Science, Technology, and Society Module 3

GE 6: Science, Technology and Society A Module Prepared by: JEAN A. BALDOZA Instructor College of Management 1st Sem SY: 2023-2024  MODULE GUIDE This module is designed for i...

GE 6: Science, Technology and Society A Module Prepared by: JEAN A. BALDOZA Instructor College of Management 1st Sem SY: 2023-2024  MODULE GUIDE This module is designed for independent and discovery learning. As a student, you are expected to be in charge of your own learning process by going through the different tasks and activities prepared for you. Thus, it is necessary that you carefully follow the directions. Every lesson begins with the objectives and an introduction to guide and give you an initial idea of the topic and the skills you are expected to acquire upon completing the lesson. After which are these sections which provide you with the instructions to follow, questions to answer, activities to accomplish, or texts to read and understand. To wit: ✓ Let’s Get Started. In this section, you will be asked do an activity or answer several questions to either activate your prior knowledge about the new topic or review the past ones. In answering this part of the lesson, you should only rely on your prior knowledge and NOT cheat by reading the next section or searching for answers online. ✓ Let’s Read. This contains the text or readings about the topic. Be it known that these materials are only outsourced from various print and online references. Copyrights rightfully belong to the respective authors which are cited at the end of the lesson. ✓ Let’s Remember. This contains a summary or a list of the major points or ideas from reading. ✓ Let’s Do It. This is the formative assessment of the lesson where you will answer questions to gauge your attainment of the objectives. Do as the directions say. Should you need more space for your answers, attach additional sheets of papers. At the end of each module is a major output or a performance task that will have you apply what you learned from the different lessons in the module. Instructions are detailed for your compliance. Should you have any concern or question about the lesson or the module, feel free to contact me in the following platforms: SMS: 09300694944 Facebook/ Messenger: Jean A. Baldoza E-mail: [email protected] Disclaimer: This is for Instructional purposes only. All concepts in here are based on Serafica, J. P., Pawilen, G. T., Caslib Jr., B. N. and Alata, E. J. P. (2018). Science, Technology, and Society. Rex Book Store, Inc., Sampaloc, Manila. ISBN 978-971-23-8671-8. Hence, the author of this module has no proprietary right on the same. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 2 of 16  Module 3 Module Title: Science, Technology and Society and the Human Condition Module Description: This module is all about the topics on the human person, technology as a way of revealing, good life, and when technology and humanity cross. Purpose of the Module: This module let the students learn about the science, technology and society and the human condition. Module Guide: In using this module, students must bear in mind that they should have focus inall the things they will read. At the same time, they must imagine that they are insidethe classroom while answering the activities given. If words are vague and hard to understand, students must find time to unlock the meaning of those words on their own. Students must follow the following: 1. Read the lessons carefully and with understanding. 2. Answer all the activities as instructed after each lesson. 3. Follow all the instruction written in this module and 4. Submit necessary requirements on or before the deadline. Module Outcomes: 1. Identify different conceptions of human flourishing; 2. Determine the development of the scientific method and validity of science; 3. Critic human flourishing vis-à-vis progress of science and technology to be able to define for themselves the meaning of a good life; 4. Name ways on how technology aided in revealing the truth about the human being; 5. Examine what is meant by good life; 6. Discuss the effects of the interplay between technology and humanity through the dilemma(s) they face. Module Requirements: At the end of this module, the students are expected to explain the significance of science and technology in nation building and the efforts put forward by the government to science education in the Philippines. Key Terms: Human flourishing, technology, dilemma, good life Learning Plan [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 3 of 16  Lesson 1: Human Flourishing https://prezi.com/p/hbgccsgv48zw/human-flourishing/ Let’s Hit These: At the end of this lesson, students should be able to: ✓ Identify different concepts of human flourishing; ✓ Determine the development of the scientific method and validity of science; and ✓ Critic human flourishing vis-a vis progress of science and technology to be able to define for themselves the meaning of good life. Let’s Get Started: [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 4 of 16  Directions: Select a pair and ask these questions. 1. What is good life to you? When can you say you have a good life? 2. What is human flourishing? When can you say that human is flourishing? 3. Name ways on how technology aided in revealing the truth about the human being? 4. Discuss further the quotation below. https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/bertrand_russell_383143 [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 5 of 16  Let’s Read: LESSON 1: HUMAN FLOURISHING INTRODUCTION Eudaimonia, literally "good spirit," is a term coined by renowned Greek Philosopher Aristotle (385-323BC) to describe the pinnacle of Happiness that is attainable by humans. This has often been translated into "human flourishing" in literature, arguably likening humans to flowers achieving their full bloom. https://lightmotiff.com/blogs/news/the-gift-of-aristotle As discussed in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle's human Flourishing arises as a result of different components such as phronesis, friendship, wealth and power. In the Ancient Greek society, they believe that acquiring these qualities will surely bring the seeker's happiness, which in effect allowed them to partake in the greater notion of what we call the Good. As times change, elements that comprise human flourishing changed, Which are subject to the dynamic social history as written by humans. People found means to live more comfortably, explore more places, develop more products, and make more money, and then repeating machines to make hunting and gathering easier. This development allowed them to make grander and more sophisticated machines to aid them in their endeavours that eventually led to space explorations, medicine innovations, and ventures of life after death. Our concept of human flourishing today proves to be different from what Aristotle originally perceived then humans of today are expected to become a "man of the World." He is supposed to situate himself in global neighborhood, working side by side among institutions and the government to be able to reach a common goal. Competition as a means of Survival has become pass; coordination is the new trend. Interestingly, there exists a discrepancy between eastern and western conception regarding society and human flourishing. It has been observed that western civilization tends to be more focused on the individual, while those from the east are more community-centric. Human flourishing as an end then is primarily more of a concern for western civilizations over eastern ones. This is not [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 6 of 16  to discredit our kinsfolk from the east; perhaps in their view, community takes the highest regard that the individual should sacrifice himself for the sake of the society. This is apparent in the Chinese Confucian system or the Japanese Bushido, both of which view the whole as greater than their components. The Chinese and the Japanese encourage studies of literature, sciences, and art, not entirely for oneself but in service of a greater cause. The Greek Aristotelian view, on the other hand, aims for eudaimonia as the ultimate good; there is no indication whatsoever that Aristotle entailed it instrumental to achieve some other goals. Perhaps, a person who has achieved such state would want to serve the community, but that is brought upon through deliberation based on his values rather than his belief that the state is greater than him, and thus is only appropriate that he should recognize it as a higher entity worthy of service. Nevertheless, such stereotypes cannot be said to be true given the current stance of globalization. Flourishing borders allowed people full access to cultures that as a result, very few are able to maintain their original philosophies. It is in this regard that we would tackle human flourishing- in a global perspective and as a man of the world. Science, Technology, and Human Flourishing https://www.slideshare.net/RONALYNCARIAGA1/human-flourishingpptx In the previous chapters, contributions of science and technology have been laid down thoroughly. Every discovery, innovation, and success contribute to our pool of human knowledge. Perhaps, one of the most prevalent themes is human's perpetual need to locate himself in the world [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 7 of 16  by finding proofs to trace evolution. The business of uncovering the secrets of the universe answers the question of our existence and provides us something to look forward to. Having a particular role, which is uniquely ours, elicits our idea of self-importance. It is in this regard that human flourishing is deeply intertwined with goal setting relevant to science and technology. In this case, the latter is relevant as a tool in achieving the former or echoing Heidegger's statement, technology is a human activity that we excel in as a result of achieving science. Suffice to say that the end goals of both science and technology and human flourishing are related, in that the good is inherently related to the truth. The following are two concepts about science which ventures its claim on truth. Science as Method and Results For the most part, science's reputation stems from the objectivity brought upon by an arbitrary, rigid methodology whose very character absolves it from any accusation of prejudice. Such infamy effectively raised science in a pedestal untouchable by other institutions-its sole claim to reason and empiricism garnering supporters who want to defend it and its ways. https://americanboard.org/Subjects/elementary-education/scientific-investigation-skills/ In the school, the scientific method is introduced in the earlier part of discussions. Even though the number of steps varies, it presents a general idea of how to do science: 1. Observe and determine if there are unexplained occurrences unfolding. 2. Determine the problem and identify factors involved. 