Measuring Progress as it Relates to Technological Advances
Take a look around the world we live in today. It is filled with millions of different technologically intricate devices. We have cell phones that allow us to talk to anyone anywhere. We can listen to music on the go with CD and MP3 players. We can learn, interact, communicate and work using personal computers. Cars, public transit and airplanes can efficiently transport us to our far off destinations. It seems every aspect of our daily lives is affected by some sort of technological/scientific device. Advertisements from the makers of the new technologies tell us that all of these new innovations are good and must be bought to ensure the best life possible. We must determine though if all of these technological innovations equal progress. And more importantly, we must comprehend our means of measuring this progress itself.
To understand our worldly view of progress, we must first look to the history of technology and its different ends throughout its evolution. Albert Teich, in his book Technology and the Future, explains that in the late eighteenth century, “the development of radically improved machinery” coincided with the new “idea of history as a record of progress” (4). He says that history advances by the increase of human knowledge and man’s control over the physical world. These powers gained by the new improved machinery were required to improve the moral, intellectual, social, material and political states of life as well. Teich best puts it, “They regarded the new sciences and technologies not as ends in themselves, but as instruments for carrying out a comprehensive transformation of society” (5). But as history adva...
... middle of paper ...
...ciety and country is progressing towards right now. We should consider adopting a new set of moral, social, political and environmental goals for our nation to shoot for into the future. Also, maybe we should reconsider our original intent to found this nation on the principles of the Bible. We still make coins and bills that have engraved and printed “In God We Trust” on each of them. We still chant “God bless America” in times of tragedy and support, in example for our troops that are fighting in Iraq right now. Maybe, we could reestablish our original biblically founded intent to the make new moral, social, political and environmental goals. It would be then, once we have these new goals in place that our nation would fully progress, prosper and bloom.
Works Cited
Teich, Albert H. Technology and the Future. Canada: Wadsworth Publishing Company. 2003
Between 1491 and 1754, the New England, middle, Chesapeake, and southern colonies developed in a way such that they must be viewed as four distinct societies with interlacing interactions and beliefs. These different societies were shaped by the different labor systems and economic characteristics, varying groups of religious founders, and response to salutary neglect and British taxation.
In the 1600’s, America was the new world, and the land of opportunity, which spurred settlers to travel to the region seeking religious freedom or economic success. However, as the colonies of New England and Chesapeake were settled, they had contrasting viewpoints on how they should live, and manage their newly occupied settlements. These viewpoints correlated to specific problems arising in each area. For example, the New England colonies experienced the witchcraft scare, and the Chesapeake colonies experienced civil uprisings like Bacon’s rebellion. To better understand why these colonies experienced contrastingly different problems, a closer look is required of the two colonies social, economic, and religious viewpoints, which contributed
In the end of the 16th and beginning of 17th century the Americas were slowly becoming more and more settled. Some of these settlements helped shape American society to what we know today. Of these many settlements, the two groupings of the New England and Chesapeake colonies are arguably the most influential. To show the importance of both of these colonies but also their individuality they must be compared and contrasted. Although The New England and Chesapeake colonies do have their differences, they also share distinct similarities.
On his way to the New World, aboard the Arabella in 1630, John Winthrop, Puritan leader of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, spoke of the plan that he had in store for the colony. He preached that there would be equality in the new colony and that they " must be knit together in this work as one man." He spoke about the importance of community in the colony that was vital for the survival of the colony. His statements made on the Arabella are to the ideas in the Articles of Agreement, which compiled in Springfield, Massachusetts in 1636. In the Articles of Agreement, the community was to contain forty familiesrich and poor. In the Articles of Agreement, the concern for comfort and quality of life (for families) is outlined. They again put emphasis on the importance of unity in the colony and they also express that social classes do not determine what a person is. In Connecticut, the colonists set up regulations for wages and price; these rules were made to include poor settlers in trading and the economy by keeping the prices in the colony "fair." Since the colonists in the New England region was untied "as one" in each colony, this was one way that caused them to become a different society from the Che...
Just like their religions, Massachusetts gave more power to the people and Virginia gave power to England. In the New England Handout, Mailer describes the difference further, “Unlike in Virginia where a governor is elected from a faraway company in London, and after 1624, by the Crown itself, the ‘freemen’ of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire elect their own governors.” (1) This information describes the contrast in the way a governor gets elected. In Massachusetts, the “freemen”, men who own land, get to vote for their governor, while Virginia’s governor gets appointed by the crown. Virginia’s government also consisted of the Governing Council, rich elites controlling everything, and the House of Burgesses, upper middle-class landowners. The main reason the governments of these colonies differ is the fact that the charter of Virginia created by the Virginia Company resides in England, or in other words it is controlled by the crown. On the other hand, Massachusetts’s charter, created by the Massachusetts Bay Company, resides in the colony, so the colony self-governs itself. This brings forth another comparison of the two colonies; the reason why they were founded.
Despite being magical of gene therapy, it is high-risk. Few people got benefits from it, and it has a low rate of success. Prior to the human trial, Batshaw and Wilson had done experiment on animals to ensure the safety. Over 20 experiments have been done on mice but only 12 of them survived at last (Sophia, M. and Kolehmainen, J.D., 2000). More seriously, complicating diseases, which can be more dangerous than genetic diseases, might set in during the treatment period. In December 200...
