Prelude
Technology as transforming and transformative is human interpretation and pragmatization. It is an appropriation of the scientific for human purposes.The act of appropriation, by the way, is one of interpretation and pragmatization that responds to a human responsibility. Hence, technology ideally carries the value of responsibility. And responsibility in this sense is measured in human terms. On such basis, the morality of technology is reflected on how technology humanizes, empowers, and elevates the human being. Moral technology should, in that sense, be a transforming/ transformative instrument to: (1) alleviate sufferings; (2) resolve conflicts; and (3) promote happiness.
The Rise of Modern Science and Technology
The modern era in world history is characterized by the widespread dominance of science and technology at the expense of the ecosystem. Such dominance is a narrow and shallow signification of human service and facility--a shortsighted attempt to satisfy human needs and wants without considering the tragic consequences of devastating the natural resources.
The destruction of the ecosystem has been perpetrated by the immoral technology of the modern world. 'Worldwide in scope and profligate in its ill effects, deforestation stands as a symbol of the environmental degradation that so concerns us. Many other stresses vie for our attention: depletion of the ozone layer, with its threat of harmful ultraviolet radiation; loss of reefs andwetlands, so rich in their variety of life-forms; contamination of the air with emissions and the waters with pollutants; and all aggravated by the pressures of a global population rising by a million every four days' (Canby, 1994).
Such losses and destruction in the modern/ industrial era are the major concerns being addressed now by the morality of the post-industrial era. TheNorwegian philosopher Arne Naess provides us with certain normative principles that characterize a type of humanism that humanizes nature and 'naturizes 'humanity, if you will:
(1) 'The flourishing of human and non-human life on Earth has intrinsic value.The value of non-human life forms is independent of the usefulness these mayhave for narrow human purposes.
(2) 'Richness and diversity of life forms are values in themselves andcontribute to the flourishing of human and non-human life on Earth.
(3) 'Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except tosatisfy vital needs.' (Anker, 1998)
The Weltanschauung of the Industrial Era
At this point, we should deem it necessary that a better understanding of the worldview of the post-industrial era can be effectively laid out if viewed in contrast with the kind of worldview that has empowered the events and personalities of the industrial era.
The celebrated futuristic theorist of the '70s and '80s, Alvin Toffler enumerated three key concepts that animated the industrial era: the war with nature, the importance of evolution, and the progress principle. Regarding the war with nature, Toffler says in the The Third Wave (1990): 'The idea thatnature was there to be exploited provided a convenient rationalization for shortsightedness and selfishness: There has been so much destruction in nature, so much brutality towards the earth's ecosystem, because of this worldview. Andthis worldview has created a sense of arrogance in man who has developed the notion that he is the principle of a long process of evolution' (Toffler, ibid.).
With the first two key concepts of the industrial era, the third key concept which is the progress principle is now well entrenched. It is 'the idea that history flows irreversibly toward a better life for humanity' (Toffler, ibid.). Adam Smith in his The Wealth of Nations and Karl Marx in his Das Kapital had their own respective theories of human progress.
In the industrial framework, time is linear and space is concentrated to satisfy the demands of the progress principle. The very idea of progress entails the linearity of time. And since industrialization is the highest stage of progressive evolution, its centers being the urban cities are the most important space concentrations.
On the metaphysical question of 'What are things made of from the perspective of the industrial era?', reality is looked upon not as a fused or integrated entity but as a structure built upon a multiplicity of components. This is known as the atomic view of reality and this is the foundation of the principle of individualism. As the old agricultural civilization decayed, as trade expanded and towns multiplied in the century or two before the dawn of industrialism, the rising merchant classes, demanding the freedom to trade and lend and expand their markets, gave rise to a new conception of the individual-- the person as atom.
The Weltanschauung of the Post-Industrial Era
In the post-industrial era or the third wave civilization (as this is called byToffler), humanity is reconciled with nature. 'There is no such thing as either man [i.e., human] or nature now, only a process that produces the one within the other and couples the machine together' (Deleuze and Guattari,1977). And the war is against those who have declared war against nature in the industrial era. Now is the age of 'ecosophy' or 'eco-philosophy' whose leading proponent is the Norwegian thinker Arne Naess. 'During the last thirty years philosophers in the West have critiqued the underlying assumptions of modern philosophy in relation to the natural world. This development has been part of an ongoing expansion of philosophical work involving cross-cultural studies of worldviews or ultimate philosophies. Since philosophical studies in the West have often ignored the natural world, and since most studies in ethics have focused on human values, those approaches which emphasize ecocentric values have been referred to as eco-philosophy. Just as the aim of traditional philosophy is Sophia or wisdom, so the aim of eco-philosophy is ecosophy or ecological wisdom. The practice of eco-philosophy is an ongoing, comprehensive,deep inquiry into values, the nature of the world, and the self' (Drengson,1999).
In the post-industrial era, the seemingly omnipotent notion of uninterrupted linear evolution has already lost its momentum. There has been a wholesale breakdown in the most basic key concepts of the industrial era's worldview which gives the final death blow to the progress principle that animates the entire infrastructure of the industrial era.
Finally, the paradigm shift has been felt as the concepts of time and space change and as the atomic model of reality is displaced by the holistic model.
Postlude
The direction now of post-industrial technology aimed to humanize nature and'naturize' humanity is one of synthesis: the non-subversion of the ecosystem whereof humanity is subsumed to be a part. Human progress is therefore construed in the post-industrial sense as a bi-condition of ecosystem protection and defense. In this condition, there is no viable way to come upwith a real workable human development program in isolation of certain considerations affecting the ecological network. Deleuze and Guattari say:
[We] make no distinction between man and nature: the human essence of nature and the natural essence of man become one within nature in the form of production or industry, just as they do within the life of man as a species. Industry is then no longer considered from the extrinsic point of view of utility, but rather from the point of view of its fundamental identity with nature as production of man and by man. Not man as the king of creation, but rather as the being who is in intimate contact with the profound life of all forms or all types of beings, who is responsible for even the stars and animal life, and who ceaselessly plugs an organ-machine into an energy-machine, a tree into his body, abreast into his mouth, the sun into his asshole: the eternal custodian of the machines of the universe (Deleuze and Guattari, 1977).
Further human development that is proper or morally defensible is possible only if there should be immediate and concerted conservation and/ or preservation measures instituted for the world's remaining natural resource base, if there is to be continuing but sustainable use of it by mankind. Such continuing human development should be with the end in view of more equitable sharing and benefits distribution. A simple enough prescription, but one that is quite at all order to do from any perspective -- historical, political, economic,social, etc. -- even under the best of circumstances. And, truth to tell, the actual condition of the world today is anything but the best of circumstances.
Therefore, 'moral technology' -- if indeed there is such a thing existing or even forthcoming any time soon -- sure has its work cut out for it. But whether or not technology is or becomes moral and thus transforming or transformative, still it is just an instrument to alleviate sufferings, resolve conflicts, and promote happiness. Ultimately, it is still man himself who determines the fate of his environment and the destiny of his own species. The synthesis that fully integrates human development with earth's ecological network glimmers in the horizon, beckoning.
REFERENCES
Anker, Peder. 1998. 'Ecosophy: An Outline of Its Metaethics.' http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca
Canby, Thomas y. 1994. Our Changing Earth. Washington D.C.: NationalGeographic Society.
Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari. 1977. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. New York: Viking Penguin.
Drengson, Alan. 1999. 'Ecophilosophy, Ecosophy and the Deep Ecology Movement: An Overview.' http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca
Toffler, Alvin. 1990. The Third Wave. New York: Bantam Books.
(c) Ruel F. Pepa 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment