Recently the instructor in my humanities class requested that all students must put their R number down instead of their name on certain assignments in order to curb impartiality. Knowing that being identified by merely a number instead of my name is a potential threat to human identity, which is not supportive of the ideas in a free society, I voiced my concerns on the class message boards. I found this thread really funny because it was composed of people who were content in giving up their "right" to human identification in the name of simplicity, safety, and convenience... very similar to the same reasons why people give up their liberties.
In the end, I stood up for myself, and was permitted to put my name on my paper, which I whole heartily followed through on.
My comments are black.
Other student's are blue.
The professor's are red. Enjoy.
Every time teachers and bureaucrats ask for my identification number which they forced upon me, it always reminds me of the famous line in "The Prisoner" where the main character of the movie refuses to accept his number, and shouts "I am not a number, I am a free man!" I found myself saying this to myself again when we now have to turn in a paper with our identification code. Although not exclusively do I write specifically for this assignment, I find it strangely dehumanizing that anytime I want to talk to my academic counselor or deal with any type of the school's bureaucracy, I must provide my ID number... and not my name. This makes me pause as I ponder what type of society we are gently transitioning into, where we are merely represented by "our papers". Whatever happened to the rugged individualism I thought this country stood for? Do any of you (and by you, I merely mean randomly generated ID codes) find this type of identification insulting, or dehumanizing to say the least? Maybe we should begin addressing each the employees by their respective employee identification codes, and see how they feel.
-----
This is a very good point that I have never thought about before. I totally agree with you. As I was reading your little paragraph I began to feel a little offended. We are categorized by our numbers and not our names or anything else that is personal to us as human beings.
-----
In defense of our policy of asking for ID numbers on papers, we are trying to read them impartially without reference to previous experience with students' participation (or lack of it) in class, personalities, or attendance record. We want to meet you on the page, so to speak, and this almost guarantees that.
Studies have shown that anonymously graded papers (as well as submissions to peer-reviewed journals and grant applications) have a better chance of being evaluated fairly on their actual arguments and content, unaffected by some prejudice of the reader. That said, if you want to put your name on your paper, you are perfectly free to do so, and your instructor will make every effort to meet you on the page.
-----
As a historical note to the numbering issue: many of you are aware that the university (and universities in general) used to use Social Security numbers for identification purposes. Anyone who's dabbled in database management knows that it is very difficult to organize a large number of records by names, especially when there are, for example, seven people named "Jxxxxx Jxxxxx." (In fact, there are three people named "John Russell" currently enrolled at UNR.)
When SS numbers became a way someone could steal your identity, universities and other institutions went to unique ID numbers as record identifiers for students, faculty and staff. Of course, some believe that these kinds of numeric tags are the equivalent of the "number of the beast" mentioned in certain apocalyptic texts; pity the poor and no doubt hellbound UNR student whose number is "R000666666"!
-----
I'm ok with having a number ID to help recognize me, as long as I don't have it bar-coded onto my forearm. And I'd even appreciate it if I were a 4.0-gpa student named John Russell and I was accidentally mistaken for 2.1-gpa John Russell and the wrong transcript was sent to the grad school I was applying for. I know that's pretty much the plot of Orange County, but in the off-chance that could happen, I'm ok with an extra identifier just to get things right.
-----
This thread is great because for me it gets to the idea of abstraction as being the mathematical bridge to the modern world. When the Stone-Age farmer stopped counting off his cows as "Flossie, Bessie, Messie, ..." and starting in with "1, 2, 3, ..." he was creating a mathematical model of the material world, as you sort of have to do once you've accumulated a couple thousand cows. After that it was just a matter of time, 6000 or 8000 years maybe, until R numbers.
-----
But at what point, or what "line", does this mathematical bridge conflict with individualism and human identity? Each one of our names represents more than just who we are.. does "Bob", "Mauricel" and "Nuying" identify our individualism more than "R000345214" and "R000785114" and "R000778210" ?The fact that one would bring up "cattle" is illustrative! Are we satisfied with our masters branding us with a number? If so, then we must be satisfied in the fact that they hold an inherit power over us. I find this nothing more than a ration of servitude - hay and a barn for human cattle.
-----
Wouldn't this be the point of middle names?
-----
It's hard to have an original name with only 2 or 3 words because there are 6 billion people on this planet.
And I have met quite a few people with ONLY first and last names.
I don't mind having, as Cxxxxx stated, PLENTY of different ways to identify myself(even though I have a very unique name), so that I don't get confused with someone else.
In fact, my own mother has the same first, middle, AND last name of a wanted fugitive, but they have different socials, so that's how people know she isn't the same Karen "B" who is wanted for fraud. :)-----
I remember watching a news report about some people that are hassled every time they go to the airport, because they share a name with someone else who is on the terrorist watch list. They are red flagged as soon as they're name goes in the computer. Having a second way to identify oneself can help out a lot.
