Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace: • week_4_questions_comments-325_25
week_2_questions_comments-325_25

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
week_2_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/09/04 12:31] – 199.111.64.79week_2_questions_comments-325_25 [2025/09/04 15:04] (current) – [Leo Marx, The Machine] 199.111.65.11
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 I find McGaw's assertion that we must consider the social contexts of technology as we study and discuss the history of technology incredibly important. One thing that stuck out to me was her mention of the gun on page 14, where she states that the gun was only present in about half of all American households. This makes sense to me when you consider that in early America, the iron, steel, and gunpowder required to build, maintain, and continuously utilize a gun would have been prohibitively expensive to many early Americans. - Abby Firestone I find McGaw's assertion that we must consider the social contexts of technology as we study and discuss the history of technology incredibly important. One thing that stuck out to me was her mention of the gun on page 14, where she states that the gun was only present in about half of all American households. This makes sense to me when you consider that in early America, the iron, steel, and gunpowder required to build, maintain, and continuously utilize a gun would have been prohibitively expensive to many early Americans. - Abby Firestone
 +
 +It is so easy to look at technological history and look at when key inventions were and just picture the world as black and white for before and after that invention. Well McGaw really made me think deeper about how technology is used by the average person on a daily basis. The inventions that get all of the spotlight in history classes aren't always readily available or used to the everyday person. Guns seem like such an easy thing to assume everyone has during that time period, but in reality only half of Americans had even just one in their household, really put it in perspective for me. -James Clayberg
  
 ==== American Colonial Wealth ==== ==== American Colonial Wealth ====
Line 35: Line 37:
  
 Reading this was very interesting because we get to see the materials, and items that they held at what value it was as well. It is also interesting to see how their words were spelt such as, in reference to what we know of today as a “spinning wheel” they spelled it “wheal” and in reference to a “barrel” they said “barrel”. It makes me start to think of that’s probably where the stemming of what we recognize today of being a really strong southern accent - Izzy Ellenberger Reading this was very interesting because we get to see the materials, and items that they held at what value it was as well. It is also interesting to see how their words were spelt such as, in reference to what we know of today as a “spinning wheel” they spelled it “wheal” and in reference to a “barrel” they said “barrel”. It makes me start to think of that’s probably where the stemming of what we recognize today of being a really strong southern accent - Izzy Ellenberger
 +
 +Recognizing that people were not capable of being self-sufficient even if it seems like they were the biggest thing to me. People had any variety of a collection of tools, while not having everything, and in many cases, it would be feasible that people would need to borrow from others and exchange their tools. -James Clayberg
  
 I like looking through and trying to find the major differences between the women's and men's inventories. There were very few differences, which I feel would surprise modern readers, in part because we think of colonial men and women as possessing very different things, and performing wildly different tasks. - Abby Firestone  I like looking through and trying to find the major differences between the women's and men's inventories. There were very few differences, which I feel would surprise modern readers, in part because we think of colonial men and women as possessing very different things, and performing wildly different tasks. - Abby Firestone 
Line 46: Line 50:
 Hamilton rules, Jefferson drools -- Dr. M Hamilton rules, Jefferson drools -- Dr. M
  
-**It makes sense that slave owners wouldn't find any use in manufacturing, as their entire system of life relies on the colonial/early republic's dependence on agriculture as a commodity. If America starts building things, then farming wouldn't be as profitable. Contrasted to Hamilton who sees the economic importance of it anyway. Jefferson claiming morals to stop manufacturing is strikingly similar to modern day when politicians claim morals whenever something new scares them too. -- Oliver M. +It makes sense that slave owners wouldn't find any use in manufacturing, as their entire system of life relies on the colonial/early republic's dependence on agriculture as a commodity. If America starts building things, then farming wouldn't be as profitable. Contrasted to Hamilton who sees the economic importance of it anyway. Jefferson claiming morals to stop manufacturing is strikingly similar to modern day when politicians claim morals whenever something new scares them too. -- Oliver M.
  
