Our Lady of Fatima University Midterm Examination Reviewer PDF

MIDTERM EXAMINATION Reviewer SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND SOCIETY (Module II: Science, Technology, and Society and the Human Condition) WEEK 5: Technology as a Way of Revealing A. At A Glance: Who is Martin Heidegger – a philosopher from the 20th century that joined Adolf Hitler’s Nazi...

MIDTERM EXAMINATION Reviewer SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND SOCIETY (Module II: Science, Technology, and Society and the Human Condition) WEEK 5: Technology as a Way of Revealing A. At A Glance: Who is Martin Heidegger – a philosopher from the 20th century that joined Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party, his philosophy focused on ontology or the study of being – in German – Das Sein (to exist in the present, to live the moment). A1. Essence of Technology – Heidegger explained two widely embraced definitions of technology: 1. Instrumental – Technology is a means to an end. Technology is viewed as a tool available to individuals, groups, and communities that desire to make an impact on society. Knowing its functions requires paying attention to how humans use it to an end. In this sense, technology is an instrument aimed at getting things done. 2. Anthropological – Technology is a human activity. To achieve an end and produce and use a means to an end, by itself, is a human activity. The production, invention, and innovation of technological equipment, tools and machines, productions, and the purpose and functions they serve are what define technology. B. Technology as a Way of Revealing – what is correct leads to what is true. Heidegger envisioned technology as a way of revealing – a mode of “bringing forth”. B1. Bringing Forth – bringing something out of concealment, came from the Greek concept of aletheia – meaning truth or disclosure. Thus, for Heidegger, technology is a form of poiesis – a way of revealing the truth. C. Technology as Poiesis: Does Modern Technology Bring Forth or Challenge Forth? The critic of Heidegger to Modern technology is that it challenges forth because it makes people think of how to do things faster, more effectively, and with less effort. It prompts people into dominating and enframing Earth’s natural resources. To challenge forth is to exploit something. D. Enframing as Modern Technology’s Way of Revealing – Heidegger proposed two ways of enframing: 1. Calculative Thinking – humans desire to put an order to nature to better understand and control it. 2. Meditative Thinking – humans allow nature to reveal itself to them without the use of force or violence. Enframing happens because of how humans desire security, even if it puts all of nature as a standing reserve ready for exploitation. The roles humans take as instruments of technology through enframing is called destining. In destining, humans are challenged forth by enframing to reveal what is real. However, this destining of humans to reveal nature carries with it the danger of misconstruction. E. The Dangers of Technology – People must not allow themselves to be consumed by technology lest they lose the essence of who they are as human beings. For example, social media has indeed connected people in the most efficient and convenient way imaginable, but it also inadvertently gave rise to issues such as invasion of privacy, online disinhibition, and proliferation of fake news. Heidegger explained that people are delivered to technology in the worst possible way when they regard it as something neutral, to treat it as if it’s a natural phenomenon makes it more dangerous, to not be able to draw the line between what is needed  and what is excessive would soon lead to an inescapable overdependence to technology, which may render humans lazy, irresponsible, and careless. F. Art as the Saving Power – by focusing on art, people are able to see more clearly how art is embedded in nature. Art encourages humans to think less from a calculative standpoint where nature is viewed as an ordered system. Instead, it inspires meditative thinking where nature is seen as an art and that, in all of art, nature is most poetic. G. Questioning as the Piety of Thought – It is only through questioning that humans can reassess their position not only amid technology around them but also, and most importantly, in the grand scheme of things. Humans need to take a step back and reassess who they were, who they are, and who they are becoming amid technology today. Activity: According to Heidegger, art holds power; as such, look for a famous art piece from any famous artist (may it be old or modern) then answer the following questions: 1. What is the name of the art piece and who made it? Why do you think it holds saving power? 2. How can this art piece take us away from calculative thinking? WEEK 6: Human Flourishing in Progress and De-development A. Human Flourishing in Progress – “Human flourishing” is the term given to the ability to live a good life. It is the result of living a virtuous and value-driven life, emanating from individuals’ shared humanity and their effort to serve everyone’s interest. The magnitude of human flourishing drives us to believe that it is, in fact, a lifelong journey of human existence. It is not something that one achieves through some luck or overnight rise to fame. To achieve it, humans must journey through the positives (i.e. hopes, achievements, joy, love, and happiness) and the negatives (i.e., regrets, losses, illness, suffering, and coping) of life. A1. The Requisites of Human Flourishing A1.1 First, a human person is a physical being, reaching a state of overall health in mind, body, and