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$