-It is interesting to contextualize these debates within a larger intellectual tradition, since the origins of Jefferson’s early negative attitude toward manufacturing can be traced, on the one hand, to the discourse of classical republicanism (Cicero, Cato, the 18th-century physiocrats) and, on the other hand, to the “four stages theory” of the Scottish Enlightenment. A similar statement can be made about Hamilton and Coxe, though in their case they were more likely influenced by Hume through Franklin, given their support for manufacturing and luxury goods. - Nikolai Kotkov**+ 
 +  
 + 
 +**It is interesting to contextualize these debates within a larger intellectual tradition, since the origins of Jefferson’s early negative attitude toward manufacturing can be traced, on the one hand, to the discourse of classical republicanism (Cicero, Cato, the 18th-century physiocrats) and, on the other hand, to the “four stages theory” of the Scottish Enlightenment. A similar statement can be made about Hamilton and Coxe, though in their case they were more likely influenced by Hume through Franklin, given their support for manufacturing and luxury goods. - Nikolai Kotkov**
  
 Jefferson’s letters are a fascinating look at his gradual acknowledgment of the progress of manufacturing in America, as well as it is fascinating to see the development affect Jefferson’s life and the way he corresponds with colleagues. - CJ Nemetz Jefferson’s letters are a fascinating look at his gradual acknowledgment of the progress of manufacturing in America, as well as it is fascinating to see the development affect Jefferson’s life and the way he corresponds with colleagues. - CJ Nemetz
Line 59: Line 66:
  
 I think these documents, like McGaw’s, bring in another aspect of the history of technology which goes beyond what a certain piece of technology does for society but also as a society how are we going to respond to developments in technology, such as machinery in manufacturing. - Grayson Donohoe  I think these documents, like McGaw’s, bring in another aspect of the history of technology which goes beyond what a certain piece of technology does for society but also as a society how are we going to respond to developments in technology, such as machinery in manufacturing. - Grayson Donohoe 
 +
 +I really enjoyed seeing the transition of Jefferson's viewpoints as while being a slave owner he saw the process of being profitable on reliant on the agricultural south. After being in office and when the idea of running a country, you really need more than just agriculture, you need more production of things for your military or for domestic consumers. It was just cool to see how the environment Jefferson was in shaped his views a little more and got softer to the idea of manufacturing. -James Clayberg
  
 The debate about manufacturing was a huge topic in America after the Revolutionary War as many people argued to be more industrial or more agricultural, mostly being split between North and South. The two main people leading the debate were Jefferson and Hamilton. Jefferson fought as a southerner to keep the country more agricultural and Hamilton fought for an industrial nation and tariffs to make the nation grow. Coxe was on Hamilton's side and helped shape tariff and patent thinking while Cooper wanted free trade and was a critic of tariffs. - Will Crane   The debate about manufacturing was a huge topic in America after the Revolutionary War as many people argued to be more industrial or more agricultural, mostly being split between North and South. The two main people leading the debate were Jefferson and Hamilton. Jefferson fought as a southerner to keep the country more agricultural and Hamilton fought for an industrial nation and tariffs to make the nation grow. Coxe was on Hamilton's side and helped shape tariff and patent thinking while Cooper wanted free trade and was a critic of tariffs. - Will Crane  
Line 81: Line 90:
  
 Overall, Marx's analysis of Jefferson and Coxe was fair and full of perspective. Jefferson wasn't "wrong" for arguing against manufacturing in America and it's very plain why, he processed this stance from the perspective that agriculture worked just fine in the colonies while Coxe displayed the economic boom that manufacturing would implore. Coxe was not the only American drawn to the possibility and Marx reflects on that perspective as well. - Izabella Martinez Overall, Marx's analysis of Jefferson and Coxe was fair and full of perspective. Jefferson wasn't "wrong" for arguing against manufacturing in America and it's very plain why, he processed this stance from the perspective that agriculture worked just fine in the colonies while Coxe displayed the economic boom that manufacturing would implore. Coxe was not the only American drawn to the possibility and Marx reflects on that perspective as well. - Izabella Martinez
 +
 +Coxe and Hamilton were very different on why they believed manufacturing to be beneficial. Coxe needs to speak to the everyday people, the people who still have benefits to agriculture. He speaks as if America will do it right and that his main point. Whereas Hamilton just thinks at some point to be successful economically manufacturing has to happen at some degree, and the methods used do not really matter that much. -James Clayberg
  
 Industrialization had nearly began in America which meant that most didn't understand the need in interior American Production. Coxe advocated the incredible productive power of machines and factories. He believed it would be the instrument to America's future power. - Ashley Palin Industrialization had nearly began in America which meant that most didn't understand the need in interior American Production. Coxe advocated the incredible productive power of machines and factories. He believed it would be the instrument to America's future power. - Ashley Palin
week_2_questions_comments-325_25.1756989114.txt.gz · Last modified: by 199.111.64.79