Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How technology affects our cultural life
Modern technology and culture
Dependence on technology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How technology affects our cultural life
What is Francis’ attitude toward technology? What does he mean by the technocratic paradigm (101, 106-114)? Francis believes that technology has came to dominate modern-day society. He believes that it would be difficult to do without it. By the technocratic paradigm, he means that every aspect of society is controlled by technology. It would be useful it we limited our use of technology because it may lead to new achievements that cannot be attained by solely using technology.
How does Francis argue that “technological products are not neutral,” (107, 114) that “the technocratic paradigm also tends to dominate economic and political life” (109)? Francis argues that "technological products are not neutral" by saying that they are meant to
…show more content…
What would that look like? The broadened vision and a bold cultural revolution would result in a decrease in the use of technology. Without all the technology, we would be able to progress by being more healthy, more human, more social, and more integral. By limiting our use of technology, we would be able to recover the values and the great goals swept away by our unrestrained use of technology.
What does Francis mean by “modern anthropocentrism” (115)? Francis is trying to say that the intrinsic dignity of the world is compromised because humans fail to find their true place in the world and misunderstand themselves.
For Francis, “the present ecological crisis is one small sign of the ethical, cultural and spiritual crisis of modernity” (119). What does Francis mean by “practical relativism” (122) and cultural relativism (123)? By "practical relativism," Francis is trying to say that relativism rises because humans see everything as irrelevant unless it serves one's own immediate interests. By "cultural relativism," Francis is trying to say that it is the same disorder which drives one person to take advantage of another, to treat others as mere objects, imposing forced labor on them or enslaving them to pay their
Culture Relativism: putting aside any judgment or beliefs against a culture different from one’s own culture. In the narrators experience he is able to collect his thoughts and understand that their way of life is different from his own and that he must not judge them in order to truly understand them.
...on earlier in the book and finally proposes his idea that Technopoly can possibly be conquered through a new curriculum, although it may be an extreme challenge. As a cultural critic, Postman goes beyond just complaining, but also gives the reader a sense of closure and a suggestion for a possible change. His description of the world as he sees it does force us to ask many important questions-questions about the role of technology and science, our relation to them, how they change us and how we change them. Technopoly is an inspiring book that made me look at the insane way we live our lives, and how dependent we are on technology. Postman stresses where and when technologies took over, without forgetting to give credit for many advances that come from technology. I recommend this book for anyone that has ever questioned technology and the way its leading us.
Prudence rightly orders action because it is the insight into the world of human affairs, which allows us to relate facts to generalized principles. Conversely, the goods of human affairs cannot be ordered in ways that the scientific method can order inert objects. Modern society is saturated with the consolations of techne, a virtue that administers technical rationality. In other words, techne equips us with the “know how” which enables one to perform surgery, throw a baseball, or learn a new language. We have encouraged the all-inclusive allure of techne for the sake of a delusional fantasy in which through technology, we will finally be able to overcome the greatest obstacles which we face. What makes these technologies so hazardous is the fact that they are so “global in their effect and so discreet, becoming less and less conspicuous to both the user and those around them” (Tabachnick 118). Thus, techne should only be reserved for prosaic exercises being that the problems that vex human society cannot endure any single set of rules or
Even though, the arguments put forth by the author are relevant to the central theme, they lack clarity. He tends to go off on tangents and loses the flow of the article. It seems that the author has a slight bias against our generation’s obsession with technology, but that can be attributed to him being a quinquagenarian. I feel that the author has not covered the topic thoroughly enough. He has not quite explained the topic in depth or covered it from various perspectives.
Technology is the application of scientific knowledge that deals with the creation and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the environment. It concerns itself with such subjects as industrial arts, engineering, applied science and pure science and is utilized for practical purposes. Though technology offers a variety of gadgets that work to the advance of humanity, it can also harm society extensively by dispersing a certain degree of power to individuals that can be abused. In his essay, Neil Postman, a social critic contrasts the proposed future of George Orwell's in his novel 1984 (1948) with that of Aldous Huxley in Brave New World (1932). Postman maintains that Huxley's vision of the future is more pertinent to today's society than Orwell's mostly because the themes that he includes in his dystopian society are present and are very similar to those in Brave New World. Overall, it is safe to say that Huxley’s vision of the future is an indulgent one and is one that today’s society is prone to experience because of the increasing dependency on technology.