-----
This is true I should know, when I go to fly I have to go to the counter with my Drivers license because my name is on the TSA watch list which means that they have to confirm with a photo ID who I am. I can understand needing a system such as this and why it would be a great idea to use our numbers at the top of our papers. On that note I can also understand why people would be concerned with this method and what disturbs them about it.
-----
Maybe Spanish-speaking countries don't have as much of a problem since people in those cultures generally have a 1st name, what we would call "middle" name, and then two last names...first their father's last name, then their mother's last name. The only problem with this is that there isn't as much as a "melting pot" because everyone ultimately came from Spain...so there are thousands of people with the last names of Lopez and Ramirez...or both!
-----
To further the historical note, find an old social security card (one issued during or before the 1950's I believe) and you will discover that on the bottom of the card there is a message that states: "FOR SOCIAL SECURITY PURPOSES - NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" (I found this while I was gathering the things of my deceased grandmother) Here's an Example Also note that the original Social Security Act signed by Roosevelt was a completely voluntary program, and the participant would pay a significantly less amount of money than they do today.
It is obvious to see the erosion of integrity the program once served, whereas it has now proven to be a mandatory national identification system. Someone said on here as long as there is not a barcode tattooed on me I'm O.K., but if we can accept that an ID code is more convenient than our human identity, then what is stopping them from doing so? More fundamentally, who is "them", someone more "human" than you are? What is so different from a mandatory barcode than an mandatory ID number? Aren't barcodes simply ID numbers?
-----
I remember when I was getting my license, my driver's ed. instructor telling us that that they were putting a magnetic strip on IDs so that if you were being carded they could just swipe it and know it was legit. I've yet to see this happen, but I think it's a good idea. Does it reduce my identity to nothing more than a piece of plastic? I don't think so, I think it's just another way to simplifiy the process.
-----
actually I have seen this type of thing in select convienent stores. They swipe your id if buying alcohol or any tobacco substance to make sure that it is real. it isn't common but they have started to pop up and I bet will become more common real soon.
-----
Also your identity and name and such are on the id still, so it is still identifying you as you yourself, so it wouldn't be identifying you as a piece of plastic, it's just prevention of monirs getting control of whatever they can with a fake id.
-----
The scary thing about this is that swiping IDs of any kind -- license, credit card, etc -- can be a way of tracing your movements, buying habits, etc. Or that the future ID card/license/credit card will include not just a magnetic data stripe but a transponder, so you can be located anywhere, anytime. Brave New World, mama!
Some conservatives say, so what? I have nothing to hide. What are you hiding? The government must maintain order. Some liberals (and most libertarians) say, since I am not guilty of any crime, this would violate my right of privacy and my presumed innocence.
In the end, I stood up for myself, and was permitted to put my name on my paper, which I whole heartily followed through on.
My comments are black.
Other student's are blue.
The professor's are red. Enjoy.
Every time teachers and bureaucrats ask for my identification number which they forced upon me, it always reminds me of the famous line in "The Prisoner" where the main character of the movie refuses to accept his number, and shouts "I am not a number, I am a free man!" I found myself saying this to myself again when we now have to turn in a paper with our identification code. Although not exclusively do I write specifically for this assignment, I find it strangely dehumanizing that anytime I want to talk to my academic counselor or deal with any type of the school's bureaucracy, I must provide my ID number... and not my name. This makes me pause as I ponder what type of society we are gently transitioning into, where we are merely represented by "our papers". Whatever happened to the rugged individualism I thought this country stood for? Do any of you (and by you, I merely mean randomly generated ID codes) find this type of identification insulting, or dehumanizing to say the least? Maybe we should begin addressing each the employees by their respective employee identification codes, and see how they feel.
-----
This is a very good point that I have never thought about before. I totally agree with you. As I was reading your little paragraph I began to feel a little offended. We are categorized by our numbers and not our names or anything else that is personal to us as human beings.
-----
In defense of our policy of asking for ID numbers on papers, we are trying to read them impartially without reference to previous experience with students' participation (or lack of it) in class, personalities, or attendance record. We want to meet you on the page, so to speak, and this almost guarantees that.
Studies have shown that anonymously graded papers (as well as submissions to peer-reviewed journals and grant applications) have a better chance of being evaluated fairly on their actual arguments and content, unaffected by some prejudice of the reader. That said, if you want to put your name on your paper, you are perfectly free to do so, and your instructor will make every effort to meet you on the page.
-----
As a historical note to the numbering issue: many of you are aware that the university (and universities in general) used to use Social Security numbers for identification purposes. Anyone who's dabbled in database management knows that it is very difficult to organize a large number of records by names, especially when there are, for example, seven people named "Jxxxxx Jxxxxx." (In fact, there are three people named "John Russell" currently enrolled at UNR.)
