Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 13, 1995)
er 13, itro ERIE ED ^The Battalion Opinion Wednesday September 13, 1995 /r '4 Relying on technology as a crutch A dvances in technology have eliminated many of life’s hassles and bothers. We no longer have to get off the couch to change the channel. We can put off writing our term papers until the last minute be cause word processors have made the tedious task of fitting foot notes on the page and erasing ty pos obsolete. In a few minutes, with the help of com puters and advanced calculators, we can accomplish cumbersome and time-consum ing mathematical' calculations that used to take hours. As a timesaving device, these high-pow ered calculators are a godsend. However, students have a tendency to abuse the power of this technology. We tend to use computer chips as a substitute for our brains. When we program calculators for the purpose of eliminating repetitive and time- consuming calculations, they are serving a constructive purpose. When we program them for the purpose of eliminating the need to think things through, technology is contributing to intellectual laziness. There is no denying the power and con venience of these little pocket calculators. I would never want to walk into a test with out mine. However, I have noticed a significant de cline in my ability to do calculations in my head since I purchased a Hewlett Packard 48G a few years ago. I am also much less like ly to begin manual calculations that involve mathematical techniques that have been made practically obsolete by these technologi- Jim Pawlikowski Columnist cal machines. Many math prob lems can be solved just as quickly by hand us ing traditional meth ods as they can with a calculator. An example might help illustrate this point. A linear system of equations can be solved by using Kramer’s rule (the mathematician, not the actor on Seinfeld) in about the same amount of time it takes to program the ma trix equation into a cal culator and press the “solve” button. This assumes, however, that you remember what Kramer’s rule is and how to apply it. I remember learn ing this mathemati cal technique my ju nior year of high school and thinking it was relatively straight forward and easy. Unfortunately, when confronted with this method in class the other day, I had no clue as to how to apply it. Of course, I could have easily gone to look it up and refreshed my memory. But I had no need to. My calculator eliminated the need for me to know this piece of information, even though it would be better for me to have this knowledge in the long run. As a result, I remain ignorant of Kramer’s rule. While this fact is not of great cosmologi cal significance, it is symptomatic of a larg er problem: I would rather rely on a ma chine to do that which I could easily accom plish myself. The calculator has contributed to my in- ' tellectual laziness by removing the incen tive for me to learn something. The calculator has increased the mental in ertia that I must overcome in order to gain knowledge.This is not the fault of the calculator. It is a result of the pur pose for which I am using it. Technology itself is not good or bad; it is what we do with it that determines the level of control it has over us. If we use it at time saver, that’s greaw When we use it as a mental crutch, ve are cheating ourselves. In the case of the newest generation of high-powered calculators, technology is diminishing our willingness to look things up and think things through. While we should appreciate the power and convenience they provide, we should be wary of their potential to make us lazy. We should not let the power of technolo gy cripple the power of our brains. Jim Pawlikowski is a senior chemical engineering major lari- ents for irify the ma- mce and ilth ted jer- hat lips The make-believe world of Congress Many Congress members live in a different world when it comes to ethics W hile substitute teaching this sum mer, I was faced with a humorous situation. A student, whose teacher I had subbed for, and whom I had talked to several times handed me a note. The 15-year-old girl told me I was cute and asked me if I had a girlfriend. I laughed, unable to imagine actually dat ing a high school student. The six year dif ference between us felt like a century consid ering the role I played to the students. To take advantage of my position of au thority to go out with a student would have been completely unethical, as everyone would agree. Well, almost everyone. Recently, this country witnessed that members of Congress have different ideas of ethical behavior than the rest of America. Rep. Mel Reynolds, D-Ill., has just pro voked collective nausea across the U.S., be ing convicted of having sex with a 16-year- old and then trying to cover it up. He in sisted that the two never had physical sex, and that he had only had “phone sex” with the child. Apparently, the congressman’s fiber-optic- sex defense did not ring true to the jury. I doubt the taped conversations of Reynolds telling the girl to wear “peach-colored panties” to his office and ordering her to get sexually-explicit photos of her 15-year-old friend endeared Reynolds to the jurors. Even more recently, Sen. Bob Packwood offered his resignation from the Senate, after the Senate Ethics Committee unanimously recommended his expulsion. Initially, he fumed, saying, “I can’t recall when any citizen has been put through a process close to an inquisition and never had a chance to face his accusers.” Frankly, I can’t recall when any citizen has kept his job for two full years after 19 women ac cused him of sexual harassment. The following day, when an nouncing his resignation before the Senate, he chose not to apolo gize to the women and express his regret over the torment he subjected them to. Instead, he reminisced about how he came up with the Tax Reform Act of 1986 over a couple of pitchers of beer in a bar. Though Packwood and Reynolds are the worst recent abusers of political power, it seems the power of Capitol Hill makes con gressmen behave irresponsibly, unethically and occasionally illegally. On the same day Reynolds was convicted, David Durenberger, a former senator from Minnesota, pled guilty to charges that he billed the Senate for staying in a condomini um that he owned. Then there’s Dan Rostenkowski, the renowned stamp thief. Granted, most congressmen aren’t crimi nals, but they seem to operate under a dif ferent sys'tem of values than the rest of us. This Washington Beltway mentality dimin ishes their credibility in dealing with issues the American people face. For example, Phil Gramm, who earns Si33,600 as a U.S. senator, has a roll call rate of under 90 percent. Few people, especially those who earn as much money as he does, can get away with showing up to work less than 90 percent of the time. Maybe his attendance rate would be bet ter if he didn’t take so many trips paid for by interest groups — he took 31 of them last year. Ironically, Gramm thinks his performance in the Senate merits a promotion to a higher office — like the presidency. Another important congressman has been busy traveling, too. This summer Newt Gingrich toured America, promoting a book that he was paid seven figures for, even though someone else wrote for him. There’s nothing wrong with wealthy peo