spirit. A1.2 Second, a human person is a knower, having used their fundamental dispositions and characteristics as humans to be aware, grow, in knowledge, and pursue lifelong learning for the sake, of a full life. A1.3 Third, a human person is a responsible agent, living a life of full responsibility for their actions, thoughts, feelings, and emotions to impact change in their lives and enjoy the reward of human flourishing. A1.4 Finally, a human person is a person in relation to other persons, extending the fruits of a good life through community participation, joyful friendships, happy family life, and fulfilling and close relationships with significant others; to society, becoming a productive and participative member of social units from the smallest to the biggest; to God (or version thereof with your spirituality); and to the end or purpose of human life coming to term’s at life’s end, with the reason for the person’s life and fully understanding the purpose of their own life, for what and whom did they lead and pursue the life they lived. B. Human Flourishing in De-development – In the context of unprecedented scientific and technological advancement and economic development, we ask ourselves whether we humans, either as individuals or as a collective, are indeed flourishing. If development efforts to close out the gap between rich and poor countries have failed, can we possibly confront the challenges of development through a nonconformist framework? Jason Hickel, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics, criticizes the failure of growth and development efforts dating back to seven decades ago to eradicate poverty. By doing so, he offers a nonconformist perspective toward growth and development in his article titled, “Forget ‘developing’ poor countries, it’s time to ‘de-develop’ rich countries.” B1. Hickel’s “De-developing Rich Countries”: Poiesis, Enframing, and the Questions We Must Ask We shall relate the views of Hickel on growth and development concerning key elements of Heidegger’s philosophical questions about modern technology. Particularly, we shall link issues presented in the article to Heideggerian elements of poiesis (whether growth and development efforts brought forth the “unconcealedness” or the aletheia of progress), enframing (the role of modern technology in concealing the aletheia of growth and development), questioning (the role of questioning in adopting Hickel’s proposition on “de-development of rich countries”.) Relating Hickel’s essay to Heidegger’s views on modern technology raises the question of whether despite all the efforts to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, human beings have achieved poeisis of development. It is said that technology brings forth or discloses “Being”. Here, we establish disjoints between the Heideggerian notion of poiesis as a disclosure or unconcealment of the “Being” and Hickel tracing the failures of growth and development to bring forth transformation among poor countries. Hickel provides a compelling social case for transformative worldviews when it comes to development. We must ask ourselves these: 1. What is enough? 2. What is equitable? 3. What is efficient? Indeed, while a shift to quality over quantity is necessary to bridge the growth gap, we must be always careful and critical in determining what constitutes good quality and enough quantity. Lastly, while there is promise in Hickel’s “de-development” framework to finally solve the growth gap, the Heideggerian notion of questioning must guide humans through it. The critical questions must be asked because if we stop doing so, Hickel’s proposition shall face similar doom; just as the proponents of “poor countries must catch up’ have unequivocally failed by ceasing to question whether what we needed was “more growth” or a more socially equitable approach towards growth and development. Activity: People believe that the more they can purchase things and avail of services, the more developed and progressive they feel their lives are. Yet, Hickel made it clear in his article that huge consumption does not necessarily equate to long and happy lives. In this sense, is it possible for people to “de-develop” their consumption but remain happy and contented? Accomplish the personal consumption audit table below and see what things can you reduce or minimize without sacrificing, or maybe even improving, the quality of your daily life.  MY CONSUMPTION AUDIT Average daily, How much can weekly, or I reduce/do Impact of this “de-developing on my Product/Food/Service monthly amount everyday living away with it? consumed By minimizing the number of hours, I am on social media online, I can pursue other Sample: Social Media 8 hours a day 7 hours a day authentic personal interactions. I can also Usage spend more time doing schoolwork or helping with household chores. WEEK 7: The Good Life in Science and Technology A. Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics and the Good Life What standard could be used to define the good life? How can the standard serve as a guide toward living the good life amid scientific progress and technological advancement? Everyone has a definition of what good is – getting a college degree, traveling across the world, succeeding in a business venture, pursuing a healthy and active lifestyle, or being a responsible parent. However, some actions aim at an instrumental good while some aim at an intrinsic good. He made it clear that the intrinsic is better than the instrumental for the latter is a means to achieving something else or some other end, while the former is good in and on of itself. B. Eudaimonia: The Ultimate Good What is the ultimate good? Based on the contrast between two types of goods (instrumental and intrinsic), one could reflect on some potential candidates for the ultimate good. B1. One might think that pleasure is the ultimate good. One aims for pleasure in the food they eat or in the experiences they immerse themselves in. B1.1. Hedonism – a school of thought that argues that the pursuit of happiness is to get rid of all pain and distress. Pleasure is the primary goal of human life. B2. One might think that wealth is a potential candidate for the ultimate good. But it is common to hear stories about people who have become wealthy yet remain, by and large, unhappy with their lives. B1.2. Materialism – founded by Democritus and Leucippus, who believed in the existence of Atomos or seeds; the belief is that all things in nature are fundamentally made by material interaction. B3. Another candidate for the ultimate good is fame and honor. Many people today seem to be motivated by a desire to be known, to be famous. Others strive for honor and recognition. This is seen in an increasing number of social media users who wish to gain a foothold on the benefits of social media popularity. B1.3. Epochism – the tendency to believe that one’s achievements are better than others, there is a sense of superiority once one achieves an epoch in life.  B4. Unlike pleasure, wealth, fame, and honor, happiness is the ultimate good. In the Aristotelian sense, happiness is “living well and doing well”. Among the Greeks, this was known as eudaimonia, from the root words eu, meaning good, and daimon, meaning spirit. Combining these words, eudaimonia means “happiness” or “welfare”. Aristotle proposed two hallmarks of eudaimonia, namely virtue and excellence. Thus, happiness in the sense of eudaimonia must be distinguished from merely feeling good. Eudaimonia transcends all aspects of life for it is about living well and doing well in whatever one does. C. Eudaimonia: Uniquely Human Happiness is unique to humans for it is a uniquely human function. It is achieved only through a rationally directed life. Degrees of Soul Living things Functions of the Soul Theoretical Humans Practical Rational Rational (Intellect = Thought) Locomotion Partly rational Sensitive Animals Perception Growth Plants Nutrition Non-rational Nutritive Reproduction 1. Nutritive degree – all living things require nourishment and can reproduce 2. Sensitive degree – only animals and humans have ability to move and perceive 3. Rational degree – only humans can be capable of theoretical and practical functions This table summarizes Aristotle’s notion of a tripartite soul, only humans are capable of a life guided by reason. Because of this, happiness, too, is a uniquely human function for it can only be achieved through a rationally directed life. D. Arete and Human Happiness Arete, a Greek term, is defined as “excellence of any kind” and can also mean “moral virtue”. Aristotle suggested two types of virtue: intellectual virtue and moral virtue. D1. Intellectual Virtue – is achieved through education, time, and experience. It is wisdom, which guides ethical behavior, and understanding, which is gained from scientific endeavors and contemplation. D2. Moral Virtue – is achieved through habitual practice. By and large, moral virtue is a skill. A skill is acquired only through repeated practice. Intellect is innate to human beings, but skills are unique only to those who are disciplined enough to acquire them, thus being a moral virtue. Both intellectual virtue and moral virtue should be in accordance with reason to achieve eudaimonia. Indifference to these virtues, for reasons that are only for one’s convenience, pleasure, or satisfaction, leads humans away from eudaimonia. E. What then is the good life? One could draw parallels between moving toward the good life and moving toward further progress and development in science and technology. Science and technology could be ruined by under- or over-appreciation of the scope and function it plays in the pursuit of the  uniquely human experience of happiness. Refusing science and technology altogether to improve human life is as problematic as allowing it to entirely dictate reason and action without any regard for ethical and moral standards. Activity: Compare and contrast each pair of terms related to Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics as discussed in this unit. 1. Instrumental Good vs Ultimate Good 2. Pleasure vs Happiness 3. Intellectual Virtue vs Moral Virtue 4. Pleasure vs Wealth vs Fame and Honor vs Eudaimonia Criteria Points Indicators How well did the student explained the terms? Was Knowledge 10 the student able to back it up with references discussed from the lesson? Was the student able to compare the pair of terms in Analysis 10 simple yet insightful way? WEEK 8: When Technology and Humanity Cross A. Human Rights and Science and Technology Human rights are basic right and freedoms which belong to every person in the world from the day they are born to the day they die, regardless of any circumstance. By virtue of being a human, these rights apply to every individual regardless of who they are, what they believe in, where they are from, and how they choose to lead their lives. These rights and freedom, however, are not absolute. Although they must not be taken away, they are sometimes restricted because of reason more important than upholding rights (e.g., if a person commits a crime, violates the law, or is a threat to national security). The issue of human rights becomes trickier when observed in the context of science, technology, and development. Science and technology act as a double-edged sword in many instances. For example: new technologies such as satellite and global positioning system (GPS) automatons are becoming increasingly useful in monitoring peace and order and bringing perpetrators of criminal acts to justice. On the other hand, the said system is now being questioned for potential breach and violation of an ordinary persons’ right to privacy and anonymity. Clearly, science and technology can be used as tools in upholding human right, but, in situation where the use of tools, products, or practices in themselves impinge on human rights, measures to control and mitigate the potential risks and hazards have to be put in place and implemented. It is necessary that people are taught about ensuring inclusive access to the benefits of the sciences and guiding them in the ethical use of innovation. B. Human Rights-based approach to Science, Technology and Development Protecting the wellbeing and upholding dignity of the human person must be at the core of continued scientific and technological progress and development. Such is the focus of a human rights-based approach to science, technology, and development. S. Romi Mukherjee, a senior lecturer in Political Theory and the History of Religions at the Paris Institute of Political Studies listed some of the most important documents that center on a human rights-based approach to science, development, and technology, and their key principles. Document Key Principles This document affirms everyone’s right to participate in and benefit from scientific advances and be protected Universal Declaration of from scientific misuses. The right to the benefits of Human Rights (Article science comes under the domain of “culture,” so is 27) usually examined from a cultural rights perspective. This document affirms that all advance in scientific and technological knowledge should be solely geared UNESCO towards securing well-being for global citizens and calls Recommendation on the upon member states to develop the necessary protocol Status of Scientific and policies to monitor and secure this objective. Researchers – 1974 Countries are asked to show that science and technology (Article 4) is integrated into policies that aim to ensure a more humane and just society. This document states, “Today, more than ever. Science and its applications are indispensable for development. All levels of government and the private sector should provide enhanced support for building up an adequate and evenly distributed scientific and technological UNESCO Declaration on capacity through appropriate education and research the Use of Scientific programmes as an indispensable foundation for Knowledge – 1999 economic, social, cultural, and environmentally sound (Article 33) development. This is particularly urgent for developing countries.” This declaration encompasses issues such as pollution-free production, efficient resource use, biodiversity protection and brain drain. Human rights should guide humans to flourish not only as individual members of society but also to assist each other in flourishing as a unit, as a society. It may function as the “Golden Mean”, particularly by protecting the weak, poor, and vulnerable from the deficiencies and excesses of science and technology. By imposing upon people behind science, technology, and development the moral and ethical duty to protect and uphold human rights, there can be a more effective and sustainable approach to bridging the gap between poor and rich countries on both concrete (e.g., services and natural resources) and abstract (e.g., well-being and human dignity) aspects. Interest groups (such as political figures, businessmen, tycoons, the powerful) must also be held accountable for their abuse of power or discretion in science, technology, and development by ensuring that laws which protect human rights are put in place and effectively implemented. Ultimately, all these will lead to human flourishing in science and technology. Activity: Make the class watch FRONTLINE PBS’s documentary entitled “A Thousand Cuts” (can be searched and downloaded from YouTube). After the documentary viewing, instruct the class to write a critique paper by answering the following questions: 1. What is the documentary all about? 2. What do you think this documentary teaches us as a student who just learned about human rights-based approach to STS? (Both its advantages and disadvantages should be present in this part) 3. As a student, what is your role in upholding human rights-based approach to STS? Conclude everything by providing an abstract of what you’ve realized, reflecting upon the documentary’s insights, then presenting your position. Criteria Points Indicators Did the student understand the documentary? Was the student able to present the case at hand in a short Knowledge 20 but impactful way? Was the content of the documentary accurately presented on the paper? Was the student able to connect the documentary’s essence unto what is human rights-based approach to STS is all about? Is there relevance to the Analysis 15 documentary’s content and the student’s understanding of what human rights-based approach to STS is? Was the position of the student to the case synonymous to what is being presented by the whole paper? Did the student used references to back up Position 15 the claim of their position? How short, simple, cut, and concise is the student’s explanation of their position? Activity: This is the end of Module II, please conduct a unit test/quiz starting from Week 1 to Week 4, the test/quiz will serve as a mock examination for the prelims of the students. (At least 20 items, each item containing 5 questions from each week discussed).