Summary: Why Robots Will-And Must-Take Our Jobs

Robots can effect employment in a negative way,as said by the author Kelly “It may be hard to believe… 70 percent of today’s occupation will likewise be replaced by automation...even you will have your job taken away by machines”(Kelly Page.300), this quote comes to show the negative aspect of robots taking over the world in the near

The article ‘Rise of the Machines’ is Not a Likely Future (2015), Michael Littman addresses the issue and worries that people have with regards to technology. The article attempts to persuade readers to believe that there is no need to fear technology as it is just not possible that they can overtake humanity. Zeynep Tufekci touches on the issue of machines taking over jobs of human, titled “The Machines are Coming (2015)”. She attempts to argue that there is no need to reject or blame technology for taking over jobs at the workplace. Littman’s argument is stronger than Tufekci as he provided logical reasoning due to a well balanced structure with consideration of opposable viewpoints with substantial evidence and effective usage of Pathos to appeal to the reader. Tufecki’s argument is weak due to the lack of evidence and her claim was only brought in at the end of her article which makes it seem very lop-sided.

In the articles “Alone in the Crowd” and “As technology Gets Better, Will Society Get Worse?,” Michael Price and Tim Wu, respectively acknowledge the effects of technological advances. While both Price and Wu use effective rhetorical strategies in their articles, one presents their argument in a more persuasive manner. Wu effectively convinces his audience that as a society we continue to advance technologically, but for the wrong reasons. Price references an interview with Sherry Turkle, to convey his opinion that the social media frenzy consumes our society. Price and Wu both present their point of view, but Wu has more factual information to justify his argument. The appeal to emotion is stronger in Price’s article; however, in this situation Wu’s logos appeal is more rhetorically effective. Beyond Ethos, Pathos, and

In the past, machines have replaced humans in manufacturing plants and similar workplaces, putting people out of work. In today’s time, people who are employed performing simple tasks that may require some training are being replaced by artificial intelligence. David Autor from MIT claims that, “AI is “hollowing out” our

The article that is being reviewed is “Marc Andreessen says we're wrong about the robots stealing jobs, just like we've always been” by Ari Levy. This column discusses the need for our society to overcome the fear of artificial intelligence, and accept it as a portal into the future. The author compares our fear of modern day robots to the introduction of automobiles in the past. He says how there used to be a “fear that a new form of transportation would replace human labor. Instead, the auto industry turned into one of the nation's biggest employers and spawned a whole new market for people like street pavers” (Levy). This is the exact fear that humans face today in that we are afraid of being replaced, and no longer needed. A main form of

These three outstanding writers will portray the argument showing the reasoning for one to be either for or against the advancement into the technological world. Derek Thompson “What Jobs Will the Robots Take”, Thompson is the senior editor at The Atlantic writing in the areas of economics, and the labor market. Chad Jenkins, Alexandra Peseri’ s “Automation, Not Domination: How Robots Will Take Over Our World”, Jenkins Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Computer Science at Brown University, earning acknowledgement with several groups PECASE, FAFOSR, ONR, NSF focusing in glitches in robot learning and human-robot interaction. Nonetheless, Peseri is the senior research assistant in computer science for Brown University’s Humanity-Centered Robotics Initiative. Farhad Manjoo’s “Will Robots Steal Your Job”, Manjoo is a technology columnist for the New York Times and the author of True Enough. All of these authors seem to portray the same ideology in regards to the technological advancement

In Cade Metz article "Robots Will Steal Our Jobs, but They'll Give Us New Ones" it is explained how robots are taking over certain jobs. Metz explains how by 2025, robots will takeover 9.1 million U.S jobs. One job that is already in progress and taken over for is in Dusseldorf, Germany. In the airport, valet parking is no longer worked by humans, but by robots. Those machines are able to lift the car and safely park it. While this systems proves to be more productive and effective.

If we stop technological exploration, automation will not take over people jobs and provide more job opportunities, but if we sustain automation and the people's jobs, there won’t be any job loss. In addition, if this has happened, this will challenge individuals to try something new that automation did not take over. Many people in this world have talents which does not allow automation to take over. For example, if you have good communication skills, you can be a social worker. Furthermore, In the article “Will Robots Take Over Our Jobs? ”it states that “65 percent of children starting school today will ultimately work in jobs that don’t yet exist”(p.24). Now it’s up to you to get your voice heard if you want technological exploration to continue or

Gary Kasparov has had past experiences dealing with Artificial Intelligence, In a chess match against an IBM computer chess-master; Kasparov states that "Human ambition is the key to staying ahead of automation, and that's what worries me far more than killer robots." and that "humans will always find a way to build machines that replicate human performance." He implies that humans are more creative and that we can always find ways to make tasks easier to deal with or accomplish. I agree with Gary Kasparov's opinion because we should not find excuses to achieve something, we should find new ways to go around the

Hirsch brings up an interesting point on Kelly’s article about not taking the opportunity to consider the other side of the argument, shows he is biased in favor of technology. Throughout the article he talks about the impact robots will have on the world, but what about the negativity it will bring? It can be a good thing that robots will be able to take over some hard labor work in factories, but will the workers be replaced to an easier position? For some people, doing hard labor work is better than not having a job at all. Kelly speaks, “ Humans can weave cotton cloth with great effort, but automated looms make perfect cloth today for a few cents” (306). Kelly keeps thinking about how fast and cheap robots will do the labor work, but robots

According to Kreitner and Kinicki (2013) McGregor contrasted two views on human nature by insisting that Theory Y assumes that people are more positive at work, and believed managers could accomplish more by viewing employees as such (p.9). The other outdated theory, is Theory X, which is a more negative and pessimistic assumption about workers.

The advancement of automation has affected our everyday lives since the industrial revolution. Over the years we saw a drastic increase in unemployment due to the fact that machines and robots can now do the job more efficiently. Today we have adopted the idea of automation that we sometimes are unaware of the subtlety. We only become aware of the change when old technology advances or when there is a system malfunction while using the product. This monopoly is spreading through the workforce like a virus. Many people have lost jobs or have been forced to take up extra class courses due to automation. Challenges also arise as the older people get the harder it becomes to understand how to operate these new

As oppose to this assumption, McGregor believed that the general intention of most employees is to be more productive. This assumption commonly referred to as theory Y (human relation) contradicted theory Y notion that employees inherently hate working (McGregor 1960).

He assumes that everyone will comply with what their boss told them, which seems that he treate human as machines and neglect their mentality, material needs and many other complicated requirements. These are some of his theory’s disadvantages.

However, where there are pessimists there are also optimists. Muro and Andes (2015) believe that aspects of automation such as the use of robotics in business may not actually cost jobs. Instead, Muro and Andes (2015) believe that this kind of automation may just help people perform their jobs better and be more productive, not necessarily that the technology is replacing people. Additionally, a study by Millman and Hartwick (1987) found that automating leads to higher job satisfaction and enrichment in middle managers as automation of simpler tasks allowed them to devote more of their time to more complex issues.