3. Through past knowledge of similar instance, formulate hypothesis that could explain the said phenomenon. Ideally, the goal is to reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis for the study "to count as significant" (can also be separated into additional steps such as "to generate [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 8 of 16  prediction" or "to infer from past experiments"). 4. Conduct experiment by setting up dependent and independent variables, and trying to see how independent ones affect dependent ones. 5.Gather and analyze result throughout and upon culmination of the experiment. Examine if the data gathered are significant enough to conclude results. 6. Formulate conclusion and provide recommendation in case others would want to broaden the study. At least in the students' formative years, the above routine is basic methodology when introducing them to experimentation and empiricism- two distinct features that give science edge over other schools of thought. Throughout the course of history, however, there exists heavy objections on the scientific procedure; the line separating science and the so-called pseudoscience becomes more muddled. Verification Theory The earliest criterion that distinguishes philosophy and science is verification theory. The idea proposes that a discipline is science if it can be confirmed or interpreted in the event of an alternative hypothesis being accepted. In that regard, said theory gives premium to empiricism and only takes into account those results which are measurable and experiments which are repeatable. This was espoused by a movement in the early twentieth century called the Vienna Circle, a group of scholars who believed that only those which can be observed should be regarded as meaningful and reject those which cannot be directly accessed as meaningless. Initially, this proved to be attractive due to general consensus from people, which happened to see for themselves how the experiment occurred, solidifying its validity and garnering supporters from esteemed figures. Its shortcomings, however, proved to be a somewhat too risky- several budding theories that lack empirical results might be shot down prematurely, causing slower innovation and punishing ingenuity of newer, novel thoughts. Celebrated discoveries in physics, for instance, are initially theorized without proper acknowledgment of their being. Einstein's theory on the existence of gravitational waves would, following this thought, be dismissed due to lack of evidence almost a hundred years ago. Quantum mechanics would not have prospered if the scientific society during the time of Edwin Schrödinger did not entertain his outrageous thought that the cat in the box is both dead and alive, which can only be determined once you look in the box yourself. Aside from above critique, this theory completely fails to weed out bogus arguments that explain things coincidentally. A classic example is astrology, whose followers are able to employ the verification method in ascertaining its reliability. The idea is that since one already has some sort of expectations on what to find, they will interpret events in line with said expectations. American [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 9 of 16  philosopher Thomas Kuhn warned us against bridging the gap between evidence and theory by attempting to interpret the former according to our own biases, that is, whether or not we subscribe to the theory. Below is a short story illustrating this point: Suppose, for instance, this girl, Lea has a (not-so- scientific) theory that her classmate lan likes her. Good, she thought, I like him too. But how do I know that he likes me? She began by observing him and his interactions with her. Several gestures she noted include his always exchanging pleasantries with her whenever they bump into each other, his big smile when he sees her, and him going out of his way to greet her even when riding a jeepney. Through these observations, she was then able to conclude that Ian does like her because, she thought, why would anyone do something like that for a person he does not like? As it turns out, however, Ian is just generally happy to meet people he knew. He had known Lea since they were in first year and regards her as a generally okay person. It is no surprise then that upon learning that Ian basically does this to everyone, Lea was crushed. She vowed to herself that she would never assume again. Based from above story, is it justified for Lea to think that Ian does not like her? Not quite. The next criterion also warns us about the danger of this view. Falsification Theory Perhaps the current prevalent methodology in science, falsification theory asserts that as long as an ideology is not proven to be false and can best explain a phenomenon over alternative theories, we should accept the said ideology. Due to its hospitable character, the shift to this theory allowed emergence of theories otherwise rejected by verification theory. It does not promote ultimate adoption of one theory but instead encourages research in order to determine which among the theories can stand the test of falsification. The strongest one is that which is able to remain upheld amidst various tests, while being able to make particularly risky predictions about the world. Karl Popper is the known proponent of this view. He was notorious for stating that up-and-coming theories of the time, such as Marx's Theory of Social History and Sigmund Freud's Psychoanalysis, are not testable and thus not falsifiable, and subsequently questioning their status as scientific. Albeit majority of scientists nowadays are more inclined to be Popperian in their beliefs, this theory, similar to the theory [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 10 of 16  above, presents certain dangers by interpreting an otherwise independent evidence in light of their pet theory. To illustrate, previous story is restated: Ian is generally everybody's friend. He likes to be around people and generally aspires to become everybody's friend. However, there is this one girl, Lea, who seemed to not like him when he is around. Every time he waves at her, she turns away, and when they are in the same room, she avoids his glances. Through this, he concluded that Lea does not like him and does his best to show her that he is not a threat. He began greeting her whenever they pass by each other at the corridor, even going so far as calling her attention when he was in the jeepney and saw her walking past. When they are able to talk to each other, he found out that Lea is just really shy and is not accustomed to people greeting her. He then was able to conclude that his initial impression of her not liking him (as a person) is wrong and thus said proposition is rejected. Although there is no happy ending yet for Lea and Ian, we can thus see how in this case, falsification method is prone to the same generalizations committed by the verification method. There is no known rule as to the number of instance that a theory is rejected or falsified in order for it to be set aside. Similarly, there is no assurance that observable event or "evidences" are indeed manifestations of a certain concept or "theories." Thus, even though, theoretically, falsification method is more accepted, scientists are still not convinced that it should be regarded as what makes a discipline scientific. Science as a Social Endeavor Due to inconclusiveness of the methodologies previously cited, a new school of thought on the proper demarcation criterion of science emerged. Several philosophers such as Paul Thagard, Imre Lakatos, Helen Longino, David Bloor, and Richard Rorty, among others, presented an alternative demarcation that explores the social dimension of science and effectively, technology. Sciences cease to belong solely to gown- wearing, bespectacled scientists at laboratories. The new view perpetuates a dimension which generally benefits the society. For instance, far-off places in South America where many of the tribes remain [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 11 of 16  uncontacted, do not regard western science as their science. Whatever their science is, it can be ascertained that it is in no way inferior to that of globalized peoples' science. Thus, it presents an alternative notion that goes beyond the boundaries of cold, hard facts of science and instead projects it in a different light, such as a manifestation of shared experience forging solidarity over communities. Science and Results For the most part, people who do not understand science are won over when the discipline is able to produce results. Similar to when Jesus performed miracles and garnered followers, people are sold over the capacity of science to do stuff they cannot fully comprehend. In this particular argument, however, science is not the only discipline which is able to produce results-religion, luck, and human randomness are some of its contemporaries in the field. For some communities without access to science, they can turn to divination and superstition and still get the same results. Science is not entirely foolproof, such that it is correct 100% of the time. Weather reports, for one, illustrate fallibility and limitations of their scope, as well as their inability to predict disasters. The best that can be done during an upcoming disaster is to reinforce materials to be more calamity proof and restore the area upon impact. It can be then concluded that science does not monopolize the claim for definite results. Science as Education Aforementioned discussion notes that there is no such thing as a singular scientific method, offering instead a variety of procedures that scientists can experiment with to get results and call them science. Discoveries in physics, specifically in quantum mechanics, appeared to have debunked the idea of objectivity in reality, subscribing instead to alternative idea called intersubjectivity. With objectivity gone, it has lost its number one credence. Nevertheless, there still exists a repressing concept that comes about as a result of unjustified irreverence of science-our preference of science-inclined students over those which are less adept. There are distinct portions in entrance exams in the secondary and tertiary levels that are dedicated to science and mathematics. In the Philippines, a large distribution of science high schools can be found all over the country, forging competition for aspiring students to [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 12 of 16  secure a slot and undergo rigorous science and mathematics training based on specialized curricula. Although arguable as these schools also take great consideration in providing holistic education by assuring that other non-science courses are covered, adeptness in science and mathematics are the primary condition to be admitted. This preference is also reflected on the amount of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)-offering schools accommodating Grades 11 and 12. Among all the clusters being offered, STEM trumps the remaining clusters in terms of popularity and distribution, with Accounting and Business coming in as a close second. One might infer that there are more demand in this field as students