Eyewitness to History: Frank Norris and The Octopus

The chief cause of stress is loss of control over one’s own fate. Stress due to loss of autonomy is one of the prime drivers of historical change. It is nearly impossible to overstate its importance, past and future. Pick up any newspaper, and look for articles and letters about demonstrations, violence, anti-government protests, calls for organization, or complaints against “outsiders.” Feelings of lack of autonomy will motivate those speaking and taking action.

The period after the Civil War (1870-1900) was one of rapid industrial growth, increased immigration to the United States, growing cities and expansion into the west. It was also the “Gilded Age” period of indifference of wealthy leaders to workers and working conditions, formation and growth of powerful monopolies, crowded tenements, Jim Crow laws, child labor, relegation of native Americans to reservations, and crippling unemployment during business downturns.

One common outgrowth: The autonomy or self-government of farmers, factory workers, miners, other workers, black Americans, and native Americans was degraded by the power of railroads, factory owners, and others in positions of power.

In response to these conditions, this period saw the growth of labor movements and unions, strikes, strife and violence, formation of organizations such as the Grange and the Populist Party, aggressive acts toward indispensable scapegoats such as black people and immigrants, and growth of religious movements focusing on the “social gospel.”

Autonomy is the ability to control the events of one’s life: self-rule. Autonomous states control their internal affairs and can stand alone. Autonomous individuals make their destiny instead of reacting to events.

“The Octopus”

This excerpt from Frank Norris’s The Octopus (1901) offers a dramatic introduction to this concept and the history for this module. It depicts a situation where a farmer’s autonomy is lost.

Prior to the Civil War, the livelihood of most Americans in the pre-Industrial Age depended on farms, so the effects of economic cycles had little effect on their lives. “Boom” years when jobs were readily available led to more people dependent on industry for subsistence, so when panics and depressions came, more and more people suffered the consequences.

The Assignment
Please read the excerpt below from Frank Norris’s The Octopus — the first primary source for this class.

As you do, read to answer the following questions about this document:

Summarize this excerpt from the novel. Hit the most important points and use only your own words. No quotations. At minimum, be sure your summary is 200 words long.

What’s happening to Dyke’s autonomy? How is he likely to react to the increase in the cost of transporting hops?

How does Dyke’s story link to the events and themes of chapter 18? First, identify at least two themes, then discuss how the primary sources link with them.

What Dyke and many others at this time in history were undergoing is what economists call “system change,” a profound shift in the economy that causes dislocations, pushing the fortunes of some upwards, and snuffing out the fortunes of others. Many today believe that President Trump got elected because of his appeal to those who were either suffering system change or feared that they were about to — such as the coal miners in West Virginia. Where do we see system change in U.S. society today? Do a little research and show us what you come up with. How does it compare with the example of system change given here? Do you ever feel like Dyke?

Sample Solution

models), the level of precision in perceiving faces was practically 100%, on a par with a human. Wilkinson invests significant energy examining the inconceivability of disclosing to a PC the easiest of things like how to respond to a seat (Wilkinson, p.125). Be that as it may, how can one portray a human face? Without a rundown of formal principles or portrayal, some way or another the PC in the test had the option to ‘get the hang of’, engrossing a huge number of snippets of data which people essentially don’t have the ability to articulate precisely. Correspondingly, organization Ai have made HAL, a program which is being instructed to communicate in English just by being spoken and read to. As per the organization, individuals perusing the transcripts of HAL’s discussions have been not able to disclose to them separated from a little child (www.wired.com). This would apparently finish the Turing assessment structured by creator Alan Turing to defeat the issue of what establishes ‘thinking’, which expresses that once an individual can neglect to recognize the discussion of a genuine individual and a PC, the PC is ‘thinking’ (Crane, Audio Cassette 5).

Dreyfus contends that to have general insight (like the capacity to perceive male from female, or maybe the capacity to evaluate the proper behavior in some random circumstance), a PC would must have presence of mind information (Crane, Audio Tape 5). Be that as it may, what is good judgment information? Does an infant have this? No, and in spite of various uniform components basic to everyone, presence of mind information is procured by input. The info isn’t constantly finished and is regularly divided (and once in a while completely imperfect) – that is the reason we need to work on driving the vehicle or riding the bicycle. However, each and every move we make could in principle be determined altogether without vagueness, tolerating this would be a fantastically intricate errand, yet not really inconceivable. “All human mental traits… are algorithmically specifiable types of image control” (Wilkinson p.102).

Further, with new innovation as PDP, it is feasible for PCs to work in the equivalent staggered route as a human mind. Searle contends this doesn’t manage the cost of a path round the Chinese room contention and is, as a result, simply growing the space to what he calls a “Chinese rec center”. He accepts that expanding the size of the program doesn’t imply that the program will work in any capacity distinctive to a little form (Wilkinson, pp 108 – 109, Searle p.208). Business as usual, regardless of the amount more, won’t produce understanding (Dennett, p.113). However, how would we know? Initially, we’ve always been unable to give a program even a small amount of the limit or capacity of the human cerebrum so we have no clue how such a program will act. Furthermore, Trefil gives the case of a heap of grains of sand which is static until it arrives at a specific purpose of multifaceted nature, at which it starts to show uncommon highlights. It has a rising property and we can’t realize that a program won’t show the equivalent developing prope

This question has been answered.

Get Answer