In its entirety, moral relativism is comprised of the belief that, as members of various and countless cultures, we cannot judge each other’s morality. If this theory stands true, then “we have no basis for judging other cultures or values,” according to Professor McCombs’ Ethics 2. Our moral theories cannot extend throughout cultures, as we do not all share similar values. For instance, the Catholic tradition believes in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This sacrament holds that confessing one’s sins to a priest and
Cultural Relativism is a moral theory which states that due to the vastly differing cultural norms held by people across the globe, morality cannot be judged objectively, and must instead be judged subjectively through the lense of an individuals own cultural norms. Because it is obvious that there are many different beliefs that are held by people around the world, cultural relativism can easily be seen as answer to the question of how to accurately and fairly judge the cultural morality of others, by not doing so at all. However Cultural Relativism is a lazy way to avoid the difficult task of evaluating one’s own values and weighing them against the values of other cultures. Many Cultural Relativist might abstain from making moral judgments about other cultures based on an assumed lack of understanding of other cultures, but I would argue that they do no favors to the cultures of others by assuming them to be so firmly ‘other’ that they would be unable to comprehend their moral decisions. Cultural Relativism as a moral theory fails to allow for critical thoughts on the nature of morality and encourages the stagnation
In Postman’s book that our society is redefining what family, religion, education, privacy, and history mean as a result of technology, known as technopoly. He proposes several theories about how our society got to where we currently are;including social, and symbolic traditions, and totalitarian technocracy. Postman compares technology to Thamus’ concern that writing would have an impact on an individual’s wisdom and memory. However, not all technology has been viewed negatively in Postman’s eyes. He has viewed some technologies as blessing to society; including technologies that once were provided as a helpful tool to society; including technologies such as, the printing press and clock. According to Postman, current technology is now considered a totalitarian order on society (Postman, 1992). These technologies brought beneficial aspects to society but did not control s...
Vaughn first defines ethical relativism by stating that moral standards are not objective, but are relative to what individuals or cultures believe (Vaughn 13). Rachels says that cultural relativism states “that there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only various cultural codes,
Rachels, J. (1986). The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. The elements of moral philosophy (pp. 20-36). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Culture Relativism; what is it? Culture Relativism states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong because it all depends in the society we live in. James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do. Cultures are said to be different but if we look at them closely we can actually find that they are not so much different from one’s own culture. Religion for example is a right given to us and that many cultures around the world practices. Of course there are different types of religion but they all are worshipped and practice among the different culture.
The proponents of technology have always believed that technology is a product of independent creation and thus follows its own pace. They say that technology is forceful and society does not have a choice but to adapt to the changes that it imposes on the people. The members of any particular society may not be actually happy with the change but eventually they learn to accept it, as a result of which the process of change comes a full circle. This idea however is debatable because many critics point out that technology is in fact a planned phenomenon. Not only this but also they point out that there are certain forces that control and introduce technology into the society and that the expected changes from such an introduction is said to be a deliberate attempt at transforming the society. Marshall McLuhan wrote extensively about this subject in his book The Gutenberg Galaxy. The book is basically about the changes that were imposed in the European society as a result of the creation of the printing press in the fifteenth century. It was this printing press that was responsible for a number of changes in the society, which include the social, political and economic forces that were present at the time. The printing press was primarily responsible for the Protestant Reformation because a large number of bibles were available for everyone to read which meant, “Every man can be a priest.” The following essay will thus attempt to discuss McLuhan’s ideas in the light of the phenomenon of technology and discuss whether it is relevant to the current revolution in electronic publishing. The initial Gutenberg revolution discussed by McLuhan is just an introduction of other things to come. He is more interested in finding out about the...
In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is a weak argument. Cultural relativism is the theory that all ethical and moral claims are relative to culture and custom (Rachels, 56). Pertaining to that definition, I will present the idea that cultural relativism is flawed in the sense that it states that there is no universal standard of moral and ethical values. First, I will suggest that cultural relativism underestimates similarities between cultures. Second, I will use the overestimating differences perspective to explain the importance of understanding context, intention and purpose behind an act. Finally, referring to James Rachels’ “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” I will solidify my argument further using his theory that
Technology allows culture to evolve by creating solutions to problems by removing constraints that exist. Every invention and concept is expanded on to create the utmost perfect solution. Although this process can take decades, or even centuries, to actually develop a proficient resolution, the end result is what advances society industrially. There are conflicting views, however, if these advances are beneficially or maliciously affecting society (Coget). There are three kinds of people in regards to the attitude toward technology: technophiles, technophobes, and those who aren't biased in either regard (Coget). Technophiles understand that the world adapts to the advances in technology and uses them to improve their lives (Tenner). Technophobes observe technology as damaging or are uncomfortable in using it (DeVany). It is undeniable that technology is ever-expanding, thus peaking curiosity to uncover what fuels the fear behind the technophobes. Our focus is concentrated on the technophiles and the technophobes . I will begin with the latter as they contribute greatly to the ov...
Mannoia, Jim (1997, May 15). A philosopher looks at the effect of modern technology on our view of human life. At http://www.houghton.edu/offices/acad_dean/Techpap.htm.