are preconditioned that the field would latter land them high-paying jobs and a lucrative career after graduation. How is science perceived by those who graduated from this field? A couple of years ago, a student entered a class all curious and excited. When he was made to report on Paul Feyerabend's work How to Defend Society Against Science one day, he looked dissident, staunchly refusing to consider the author's ideas on science and critiquing him instead. When asked why, he reasoned out that he had come from a science high school and was trained to regard science in a distinct accord. As isolated a case as it may seem, it somewhat suggests that the aforementioned kind of academic environment has made students unwelcoming of objections against science. Reminiscent of Paul Feyerabend's sentiment above, he muses how the educational system can hone and preserve students' capacity to entertain other options and decide for themselves the best among all presented. It will thus reinforce their imagination and allow some level of unorthodoxy, bringing forth novel discoveries that otherwise would not be considered had they stuck to the default methodology. Innovations are brought forth by the visionaries, not the prude legalists, and several notable figures in science even consider themselves as outsiders. If one is really in pursuit of human flourishing, it would make sense for them to pursue it holistically. Simply mastering science and technology would be inadequate if we are to, say, socialize with people or ruminate on our inner self. Aristotle's eudaimonic person is required to be knowledgeable about science, among other things of equal importance. They are supposed to possess intellectual virtues that will enable them to determine truth from falsehood or good reasoning from poor reasoning. A true eudaimon recognizes that flourishing requires one to excel in various dimensions, such as linguistic, kinetic, artistic, and socio-civic. Thus, he understands that he should not focus on one aspect alone. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 13 of 16  How Much Is Too Much? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FxLQ9KPYJ4 In 2000, world leaders signed the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) that targets eight concerns, one of which states that they should be able to forge a global partnership for development. Inasmuch as the institutes imposing them do so in good faith, the primary goal to achieve growth for all might prove to be fatal in the long run. Economists believe that growth is the primary indicator of development, as both go hand in hand, and has put forth their resources in trying to achieve such. Technology has been a primary instrument in enabling them to pursue said goal, utilizing resources, machineries, and labor. What is missing in this equation is that growth presents an illusory notion of sustainability-the world's resources can only provide so much, it cannot be expected to stretch out for everybody's consumption over a long period of time. Moreover, growth is not infinite-there is no preordained ceiling once the ball starts rolling. If the MDG convention's intent was to get everyone in the growth ship, that ship will surely sink before leaving the port. The same analogy applies to the capacity of nature to accommodate us, which Joseph Hickel contemplated on, suggesting that developed countries should not push forth more [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 14 of 16  growth but instead adopt "de-development" policies or else, everybody loses. The rapid pace of technological growth allows no room for nature to recuperate, resulting in exploitation and irreversible damages to nature. Right now, we are experiencing repercussions of said exploits in the hands of man-made climate change, which would snowball and affect majority of flora and fauna, driving half of the latter extinct in less than a hundred year from now. If this continues in its currently alarming rate, we might bring about our own extinction. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 15 of 16  Let’s Read: LESSON 2: TECHNOLOGY AS A WAY OF REVEALING At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to: explain the concept of human condition before science technology; identify the change that happened in human condition after science and technology; and name ways on how technology aided in revealing the truth about the human being. INTRODUCTION Comparing the lives of the people before and now will make anyone realize the changes that happened in society not just in terms of culture, language, or rights but more importantly, changes in people's way of life due to the existence of science and technology. The term "generation gap" is attributed mainly to the changes brought about by technology. Although the original idea is for technology to help everyone, it cannot be denied that until today, not everyone is comfortable in using the different kinds of technologies. Mostly those who belong to the older generation think that these technologies are too complicated to operate. They have been used to the simple living in the past and these available technological devices, though very appealing, are a difficult puzzle to them. However, this gap is not something to be worried about. This does not in any way make technology a villain. Instead, it is a people in the field of science and technology to make these technological advancements more accessible and less confusing for people who are not as young anymore. This is also a challenge for the younger generation to take the older generation to an exciting journey in science and technology In this way, everyone can experience what it is like to live with ease and comfort because of the availability of modern technology. challenge for Even before, people are already fascinated with science and technology. This fascination led to numerous magnificent inventions that people in the present are able to enjoy and benefit from. Through science and technology, people get to experience what it really means to live because it helps people in more ways than one. People who lived in the past and people who are living in the present all have different views of what it means to flourish, primarily due to the kind of environment and the period one is in. People's ways of life and how the society works also affect how one construes the concept of human flourishing. The environment needs to be assessed in order to know the possibility of human flourishing and to what extent it is possible. Since there have been drastic changes in people's way [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 16 of 16  of life, it can be inferred that there have been drastic changes not only in the conception of human flourishing but to people's actual human condition. These changes were brought about by the interplay of different factors but essentially, it was brought about by science and technology. The Human Condition Before Common Era Our early ancestors' primal need to survive paved way for the invention of several developments. Gifted with brains more advanced than other creatures, humans are able to utilize abundant materials for their own ease and comfort. As it is difficult to pinpoint the particular period where technology is said to have started, one can say that at the very least, the motivation to make things easier has been around since humans are. Homo erectus have been using fire to cook, through chipping one flint over the other to produce a spark, all the while without realizing the laws of friction and heat. Tools from stone and flints marked the era of the Stone Age, during the advent of our very own Homo sapiens, and humans began to sharpen stones as one would a knife; an example of this is the simple machine called wedge. This particular period proved to be difficult for our ancestors, but in a remarkably distinct way. There is little to no written accounts except for several cave drawings and unearthed artifacts from various parts of the world that narrate how their culture came to be. It then proves that there is little capacity for our ancestors to contemplate and perceive things outside themselves in a more reflective manner. For instance, there are several excavations in different parts of Europe of miniature statues prevalent during the Paleolithic period, the so-called "Venus" figure. It depicts a rudimentary carving of a voluptuous woman out of ivory or stone. The reason behind this is still unknown to archaeologists and anthropologists alike; they can only infer that the humans of yesterday have a certain fixation on the female anatomy. What did this fascination translate to? Lack of conclusive evidence hinders us from proceeding any further. Soon enough, people discovered minerals and began forging metalwork. They realized that these substances are more durable, malleable, and have more luster than the previous material. On the other hand, there are some indicators that humans in the past share the same concerns and interests, suggesting that these inclinations persist through multitudes of generation over several millennia. Fur clothing and animal skin are primarily used for comfort against harsh winds-our ancestors are able to draw the connection between their being naked and vulnerable due to some lack of fur or protective covering which would otherwise allow them to withstand extreme weather conditions. They begin to cover themselves up out of necessity, and gradually, added several more to their garments. Some of those found at excavation sites are reminiscent of early accessories, suggesting that our ancestors have been deeply engaged in the concept of beauty. Perhaps, they [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 17 of 16  had taken a liking to a certain shiny stone, or a perfectly shaped bone, and wanted to wear it as trophy. What does this tell of them and their philosophies? Were they perhaps proud to show off their hunt and how good of a hunter they were? Were they concerned with social standing and stratification? How about the meaning of life? Were they also curious on finding explanations to certain phenomena? At least for the last question, it seems that they have found their answer in the person of religion. Excavations on the latter half of the Stone Age include several figures thought to be ceremonial, meaning, that perhaps people of the time had also painstakingly wrought and hewed said figures in honor of some deity. This notion, as it was then and as it is now, is often people's resort to make sense of events happening outside their control. The initial roster of primitive gods includes objects they encounter through their day-to-day lives, so it is not surprising that different tribes may have different gods. Those who might have lived alongside majestic creatures, such as elephants and mammoths, might have been awed by their size and worshiped them as the owner of the land, asking for blessings in their hunting ground. On the contrary, they might have hunted the mammoths for their woolly coat and meat, taking down the animal for the entire community to eat. In windy places near mountains, they might have had a mountain god to explain wind currents and ask for provisions. On the other hand, those who were near coastal areas or bodies of water might have had water gods they referred to when asking for a good catch. However, it might be also the case that people of prior civilizations shared several generic gods, such as the sun. Nevertheless, it can be positively inferred that like the people of today, our ancestors also found the need to explain things in a way that makes sense to them. They quickly realized that there are events outside of their control and attempted to justify things as being a work of a supernatural being. Throughout the course of history, religion remains to be the strongest contender to science arguably due to its being the most easily grasped. Admittedly, once people stop connecting the dots between cause and effect, they turn to something that could possibly explain their inadequacies in making sense of the world. The people of yesterday appeared to have acknowledged early on that they could only do and understand as much, that perhaps other powers at play also existed alongside them. This notion effectively humbled and perhaps grounded them, with their constant befuddlement serving as an early reminder that they were way behind several larger, more powerful forces in nature in terms of order of things. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 18 of 16  The Human Condition in the Common Era For a long time, humans were content with their relationship with nature. Earliest case of man- made extinction occurred over 12,000 years ago, possibly brought upon by hunting and territorial disputes. The Holocene extinction, also called the sixth extinction or more aptly Anthropocene extinction, occurred from as early as between 100,000 to 200,000 years up to the present. It pertains to the ongoing extinction of several species-both flora and fauna-due to human activity. Driven by their primal need to survive and gaining the upper hand in terms of development and adaptability, humans were quick to find ways to drive off other megafaunas threatening a prospective hunting spot and eventually, settling grounds. Growing population also necessitated finding additional resources, leading to overhunting and overfishing common prey, some of which were endemic to the area. Hunting, coupled with a changing terrain that the humans began cultivating when agriculture emerged some 9.000 years ago, caused several species to lose competition in territory and food resources. Formation of communities caused humans to expand more in territory and more people to feed; large, separate communities hailing from the same ancestors and residing in the same large community paved way for civilizations. Even as a community, the people realized that though they were at most self-sufficient, they were in constant need of resources. Albeit waging wars with other tribes seemed to be the early solution, they were able to find out some 5,000 years ago that engaging in a peaceful negotiation was also a possible and less bloody method. They realized that they could get hold of things not present in their towns by offering something of same value present in theirs. It is in this process that trade emerged, leading to cross-town and eventually cross-cultural interaction as more products were exchanged and the initial needs extended to wants. People then had a new objective-gather as much products as possible. They have turned to wealth as one of their goals as humans and ultimately as civilizations, for they perceived that those who have live comfortably and thus are generally happier than those who do not have sufficient wealth. Thus, they began to hunt, farm, and produce things with prospect of profit. A nuclear community which is initially self-sufficient has to accommodate their growing population with depleting resources, leading them to be reliant to other communities' produce which keeps them surviving. In return, these communities have to make use of their current resources twice as much to provide for other communities' needs. Products of every kind were exchanged, ranging from necessary ones such as crops, cattle, poultry, others of kind, and clothing materials, up to metals, accessories, weapons, spices, literature, and entertainment. They were able to find and create niches for interests. When they could not sell products, they used their skills and got compensated for it-bringing forth a specialized group of artisans. Humanity became more complex. The primary goal was not merely to survive, but to live the good life. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 19 of 16  Technology has been instrumental in all of these because in searching for the good life, people were able to come up with creations that would make life easier, more comfortable, and more enriching. Although the good life envisioned before might be pale in comparison to the multifariousness of today, it offered us the initial intricacies of how today came to be. Such intricacies are also evident in the machines created and causes endeavored by the people of long ago. They perceive death as, at the very least, unpleasant and concocted potions to ward evil off from their kinsmen, often appealing to their gods for blessings. Medicine was thus born, although it would take a considerably long time before it part ways with potion. They became fixated with gold and were adamant in procuring more, trying to use incantations with mixtures of substances to turn lead into one. This ultimately paved way for the emergence of chemistry in its primitive form, not quite distinct from alchemy. Due to differing races, belief, or abundance of resources and/or territory, wars were always being waged, leading communities to allocate resources to the militia. Initially, the early leaders were those who portrayed exceptional strength among their group-this condition carried on for generations. Physical strength was valued at most, although there appeared to be as many intellectually gifted figures just the same. These innovators were primarily the ones behind discoveries and triumphs of these civilizations. Position-wise the humans of today are much better off compared to humans several centuries ago. Advancements in medicine, technology, health, and education ushered in humanity's best yet, and show no sign of stopping. Below are some of the notable comparisons then and now: 1. Mortality Rate. Due to technology, lesser women and children die during birth, assuring robust population and strong workforce. Medical care for premature infants allows them to survive and develop normally, while proper maternal care ensures that mothers can fully recover and remain empowered. 2. Average Lifespan. Aside from the reason that people engage less in combat and are less likely to die in treatable diseases now as opposed to then, science is able to prolong lives by enhancing living status and discovering different remedies to most diseases. Distribution of medicines is also made easier and faster. 3. Literacy Rate. Access to education provided to more individuals generally creates a more informed public that could determine a more just society. 4. Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Although not an indicator of an average person's lifestyle in a certain country, it is often used to determine the value of the country's goods and services produced [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 20 of 16  within the territory given a certain time period. Higher country income is brought upon by high productivity, often an indicator of presence of technology. The Essence of Technology Humanity has indeed come a long way from our primitive ways, and as a general rule, it is said that we are more "developed" than we were before. Above data are few indicators of the route that we have come to take as species, and there are no signs of stopping. Modern humans are reliant on technology in their search for the good life. We see ways and means from nature to utilize and achieve growth - a goal that we believe would bring forth betterment. In retrospect, this view of technology proves to be a goal-oriented. It assumes that it is instrumental in achieving a goal in mind, that it is a purposeful, deliberate craft humans steer in order to reach some greater good. In the advent of postmodernism, however, the deterministic view appended to technology crumbled as people began to question if anything is deterministic at all. Apart from its purpose, what is technology? Was the history of technology brought purposeful choices for man in his search for the ultimate good? Some tried to redefine technology away from its purpose. One philosopher by the name of Martine Heidegger argued that its essence, or purpose, and being are different from each other. He was able to expound on this point upon identifying that technology can either be perceived as first, a means to achieve man's end and second, that which constitutes human activity. The second perspective paints technology in such a way that each period reveals a particular character regarding man's being. A characteristic design, or flaw, unfolds based on the repercussions brought upon by immersing ourselves with a piece of new technology. In effect, through technology, a myriad of new questions begins to mount. Rather than thinking that humans have a clear idea of what to confront the unknown and see how they would react. This is not a good thing altogether though, for technological revelation is but one of the many ways to perceive the world. However, as long as humans are invested in growth and development, we cannot distance ourselves from this perspective. In the name of growth, we view the world as a field of resources, vent on attributing monetary value on seemingly priceless entities. We begin to categorize nature as renewable and nonrenewable instead of seeing it as it is. Humans are reduced into the amount of productivity they are able to render during their lifetime, and our current mindset is geared toward which would utilize our own skills. A good life is one which is practical in essence; a life which makes use of our labor and which we get compensated fairly upon. It is no wonder that the sciences are one of the most sought-after courses, for the opportunities are plenty and the resources are bountiful. Since humans appear not to really know what they are seeking for, the search continues. It is a looming fear, however, that the path we are treading will not take us to the right [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 21 of 16  direction, leading us in endless circles instead in our pursuit of the good life. This is the danger presented by too much reliance on technology. Humans are lose track of things that matter, reducing their surroundings to their economic value. As this presents strong backing by the sciences whose reverence is also brought upon by our deluded enchantment with technology, it will prove to be a herculean task to distance ourselves from this perspective and consider alternatives. After all, it was science and technology gave us explanations, which worked for us and