During the 1600’s the New England and Chesapeake regions were beginning to settle and colonize. While both came from English origin and had dreams of wealth and freedom, differences began to form just as they settled and by the 1700s the two regions will have evolved into two distinct societies. Because of the exposure to different circumstances both regions developed issues that were unique from one another and caused them to construct their societies differently. Therefore, the differences socially, politically and economically in the two regions caused the divergence.
The term, progress, is synonymous with phrases that denote moving forward, growth, and advancement. It seems unorthodox then that Ronald Wright asserts the world has fallen into a progress trap, a paradox to how progress is typically portrayed as it contradicts the conventional way life is viewed: as being a natural progression from the outdated and tried towards the new and improved. Wright posits that it is the world’s relentless creation of innovative methods that ironically contributes to the progress trap rather than to progress itself, the intended objective. Wright’s coinage of the term “progress trap” refers to the phenomenon of innovations that create new complications that are typically left without resolve which exacerbate current conditions; unwittingly then, matters would have been much better if the innovation had never been implemented. In his book, “A Short History of Progress,” he alludes to history by citing examples of past civilizations that collapsed after prospering, and ones that had longevity because they avoided the perilous progress trap. Wright recommends that societies of today should use indispensable resources, such as history, to learn and apply the reasons as to why certain societies succeeded, while also avoiding falling into the pitfalls of those that failed, the ones that experienced the progress trap. This can easily be interrelated with Godrej’s concept of “the overheated engine of human progress,” since humans for centuries have been risking environmental degradation for progress through ceaseless industrialization and manufacturing. This exchange is doomed to prevent improved progress and will lead to society’s inevitable decline since it is unquestionable that in the unforeseeable future, cl...
Throughout the centuries, society has been given men ahead of their time. These men are seen in both actual history, and in fictional accounts of that history. Aristotle, Copernicus, Galileo, Bacon, and even Freud laid the framework in their fields, with revolutionary ideas whose shockwaves are still felt today. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, and so society has also possessed those how refuse to look forward, those who resisted the great thinkers in science and civilization. The advancement of science and technology is like the flick of a light switch; research may be slow and tedious, but once discoveries are made, they are not long hidden. In contrast, advancement in the ideas of ethics and human values come slowly, like the rising of the sun; there are hints at advancement for a long time before the next step is ready to be made. Because of this, science and technology takes off in leaps and bounds before human values have awakened to find society moving again.
“History may be a succession of absurdities, tragedies and crimes: but everyone insists – the future can still be better than anything in the past. To give up this hope would induce a state of despair.” (Gray 4) This quote, delivered by John Gray, a professor of Western Thought at the London School of Economics, describes the importance of faith in progress, and also reveals the vast agreement that humanity is on a path, and that path is progressing. However, as modern western culture struggles to obey the instinctual necessities of the human animal, and rather decide to place the focus on materials and money, the future of humanity as always progressing is seemly a dim prospect. The endeavor of illuminating whether human progress is a myth, a concentration must be placed on the most important categories. The most important categories to be discussed, with a focus on western culture are: where the idea of progress came from; scientific progress pertaining to technological advancements; and, the decline of acknowledging humans as an animal with instincts that cannot be logical or religiously controlled, curbed or cured.
Technology can be regarded as a phenomenon with vast uncertainties. Technological change is rapid and we are struggling to keep up to date with the latest advances, while learning new ones and trying to prepare for the next changes proposed for the future. In order to do so, however, we need to be clear about what we mean, and what we consider to be a technology and evaluate some of the assumptions of our understanding of our technologically advanced society.
It is undeniable that throughout times, humanity has been progressing in all fields, but what drove humankind to do so and what still drives us to invent things to improve our lives and ourselves remains a bit mysterious. What drives us to progress and towards what end is it aimed? The phenomenon seems to be unstoppable; a simple glance at History textbooks will tell you this. In addition, it seems to be a cycle of improvement followed by destructions: for example, the invention of the automobile destroyed the use of horses as a means of transportation. Therefore, it seems to me that humanity is condemned to progress and never to attain its goal.
One of the biggest concerns involved in gene therapy in humans is the lack of knowledge and the possibility for consequences later on or i...
“… and yet a true creator is necessity, which is the mother of invention.” (Plato 390c). It’s this ‘need’ that fueled are inventions and innovations to reduce the difficulty of all those scenarios deemed impossible. Over the centuries, mankind has progressed by leaps and bound. Starting from being cavemen who hunted animals by sticks and stones to survive, mankind is now able to live luxurious life with well-built homes, stable food and water supply and efficient communication and travel methods. Just picturing the Stone Age and our current lives side by side will make us realize how technology has changed our society. It has changed how we produce our food, communicate with others and how we travel.
Now, as I bash technology for some of its downfalls, I am still reminded about its benefits for medicine, and transportation. Isn’t that kind of progress beneficial for our civilization? Again the answer is, well, yes and no. Sure, we can get from point A to point B faster, but we pollute the environment and rely heavily on nonrenewable resources, which we can’t afford in the long run. I foresee my generation having to confront this. I see myself using new technologies, but, like Gomez-Pena, continuing to maintain balance, and staying grounded in a less “virtual” world.