ple serving in Congress, but when con gressmen behave like fat cats because of the position they hold, they begin to seem out-of-touch. Although the Republican-controlled Con gress has fought hard to pass populist gim micks, such as term limits and the bal anced budget amendment, the federal gov ernment’s standing among Americans is lower than ever. Recently, this country has wit nessed members of Congress have different ideas of ethical be havior than the rest of America. One big reason is Congress’ credibility gap. Our country expects its electedT>epre- sentatives to reflect the behavior and values of the people they represent. To some extent, the American people equate responsible governing with responsi ble personal behavior. Currently, it appears that congressmen treat acts such as sex with a child and forc ing themselves on women as normal and accepted behavior. They also seem to feel as if they have somehow earned the “perks” that come with their power. As long as this perception persists, Ameri cans will trust the House of Representatives like they would a house of cards, and will view the Senate as a ship of fools. Jason Brown is a senior economics major The Battalion Established in 1893 Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the editorials board. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, administration, faculty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons and letters express the opinions of the authors. Contact the opinion editor for information on submitting guest columns. Editorials Board Rob Clark Editor in Chief Sterling Hayman Managing Editor Kyle Littlefield Opinion Editor Elizabeth Preston Assistant Opinion Editor Editorial Sick Policy Beutel needs a policy that attends to the sick and dismisses the fake. Recently, the Faculty Senate altered the wording of the health center excuse policy, which now prevents instructors from calling the Beutel Health Center to confirm that absent students received treatment. While this will protect stu dents’ privacy, the senate has yet to solve the largest prob lem regarding the health cen ter excuse policy — student misuse of it. It is common knowledge that students unprepared for a test, sometimes go to the health cen ter to avoid taking it and to get an excuse to make their test up at a later date. The current policy requires students to show proof of treat ment to instructors to receive a University-authorized absence. However, doctors at the health center have been com plaining about the extra work because students who are not sick are still visiting the clinic. Doctors are having to treat healthy students who avoid their classes, which wastes their time and limits the time they can spend treating students who need attention. In addition, some students who who have visited the health center have complained that they were greeted with suspicion by health center workers who did not want the doctors to have to waste their time with healthy, albeit lazy students. The blame for this mess be longs to the students who have been abusing the health center and its policies in order to shun their responsibilities. However, giving these “pa tients” a guilt trip will not solve the problems the health center and the truly sick students face. The Faculty Senate should revisit this issue in order to find a policy that will cut down on the misuse of the health cen ter while not neglecting the sick students or burdening the doctors even more. Given that honor and hon esty are heavily emphasized at A&M, an ideal solution would be to implement an honor code policy, which would require in structors to trust the studem who claim to be sick. As a consequence, Beutel doctors would not have to treat healthy students. Although some students would lie to their professors, it’s not as if that would be any thing new. Answers to debate on football tickets As employees of the Athletic Ticket Office, we would like to clarify issues regarding football ticket policies. With the excep tion of the stroller and umbrel la restrictions, these policies have been in effect for more than 15 years. Students who purchase the all-sports pass or the football only option are paying one-half the regular price of a football season bench ticket. This is a savings of more than $60 each football season. If one purchases the all-sports option, one could pay as little as one dollar per sporting event each year. The Athletic Ticket Office poli cy has been to allow the students who do not purchase an all-sports pass or a football only option to purchase a student ticket on Fri day and Saturday of the home game week at one-half the origi nal ticket price. The term for this situation is a “walk-up.” If a Texas A&M student who does not have a sports option wishes to draw a ticket any ear lier than Friday, he or she is treated as a guest and must pay the full ticket price. This en sures that those students with the sports option will receive their prepaid ticket if drawn by 4 p.m. on Thursday. Through careful calculation, the ticket office determines the number of guest tickets avail able. Guest tickets may be pur chased by sports card holders only on a first come, first serve basis. This would make it possi ble for all of the available guest tickets to be sold on Monday; therefore, it is very unlikely that walk-up tickets will be available for the t.u. football game. Another football ticket policy that has been questioned is the child ticket policy. The policy states that all persons entering the stadium must have a ticket. It is up to the gate person’s discre tion to enforce this policy if the young child cannot walk and must be held in the parent’s arms. Because of growing crowds at football games, the gate people Mail Call have been more strict. Also, it is difficult to compare! the ticket requirement for a foot : ball game to a baseball game as!; the number of spectators differs ; greatly. It is our belief that all'' children should have a ticket to ;■ enter the stadium. A child requires as much ! space, if not more, than many adults because of necessities that must accompany a young child, such as a diaper or toy bag. Children often distract oth er spectators with their move ment in the stadium, having their own seating space allevk ates many of these problems. We hope that this begins to clarify the football ticket policies that have confused many in the recent weeks. We encourage stu* dents to contact the ticket office to clarify any further questions that might arise. Megan Witcher Class of ’9$ Sarah Moorq Class of ’97 Linda Chandler Class of ’94 Baxter's liberal ideas don't belong About a year ago, as H.L. Baxter would put it, I “changed my environment.” I grew up in Canada, where wasteful social spending created massive debt and a nation of whiny, goverm ment-dependent liberals. I didn’t come to Texas A&M for cowboy hats and country muj sic but rather for tradition, honj or and an environment where my beliefs weren’t ridiculed. Am I correct in concluding that Baxter wants more permis": siveness and an erosion in those values that have made Texai A&M strong? I don’t pay big bucks (non; resident tuition) to be told that everything I believe in is wrong. More liberalism is not the answer, but if it is liberal ism you seek, I believe t.u. is accepting applications. Eva Darski Class of ’9$