists
have, that people find things humorous when it makes them feel superior to
another group, then socio-ethnic humor can be viewed as racism. However,
many people believe that humor isn't about being derogatory, but rather
about portraying existing beliefs and stereotypes in a non-typical
manner-- for instance, publicizing a party at East Campus, which can
hardly be stereotyped as a "hip-hop" environment, using urban slang. I
tend to think that humor like this doesn't make fun of people as much as
it makes fun of the stereotypes that are prominently portrayed in media,
politics, &c., and in that way it helps us think around and sometimes
through them.
That doesn't mean that the joke wasn't in poor taste. I imagine the
problem here is not part of a larger philosophical debate about the nature
of humor, but rather a political one-- as evidenced in the article Aaron
sent out, people might portray incidents like this not as a few
individuals trying to do something funny, but rather as an indictment of
the institutional culture of MIT. If you do that, you should have to
include all colleges and universities along with it-- however, MIT is
always going to receive scrutiny because it is either (a) supposed to
contain the best and brightest, and therefore held to a high moral
standard, or (b) envied as the bastion of the technologically privileged,
both of which points of view are expressed in the article.
I just hope that in taking action on the recent episode, MIT considers the
intent and not just the possible negative reaction. I also hope that MIT
doesn't see this as a reason to limit expression, particularly humorous
expression, because I think it's important for people to keep challenging
popular beliefs and stereotypes.
Jeff Roberts
MIT Class of 2002
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk,
mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at:
http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