benefited us. Rejecting a working, tried-and-tested process seems foolish, more so, knowing that there are no options of equal value. It will be absurd to venture the dark and the unknown, but it should be done in order for us to retrace our steps to be able to achieve the Good. Backtracking The Human Condition Technology's initial promises proved to be true, regardless of its ramifications. ALL in all the human condition improved, only if by improving we measure the level comfort, various scientific breakthroughs, and improved lifestyles of those who had the luxury to afford to do so. Different machineries aid on prolonging lives assisting those with disabilities, honing efficiency in industrial workplaces, and even exploring the universe for places we can thrive once all the Earth's resources are depleted. As to the Initial aims, appears that things really did not much differ. Some places in the world are still battling for their daily survival disease, tribe wars, lack of habitable territories, and competitions on resources are several factors contributing to such. People still wage wars in the basis of races, belief, and abundance of resources and/ or territory except that now, they are able to inflict such in a global scale. A lot of people still subscribe to religion in explaining things that they do not know. For those who have ceased to do so, they have turned this workships to reverence of science. Whether science or religion, these people are still bent on trying to make sense of the events happening in the world on the basis of either of these two paradigms. They are still trying to discover and rediscover things that would give meaning to their lives whether it be honor, strength, or merit. People are still trying to make sense of their existence in the world, and technology does little to aid them in their pursuit of life's meaning. It seems that the human condition, although more sophisticated, is nothing but a rehashed version of its former self. Nothing much has changed since then, and it appears that nothing will change in the times to come if we fail to shift our view elsewhere. While it is true that technology offered us one compelling notion of the truth and the good, we should be staunch in our resolve if we want to know the real one. For starters, we might begin with considering other concepts, which corresponds to the good, such as Aristotle's conception of human flourishing. His notion entertains [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 22 of 16  the idea of holistic enrichment of a person situated in is society. A notable distinction on Aristotle's idea is his subscription on evaluative concepts called virtues and their role in achieving the good life. Technological advancements are seemingly occurring in a rapid pace that our morality cannot quite keep up no such consideration was given in this approach in achieving the good life. This will further be discussed in the following chapters. Think about this: What would have happened to human kind if technology did not exist? [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 23 of 16  Lesson 3: The Good Life LESSON OBJECTIVES At the end of his lesson, the students should be able to: examine what is meant by a good life; identify how humans attempt to attain what is deemed to be a good life; and recognize possibilities available to human being to attain The good life. INTRODUCTION In ancient Greece, long before the word "science" has been coined, the need to understand the world and reality was bound with the need to understand the self and the good life. For Plato, the task understanding the things in the world runs parallel with the job of truly getting into what will make the soul flourish. In an attempt to understand reality and the external world, man must seek to understand himself, too. It was Aristotle who gave a definitive distinction between the theoretical and practical sciences. Among the theoretical disciplines, Aristotle included logic, biology, physics, and metaphysics, among others. Among the practical ones, Aristotle counted ethics and politics. Whereas "truth" is the aim of the theoretical sciences, the "good" is the end goal of the practical ones. Every attempt to know is connected in some way in an attempt to find the "good" or as said in the previous lesson, the attainment of human flourishing. Rightly so, one must find the truth about what the good is before one can even try to locate that which is good. In the previous lesson, we have seen how a misplaced or an erroneous idea of human flourishing can turn tables for all of us, make the science work against us rather than for us, and draw a chasm between the search for truth and for the good. In this lesson, we endeavor to go back a little and answer these questions: what does it really mean to live a good life? What qualifies as a good existence? Granting this understanding, we are assumed to be in a better position to reconcile our deepest existential needs as human beings and science as tool to maneuver around the world. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 24 of 16  Aristotle and How We All Aspire for a Good Life It is interesting to note that the first philosopher who approached the problem of reality from a "scientific" lens as we know now, is also the first thinker who dabbled into the complex problematization of the end goal of life: happiness. This man is none other than Aristotle. Compared to his teacher and predecessor, Plato, Aristotle embarked on a different approach in figuring out reality. In contrast to Plato who thought that things in this world are not real and are only copies of the real in the world of forms, Aristotle puts everything back to the ground in claiming that this world is all there is to it and that this world is the only reality we can all access. For Plato, change is so perplexing that it can only make sense if there are two realities: the world of forms and the world of matter. Consider the human person. When you try to see yourself in front of the mirror, you normally say and think that you are looking at yourself-that is, you are e person who slept last night and you are the same person looking at yourself now, despite the occasional changes like a new pimple that grows on your nose. The same is true for a seed that you threw out of the garden last month. When you peek into same patch of land where the seed ingrained itself into, you may be surprised to see a little plant showing itself to you and to the sun. Plato recognized change as a process and as a phenomenon that happens in the world, that in fact, it is constant. However, Plato also claims that despite the reality of change, things remain, and they retain their ultimate "whatness"; that you remain to be you despite the pimple that now sits atop your nose Plato was convinced that reality is full of these seemingly contrasting manifestations of change and permanence. For Plato, this can only be explained by postulating two aspects of reality, two worlds if you wish: the world of forms and the world of matter. In the world of matter, things are changing and impermanent. In the world of forms, the entities are only copies of the ideal and the models, and the forms are the only real entities. Things are red in this world because they participate in what it means to be red in the world of forms. Aristotle, for his part, disagreed with his teacher's position and forwarded the idea that there is no reality over and above what the senses can perceive. As such, it is only by observation of the external world that one can truly understand what reality all is about. Change is a process that is inherent in things. We, along with all other entities in the world, start as potentialities and move toward actualities. The movement, of course, entails change. Consider a seed that eventually germinates and grows into a plant. The seed that turned to become the plant underwent change- from the potential plant that is the seed to its full actuality, the plant. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 25 of 16  Aristotle extends this analysis from the external world into the province of the human person and declares that even human beings are potentialities who aspire for their actuality. Every human being moves according to some end. Every action that emanates from a human person is a function of the purpose (telos) that the person has. When a boy asks for a burger from a Filipino burger joint, the action that he takes is motivated primarily by the purpose that he has, inferably to get full or to taste the burger that he only sees on TV. When a girl tries to finish her degree in the university, despite the initial failures she may have had, she definitely is being propelled by a higher purpose than to just graduate. She wants something more, maybe to have a license and land a promising job in the future. Every human person, according to Aristotle, aspires for an end. This end, we have learned from the previous chapters, is happiness or human flourishing. No individual-young or old, fat or skinny, male or female-resists happiness. We all want to be happy. Aristotle claims that happiness is the be all and end all of everything that we do. We may not realize it but the end goal of everything that we do is happiness. If you ask one person why he is doing what he is doing, he may not readily say that it is happiness that motivates him. Hard-pressed to explain why he is motivated by what motivates him will reveal that happiness is the grand, motivating force everything that he does. When Aristotle claims that we want to be happy, he does not necessarily mean the everyday happiness that we obtain when we win a competition, or we eat our favorite dish in a restaurant. What Aristotle means is human flourishing, a kind of contentment in knowing that one is getting the best out of life. A kind of feeling that one has maxed out his potentials in the world, that he has attained the crux of his humanity. Happiness as the Goal of a Good Life In the eighteenth century, John Stuart Mill declared the Greatest Happiness Principle by saying that an action is right as far as it maximizes the attainment of happiness for the greatest number of people. At a time when people were skeptical about claims on the metaphysical, people could not make sense of the human flourishing that Aristotle talked about in the days of old. Mill said that individual happiness of each individual should be prioritized and collectively dictates the kind of action that should be endorsed. Consider the pronouncements against mining. When an action benefits the greatest number of people, said action is deemed ethical. Does mining benefit rather than hurt the majority? Does it offer more benefits rather than disadvantages? Does mining result in more people getting happy rather than sad? If the answers to the said questions are in the affirmative, then the said action, mining, is deemed ethical. The ethical is, of course, meant to lead us to the good and happy life. Through the ages, as has been expounded in the previous chapters, man has constantly struggled with the external world in order to reach human