When SS numbers became a way someone could steal your identity, universities and other institutions went to unique ID numbers as record identifiers for students, faculty and staff. Of course, some believe that these kinds of numeric tags are the equivalent of the "number of the beast" mentioned in certain apocalyptic texts; pity the poor and no doubt hellbound UNR student whose number is "R000666666"!
-----
I'm ok with having a number ID to help recognize me, as long as I don't have it bar-coded onto my forearm. And I'd even appreciate it if I were a 4.0-gpa student named John Russell and I was accidentally mistaken for 2.1-gpa John Russell and the wrong transcript was sent to the grad school I was applying for. I know that's pretty much the plot of Orange County, but in the off-chance that could happen, I'm ok with an extra identifier just to get things right.
-----
This thread is great because for me it gets to the idea of abstraction as being the mathematical bridge to the modern world. When the Stone-Age farmer stopped counting off his cows as "Flossie, Bessie, Messie, ..." and starting in with "1, 2, 3, ..." he was creating a mathematical model of the material world, as you sort of have to do once you've accumulated a couple thousand cows. After that it was just a matter of time, 6000 or 8000 years maybe, until R numbers.
-----
But at what point, or what "line", does this mathematical bridge conflict with individualism and human identity? Each one of our names represents more than just who we are.. does "Bob", "Mauricel" and "Nuying" identify our individualism more than "R000345214" and "R000785114" and "R000778210" ?The fact that one would bring up "cattle" is illustrative! Are we satisfied with our masters branding us with a number? If so, then we must be satisfied in the fact that they hold an inherit power over us. I find this nothing more than a ration of servitude - hay and a barn for human cattle.
-----
Wouldn't this be the point of middle names?
-----
It's hard to have an original name with only 2 or 3 words because there are 6 billion people on this planet.
And I have met quite a few people with ONLY first and last names.
I don't mind having, as Cxxxxx stated, PLENTY of different ways to identify myself(even though I have a very unique name), so that I don't get confused with someone else.
In fact, my own mother has the same first, middle, AND last name of a wanted fugitive, but they have different socials, so that's how people know she isn't the same Karen "B" who is wanted for fraud. :)-----
I remember watching a news report about some people that are hassled every time they go to the airport, because they share a name with someone else who is on the terrorist watch list. They are red flagged as soon as they're name goes in the computer. Having a second way to identify oneself can help out a lot.
-----
This is true I should know, when I go to fly I have to go to the counter with my Drivers license because my name is on the TSA watch list which means that they have to confirm with a photo ID who I am. I can understand needing a system such as this and why it would be a great idea to use our numbers at the top of our papers. On that note I can also understand why people would be concerned with this method and what disturbs them about it.
-----
Maybe Spanish-speaking countries don't have as much of a problem since people in those cultures generally have a 1st name, what we would call "middle" name, and then two last names...first their father's last name, then their mother's last name. The only problem with this is that there isn't as much as a "melting pot" because everyone ultimately came from Spain...so there are thousands of people with the last names of Lopez and Ramirez...or both!
-----
To further the historical note, find an old social security card (one issued during or before the 1950's I believe) and you will discover that on the bottom of the card there is a message that states: "FOR SOCIAL SECURITY PURPOSES - NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" (I found this while I was gathering the things of my deceased grandmother) Here's an Example Also note that the original Social Security Act signed by Roosevelt was a completely voluntary program, and the participant would pay a significantly less amount of money than they do today.
It is obvious to see the erosion of integrity the program once served, whereas it has now proven to be a mandatory national identification system. Someone said on here as long as there is not a barcode tattooed on me I'm O.K., but if we can accept that an ID code is more convenient than our human identity, then what is stopping them from doing so? More fundamentally, who is "them", someone more "human" than you are? What is so different from a mandatory barcode than an mandatory ID number? Aren't barcodes simply ID numbers?
-----
I remember when I was getting my license, my driver's ed. instructor telling us that that they were putting a magnetic strip on IDs so that if you were being carded they could just swipe it and know it was legit. I've yet to see this happen, but I think it's a good idea. Does it reduce my identity to nothing more than a piece of plastic? I don't think so, I think it's just another way to simplifiy the process.
-----
actually I have seen this type of thing in select convienent stores. They swipe your id if buying alcohol or any tobacco substance to make sure that it is real. it isn't common but they have started to pop up and I bet will become more common real soon.
-----
Also your identity and name and such are on the id still, so it is still identifying you as you yourself, so it wouldn't be identifying you as a piece of plastic, it's just prevention of monirs getting control of whatever they can with a fake id.
-----
The scary thing about this is that swiping IDs of any kind -- license, credit card, etc -- can be a way of tracing your movements, buying habits, etc. Or that the future ID card/license/credit card will include not just a magnetic data stripe but a transponder, so you can be located anywhere, anytime. Brave New World, mama!
Some conservatives say, so what? I have nothing to hide. What are you hiding? The government must maintain order. Some liberals (and most libertarians) say, since I am not guilty of any crime, this would violate my right of privacy and my presumed innocence.