flourishing. History has given birth to different schools of thought, all of which aim for the good and happy life. Materialism The first [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 26 of 16  materialists were the atomists in Ancient Greece. Democritus and Leucippus led a school whose primary belief is that the world is made up of and is controlled by the tiny indivisible units in the world called atomos or seeds. For Democritus and his disciples, the world, including human beings, is made up of matter. There is no need to posit immaterial entities as sources of purpose. Atomos simply comes together randomly to form the things in the world. As such, only material entities matter. In terms of human flourishing, matter is what makes us attain happiness. We see this at work with most people who are clinging on to material wealth as the primary source of the meaning of their existence. Hedonism The hedonists, for their part, see the end goal of life in acquiring pleasure. Pleasure has always been the priority of hedonists. For them, life is about obtaining and indulging in pleasure because life is limited. The mantra of this school of thought is the famous. "Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die." Led by Epicurus, this school of thought also does not buy any notion of afterlife just like the materialists. Stoicism Another school of thought led by Epicurus, the stoics espoused the idea that to generate happiness, one must learn to distance oneself and be apathetic. The original term, apatheia, precisely means to be indifferent. For the stoics, happiness can only be attained by a careful practice of apathy. We should, in this worldview, adopt the fact that some things are not within our control. The sooner we realize this, the happier we can become. Theism Most people find the meaning of their lives using God as a fulcrum of their existence. The Philippines, as a predominantly Catholic country, is witness to how people base their life goals on beliefs that hinged on some form of supernatural reality called heaven. The ultimate basis of happiness for theists is the communion with God. The world where we are in is only just a temporary reality where we have to maneuver around while waiting for the ultimate return to the hands of God. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 27 of 16  Humanism Humanism as another school of thought espouses the freedom of man to carve his own destiny and to legislate his own laws, free from the shackles of a God that monitors and controls. For humanists, man is literally the captain of his own ship. Inspired by the enlightenment in seventeenth century, humanists see themselves not merely as stewards of the creation but as individuals who are in control of themselves and the world outside them. This is the spirit of most scientists who thought that the world is a place and space for freely unearthing the world in seeking for ways on how to improve the lives of its inhabitants. As a result of the motivation of the humanist current, scientists eventually turned to technology in order to ease the difficulty of life as illustrated in the previous lessons. Scientists of today meanwhile are ready to confront more sophisticated attempts at altering the world for the benefit of humanity. Some people now are willing to tamper with time and space in the name of technology. Social media, as an example, has been so far a very effective way of employing technology in purging time and space. Not very long ago, communication between two people from two continents in the planet will involve months of waiting for a mail to arrive. Seeing each other real time while talking was virtually impossible. Now, communication between two people wherever they are, is not just possible but easy. The Internet and smart phones made real- time communication possible not just between two people, but even with multiple people simultaneously. Technology allowed us to tinker with our sexuality. Biologically male individuals can now undergo medical operation if they so wish for sexual reassignment. Breast implants are now available and can be done with relative convenience if anyone wishes to have one. Hormones may also be injected in order to alter the sexual chemicals in the body. Whether or not we agree with these technological advancements, these are all undertaken in the hopes of attaining the good life. The balance, however, between the good life, ethics, and technology has to be attained. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 28 of 16  1. What is the good life? 2. What is the relationship between the good life and science? 3. Does technology lead us to the good life? How and why? [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 29 of 16  LESSON 3: WHEN TECHNOLOGY AND HUMANITY CROSS LESSON OBJECTIVES: At end of this lesson, the students should be able to: Know the different technological advancements in society ; discuss the development of science and technology in Philippines; and discuss humanity the through effects of the dilemma(s)inter play between they face. INTRODUCTION The ever-growing society has made people see technology as some form of necessity. Tracing back its origins, the word ”technology” came from the Greek words techne and logos which mean art and word, respectively. Taking the two words together, technology means a discourse on arts (Buchanan, 2010). It first appeared in the seventeenth century where the concept was only used to talk about the arts, specifically applied arts. However, as technology progressed, the concept also started to have a wider range of meaning where art is no longer the only topic included. Concepts like machine and tools were also attached to the word “technology” which is the more popular sense of the concept nowadays. The roles played by technology these days are very crucial not only to a few but also to everyone. In one way or another, each person in the society is directly or indirectly affected by technology whether be wills it or not. In fact, most people survive their everyday lives with great reliance to the different technological advancements already available to the masses. While there may be some who would claim that their lives are not greatly affected by technology, the fact cannot be denied that technology is already an inevitable part of the society. It is with great effort that people were able to achieve such great inventions. It makes life so much easier and more convenient than ever before. It can clearly be seen from the simplest task at home to the most complicated ones inside the office or laboratory. Technology these days enjoys such fame and glory because of the many different benefits it brings to mankind. Some would even say that it does not only bring convenience but also pleasure and happiness to people. This is because of the different leisure activities that technology can offer to people. For example, it allows people to listen to good music wherever they are. Another is, it allows them to communicate with their loved ones anywhere in the world; but most of all, it allows them to surf and play games anytime, anywhere. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 30 of 16  The act of pinpointing a single activity that does not in any way require the use of technology has become very hard because almost all activities that humans perform already require the assistance of some kind of technological advancement. But this is not all, for there are people who would even argue that technology has become a necessity and no longer a want. At present, people work very hard in order to save money to buy these “necessities” while in the past, people only used their money for the things that would help them survive like food, housing, and clothing. In effect, anything outside these categories was considered a luxury. However, that is no longer the case at present. In general, technology keeps on progressing due to not only the changing times and environment but also to the ever-progressing mind of mankind. It would not be possible for all these technological advancements to exist if it were not for the brilliance, creativeness, and power of the mind. However, it is also important to note that anything too much is bad. The same problem is faced by technology. Although it has been very helpful to people, it is still not immune to criticisms and backlash. Various ethical dilemmas have been identified throughout time involving the use of different technological devices and its effects to humanity. Usually, different problems arise when either the technological device available is misused or if in the first place, it was invented to produce bad results. People who are aware of the possible dangers of the use or misuse of technology are not keeping still. They lay these dilemmas for the publics to see and realize what they are in for. In this lesson, several technological devices will be properly introduced, the roles they play in society and their effects, particularly the lives of the people will be identified, and the problems they face w also be examined thoroughly. Television Sets, Mobile Phones, Computers, and Humanity A number of technological devices can be easily found inside the home, the most accessible place to anyone. Having said that, it can also be easily inferred that these technological devices are some of the most popular and most commonly used types of devices across all age groups. Almost all households, if not all, own these types of devices. To be more specific, these “celebrities” in the field of technology are television sets, mobile phones, and computers. People all over the world use these technologies every day to accomplish different purposes. First, according to Kantar Media, one of the most trusted television audience measurement providers, in the Philippines, 92 percent of urban homes and 70 percent of rural homes own at least one television set. It is for this reason why television remains to be the ultimate medium for advertisement placements (The Manila Times, 2014). This survey simply shows that almost all [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 31 of 16  Filipinos use this particular type of device. In fact, Filipinos are believed to have this big fascination for television. Most of the time, they watch television during their free time or any time of the day when they have nothing important to do. In addition to this, Kantar Media also reported that in the Philippines, the current count of households with television set already reached 15.135 million (Noda, 2012). This number signifies something, that is, television plays a great role in the lives of the people or in this case, the Filipinos. Laptops have been available to the public for even less time than personal computers. Before, the first design of computer was so big that it could occupy whole floors of buildings. It was not long before people started dreaming that they could bring their devices to any place they wished. They hoped that someday it would be possible for these devices to be portable. It was believed that the transition from a personal computer to a laptop was only a matter of design, an improvement and a little deviation from the standard design of a personal computer. The first true portable computer was released in April 1981. It was called the Osborne 1 (Orfano,2011). From that moment on, the evolution of laptops continued until the present time where various designs and models are already available. A typical household owns at least four of the following devices: a mobile phone (89%), smartphone (53%), tablet (14%), desktop (39%), laptop or netbooks (37%), and smart TV (4% (Philstar, 2013). These data prove the deep-seated fascination of Filipinos to different technological devices. Here are some facts about Filipinos and their use of gadgets and the Internet (Rappler, n.d.): Mobile phone subscription is at 119 million. Filipinos spend approximately 3.2 hours on mobile and 5.2 hours on desktop daily. Currently, the Philippines has one of the highest digital populations in the world. There are now 47 million active Facebook accounts in the Philippines. The Philippines is the fastest-growing application market in Southeast Asia. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 32 of 16  Roles Played by These Technological Advancements Television sets, mobile phones, and computers or laptops all have different functions and roles played in the lives of the people, although some may be a little similar. These roles have become so essential that people, more specifically Filipinos, developed a strong inclination toward technology and its products. For instance, television is mainly used as a platform for advertisements and information dissemination. In fact, television remains to be the most used avenue by different advertising companies not only in the Philippines but also all over the world. Various advertising companies trust that television is still one of the most used technological devices up until today. However, it is important to note that these are just some of the roles played by television. Aside from the ones mentioned above, it also serves as a recreational activity and good stress reliever to most families, specifically to Filipino families. Television also is a good platform for different propagandas and advocacies. Lastly, it can also be a good way to bond with one's family members. Mobile phones, on the other hand, also have their own roles in the lives of the people. They are primarily used for communication. Mobile phones offer services like texting and calling. In the past, these were the only functions of the mobile phone but as technology progressed, there have been many additional features included on mobile phones. For example, in the present, people use their mobile phones to surf the Internet and to take pictures more than to text or to call people. This is the reason why more and more people all over the world prefer to buy smartphones over the old models where such features are not available. Other applications include music player, calendar, radio, television, and photo editor, among others. These are just some of the additional features of mobiles phones in the present. These make this particular technological device very appealing to the masses. It is like an all-in-one device. In addition, it is very portable and convenient because it can fit into any space, may it be inside the pocket or bag. Personal computers and laptops also have useful set of functions and roles. Although most of the functions found in these technological devices are now also available in mobile phones, they still offer their own unique features that make them attractive. For example, personal computers and laptops can be used to surf the Internet and communicate. Just like the mobile phones, these devices also have features like calendar, calculator. music player, movie player, camera, and many more. However, for a lot of people, they prefer to do their job using either a personal computer of a laptop than a mobile phone. One reason is that a personal computer or a laptop has wide keyboard than using a mobile phone, especially when the mobile phone has a small screen. Contrary to mobile phones, personal computers and laptops have wide screens and separate keyboards, although some [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 33 of 16  mobile phones can now be connected to a keyboard. Another reason is that the availability of a mouse or a touchpad made these two technological devices easier to maneuver than mobile phones. Lastly, for the youth and those who love to play different computer games, personal computers or laptops are really the better choice because these allow them to play with comfort and convenience. However, it cannot be denied that some would even prefer laptops over personal computers for the simple reason that personal computers are not portable and there are times when they need to bring such devices to different places. Ethical Dilemma Faced by These Technological Advancements While it is true that these technological devices are useful and beneficial, the fact remains that there are several dilemmas faced by these "necessities." First, most parents would argue that these devices make their children lazy and unhealthy. This is because of the fact that people who are fixated on these technological advancements start and end their day by using such devices. They have a great tendency to sit and chill all day long without doing anything productive in their homes, thus making them unhealthy because they do not just skip meals sometimes but also lack exercise or any bodily movements. Here, it can be inferred that these types of people are already overly dependent on these technological devices. For example, those who love to watch television shows stay in front of the television for more than six hours a day while those who love to surf the Internet or play computer games stay on their laptops, computers, or mobile phones for more than half a day. These people have the tendency to be unaware of the time because they are so engrossed with the use of technological device. In fact, if they get disturbed, there is a great chance that they will get mad or annoyed. Moreover, these are the same people who are more likely to experience alienation because they no longer take time to get out of their houses and mingle with other people. Another dilemma faced by these technological devices is the moral dilemma. People, especially the children who are not capable yet of rationally deciding for themselves what is right or wrong, are freely exposed to different things on television, mobiles phones, laptops, or computers. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 34 of 16  Because of the availability and easy access to the Internet, they can just easily search the web and go to different websites without restrictions. This allows them to see, read, or hear things which are not suitable for their very young age. This makes them very vulnerable to character change and can greatly affect the way they view the world and the things around them. On the first dilemma, it is really concerning to know that there are people who develop different kinds of sickness because of too much use of technological devices. Not only this, it also causes them to become reclusive, alienating themselves from other people. Although some would argue that technology brings people together, it can also be argued that this is not always the case in the real world because it may bring them virtually closer but not physically or personally. In fact, there are people who are friends, for example, only on social media but not in real life. This just shows that there are things that technology claims to do but in reality, does not. It is for these reasons why there are people who call for the establishment of ethics of technology. This subcategory of ethics will in one way or another guide people on how technology ought to be used in order to prevent abuse and other unfortunate results. Digging deeper, it can be said that these reasons make such devices somewhat unethical because they bring undesirable consequences to people. However, it can also be argued that it is not the fault of the technological devices but the agents using them or the ones making them. The classic deontological and teleological approaches to ethics are already too old to be applied in such cases. This is because technology has become very complicated and dynamic over time. Having said this, it is true that there are problems that can no longer be addressed by using these theories only. This is why the ethics of responsibility is an appropriate theory that can be used in these dilemmas. The word "responsibility" in the sense of being accountable for and accountable to is very appropriate to the ethics of technology because it makes each and every person in the scientific-technological development a proxy with reference to one another. In other words, each person must indicate the priorities, values, norms, and principles that constitute the grounds for one's actions and define one's contribution to the scientific- technological event. The ethics of responsibility focuses on the positive rather than the negative. Instead of asking "What ought not to be allowed?" ask "What ought to be allowed?" To put it in another way, people who are part of the scientific development ought to let the public know the good in their respective technological contribution/s. In this way, the people will have an idea how the devices ought to be used in order to maximize their positive results. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 35 of 16  However, it is also important for the people in the scientific world to inform the masses of the dangers of their contribution/s to the world of technology. In this way, the people will be sufficiently aware of what to do and what not to do. In addition to this, the agents using the devices should also be accountable to and accountable for their use of their gadgets. Going back to the first dilemma, it can be said that the agents using the devices are the ones to be blamed for the undesirable consequences, namely, laziness and unhealthiness. However, it is the assumption that the people in the scientific-technological world have properly informed the public of the positive tenor of their action in technology and the possible dangers of the misuse of their technological contribution. Thus, the undesirable consequences are brought about by the misuse of the agent. Now, talking about alienation, it can be concluded that the people in the scientific- technological world are blameworthy because they tell the people something that seems positive but when examined closely, brings more bad than good. On the second dilemma, the people in the scientific world nor the children are blameworthy because first, the children are not yet capable of rationally deciding for themselves what is good and what is bad. Second, even if creators of these technologies went out of their way to inform children of the pros and cons of these technological contributions, it would still be useless because the children have no capacity to understand them yet. So in this dilemma, the ones to be blamed are the adults who allowed the children to have access to such devices in the first place without any supervision.It is the recklessness overconfidence of the adults and cause the character change in children. Robotics and Humanity Another great product of the innovative minds of the people is the robot. Robots are now widely used. For example, there are the so-called service robots. These particular robots do specific tasks but focus mainly in assisting their masters in their everyday tasks. The International Federation of Robotics (IFR) and United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) made it their task to formulate a working definition for service robots. A preliminary extract of the relevant definition is (IFR, 2012): A robot is an actuated mechanism programmable in two or more axes with a degree of autonomy, moving within its environment, to perform intended tasks. Autonomy in this context means the ability to perform intended tasks based on current state and sensing without human intervention. A service robot is a robot that performs useful tasks for humans or equipment excluding industrial automation application. Note: A robot may be classified according to its intended application as an industrial robot or a service robot. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 36 of 16  A personal service robot or a service robot for personal use is a service robot used for a noncommercial task, usually by laypersons. Examples are domestic servant robot, automated wheelchair, personal mobility assist robot, and pet exercising robot. A professional service robot or a service robot for professional use is a service robot used for a commercial task, usually operated by a properly trained operator. Examples are cleaning robot for public places, delivery robot in offices or hospitals ,fire fighting robot rehabilitation robot in hospital. In the context , an operator is a person designated to start ,monitor and stop the intended of a robot or a robot system. Germany was one of the first countries to develop service robots. As part of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research's "Service Robotics Innovation Lead Initiative," it sponsored a collaborative project called DESIRE (Deutsche Servicerobotik Initiative-Germany Service Robotics Initiative) which was launched on October 1, 2005. DESIRE has the following individual objectives (DESIRE, 2009): To achieve a technological edge toward attaining key functions and components that are suited for everyday use To create a reference architecture for mobile manipulation To promote the convergence of technologies through integration into a common technology platform To conduct pre-competition research and development activities for new products and technology transfer in start-up enterprises in the field of service robotics Some of the expected work to be performed by DESIRE are the following: (1) "Clear up the kitchen table" all objects on top of the - kitchen table will be moved to where they belong; (2) "Fill the dishwasher" the dirty dishes will be sorted correctly into the dishwasher; and (3) "Clear up this room" - all objects that are not in their proper places will be moved to where they belong (Mock, n.d.). The earliest conception of robots can be traced around 3000 B.C. from the Egyptians. Their water clocks used human figurines to strike the hour bells. This mechanical device was built to carry out a specific physical task regularly. From that time on, different machines were already built that displayed the same mechanism and characteristics as the robots in the present. For example, there was a wooden pigeon that could fly, a talking doll, steam-powered robots, and hydraulically- operated statues that could speak and gesture. However, the earliest robots as people know them were created in the early 1950s by George Devol. "Unimate" was his attempt to sell his product to the industry did not succeed. After Unimate, several robots were also invented which were better versions of the previous ones (Stanford, n.d.). Ever since, people never stopped their quest [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 37 of 16  in the field of robotics. Roles Played by Robotics Robots play different roles not only in the lives of the people but also in the society as a whole. They are primarily used to ease the workload of mankind. They were invented to make life more efficient and less stressful. On one hand, they perform complicated activities which human beings are incapable of doing. On the other hand, they perform the simplest tasks at home so that their masters can perform the complex ones without stressing themselves over the simple tasks. There are also robots which are made for pleasure. To be more specific, these types of robots perform activities to entertain people. They can usually be found in amusement parks or exhibits. In addition, there are also some robots which were made to serve as toys. They also perform different activities, but they are usually child- friendly. Other examples of robots are those which can be seen in movies. One of the reasons why robots are very famous is because of movies. A number of local and national movies were inspired by robots. This goes to show that people have developed a distinct fascination over robots. Just like people living in the society, robots also have their own set of rules and characteristics that define what a good robot is. These laws were formulated by Isaac Asimov back in the 1940s, when he was thinking of the ethical consequences of robots. These are the following (Stanford,nd) Law One: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. Law Two: A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. Law Three: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 38 of 16  Ethical Dilemma/s Faced by Robotics Just like any other technological advancements, robotics also faces different problems and dilemmas. Although the idea is to help people and make their lives a lot easier than before, it is still not immune to different ethical dilemmas and possible undesirable outcomes. One of the dilemmas faced by robots is safety. Who should be held accountable if someone's safety is compromised by a robot? Who should be blamed, the robot, the agent using the robot, or the maker/inventor of the robot? It is important to know who should be blamed and who should be held responsible if such thing happens. Another ethical dilemma faced by robots is the emotional component. This may seem a little absurd as of the moment, but looking at how fast technology progresses nowadays, it is not completely impossible for robots to develop emotions (Evans, 2007). So here, the questions become, "What if robots become sentient? Should they be granted robot rights? Should they have their own set of rights to be upheld, respected, and protected by humans?" It is interesting to know how people would react if the time comes when robots can already feel pain and pleasure. Would they act differently or not at all? In the field of robotics, there are the so-called partial autonomy and full autonomy. Partial autonomy includes active human-robot interaction while full autonomy excludes active human-robot interaction. In other words, a robot with full autonomy can perform actions or activities even without a master telling it what should be done or what should be performed next (IFR, 2012). Using Asimov's laws for robots, it can be concluded that robots are ethical but only if they strictly follow the laws specified. They are ethical mostly because the laws formulated by Asimov ensure the of not only the users of the technology but also the people around him. Remember that these service robots are already available to the public thus, they can already be found inside the homes. Having said that, the safety of not only the owner of the technology but also all the people inside the house should be the priority more than anything else. In other words, the service robots only follow what their masters tell them to do with great consideration to the laws formulated by Asimov. However, if the agent using the technology misuses the robot to achieve personal agendas, then without a doubt, the agent should be held accountable for any consequences it may bring. It is important to note that this is under the assumption that the robot strictly followed the laws specified without any form of deviation. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 39 of 16  If the problems arise when the robot deviates from the laws specified, then the maker or the inventor of the machine should be blameworthy. It just means that the robot was not programmed very well because it violated the laws. Other problems may arise when the machine develops the ability to think for itself. In this case, the one that should be blame can both be the maker or inventor and the robot itself. This is because, in the first place, the maker gave the robot the capacity to think for itself so he should be very much aware of its possible consequences. To put it in another way, the maker programmed the robot in such a way that it can already think for itself even without an active participation from a human being. In addition, since the robot thinks for itself, whatever decision it makes and whatever consequence it may bring, the robot itself should be held responsible. For the second dilemma, it is just right for the robots to be given their own set of rights should they develop the ability to feel different kinds of emotion. It can be argued that the same thing happened with animals. Before, animals did not have their own set of rights because people believed that they were not capable of having emotions. However, after years of testing and experimenting, it was concluded that animals are indeed capable of emotions. It is for this reason that people decided to give them rights that are due to them. The same should be done to robots without any reservations. Should that time come, they ought to be treated differently and they ought to have new laws to follow in order to accommodate the new characteristic they have developed. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 40 of 16  1. How do you reconcile the “need” for technology and the dilemma/s it faces? 2. Should there be an ethics of technology? Acknowledgement All the figures, information and lessons contained in this module have been compiled and were taken from various references/sources enumerated above. Hence, the author of this module has no proprietary right on the same. This is for Instructional purposes only. Reference Serafica, J. P., Pawilen, G. T., Caslib Jr., B. N. and Alata, E. J. P. (2018). Science, Technology, and Society. Rex Book Store, Inc., Sampaloc, Manila. ISBN 978-971-23-8671-8. Let’s Do This: Directions: On the 1/4 illustration board draw the different dilemma of humans in the technological advancement and the significant of technology in our daily lives and in socio-economic life. Suggested Readings: Here are some links for you to read and view for additional information about our first lesson. [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 41 of 16  [GE 6]: [Science, Technology and Society] 42 of 16