Some basic premises – often fashioned by leaders and supported by the led – exercise the collective conscience regarding the led in so far as they stimulate a development that is willed. The growth is usually superior but maybe not necessarily civilized. The premises in question are with this kind: “Our degree of technological advancement is second to none. Upon reaching this known level, we also have to prepare our society for peace, and to ensure the peace, technology must be revised to foster the policy of war.” Technical advancement that is pushed in this direction sets a precedent that is dangerous other societies that fear a threat for their respective sovereignties. They are pushed to also foster a technology that is war.
This mode of development is perhaps not praiseworthy, nor is it morally justifiable in the domain of civilization. It is socially irresponsible since it is maybe not morally justifiable. An inspection related to the premises will reveal that it’s the last one that poses a problem. The premise that is final the conclusion of two premises that are preceding simply isn’t in any way logically deduced. What it shows is a conclusion that is passionately deduced being therefore, it fails to be reckoned as a conclusion from a mind that is rationally prepared at minimum at the full time at which it was deduced.
a tradition that improvements according to the above presuppositions – and especially according to the conclusion that is illogical has sent the psyche of non-negotiable superiority to its people. All along, the charged power of passion dictates the pace of human conduct. The principle of equality fails to work precisely because of this superiority syndrome that grips the leader and the led whether in constructive engagements or partnerships that are willed. And a society that is different refuses to share into the collective sensibilities or passion of such society has, by the logic that is expected become a potential or real enemy and faces confrontation on all possible fronts.
Most of that which we learn about the global world that is present of program, via the media, is dominated by state-of-the-art technology. Societies that have probably the most of such technology are also, time and again, claimed to be the many sophisticated. It’s not merely their advancement that lifts them to the pinnacle of power, superiority, and fame. They can also use technology to simplify and go forward a knowledge of life and nature in a direction that is various a direction that tends to eliminate, just as much as possible, a connection that is prior life and nature that was, in many respects, mystical and unsafe. This point that is final not necessarily mean that technological development is a mark of a civilization that is superior.
What we need to know is the known fact that civilization and technology aren’t terms which are conjugal. Civilized people could have an technology that is advanced level they might not have it. Civilization is not just a matter of science and technology or infrastructure that is technical or, again, the marvel of buildings; additionally has to do with the moral and mental reflexes of people also their level of social connectedness within their society that is own and. It truly is from the behaviour that is general of people who all forms of physical structures could be created, so too the relevant question of science and technology. Thus, the sort of bridges, roads, buildings, hefty machinery, among others, that we could see in a society could tell, in a general way, the behavioural pattern of this people. Behavioural pattern may possibly also tell a lot in regards to the level to which the environment that is natural been utilized for infrastructural activities, technology and technology. Above all, behavioural pattern could inform a whole lot in regards to the perceptions and understanding of individuals about other people.
I do believe – and, I think, people do think – that upon accelerating the rate of infrastructural activities and technology, the surroundings has to recede in its naturalness. Once technology that is advancingand its attendant structures or ideas) competes with the green environment for space, this environment that houses trees, lawn, flowers, all kinds of animals and seafood has to shrink in size. Yet the growth of population, the craving that is relentless is human quality life, the need to get a handle on life without with regards to the unpredictable condition of the natural environment prompt the application of technology. Technology need not pose unwarranted danger to the environment that is natural. It is the misuse of technology that is in question. While a society may justly utilize technology to improve quality of life, its people also have to ask: “how much technology do we require to protect the environment?” Suppose society Y blends the moderate usage of technology with the environment that is natural order to offset the reckless destruction for the latter, then this kind of positioning prompts the point that society Y is a lover associated with concept of balance. With this principle, one can conclude that culture boldly Y favours stability more than chaos, and has, therefore, the feeling of moral and responsibility that is social. Any state-of-the-art technology points to the sophistication regarding the mind that is human and it indicates that the surrounding has been cavalierly tamed.
Then the use of technology is a matter of course if humans do not want to live at the mercy of the environment that is natural which, of course, is an uncertain way of life – but in accordance with their own predicted pace. It would seem that the principle of balance that society Y has chosen could just be for a while that is short that this is more of a make-believe position than a real one. For when the power of the mind that is human itself following a achievement that is momentous technology, retreat, or, at best, a slow-down is quite uncommon. It can be as if the mind that is human telling itself: “technological advancement needs to speed up without any obstruction. A retreat or a process that is gradual an insult to your inquiring mind.” This kind of idea process only points out the enigma associated with the mind, its dark side, not its area that is finest. And in trying to interrogate the mode that is current of technology that is certain to the instructions for the brain, the role of ethics is indispensable.
Is it morally right to utilize this kind or kind of technology for this kind of product? And is it morally right to utilize this type or kind of product? Both concerns hint that the product or products in question are either harmful or not, environmentally friendly or not, or that they do not only cause harm directly to people but straight to the environment too. And then to use technology to produce products that harm both humans and the normal environment contradicts the main reason of technology, and yes it also falsifies an assertion that people are rational if, as i’ve stated, the purpose of technology should be to enhance the total well being. Furthermore, it recommends that the level that is sophisticated the human mind has reached is unable to grasp the essence or rationale of quality life. A peaceful coexistence with the natural environment would have already been deserted with regard to an unrestrained, inquiring human mind in this regard. The mind that is individual, as it were, become corrupted with beliefs or some ideas that are untenable in any number of methods.
The advocacy that is done by environmentalists relate to the concern of environmental degradation and its consequences that are negative humans. They insist that there’s no reason behind producing products that are high-tech harm both humans and the environmental surroundings that is normal. This contention sounds persuasive. High technology may show the height of human accomplishment, but it might perhaps not point to ethical and responsibility that is social. And to this aspect, the question could be asked: “In what ways can humans close the chasm between unrestrained high technology and environmental degradation?”
Too frequently, most contemporary humans tend to think that a lifestyle that is sophisticated better to a simple one. The former is supported by the weight of high technology, the latter is mostly not. The former eases the burden of depending a lot of on the dictates regarding the environment that is natural the latter does not. The latter tends to seek a relationship that is symbiotic the environment that is natural the former does not. Whether human comfort should come largely from an technology that is advanced the environment that is natural not a matter that might be easily answered. Then advanced level technology is required to relieve the pressures to individual comfort that arise if the natural environment is shrinking due to populace growth and other unavoidable causes. It is the proliferation that is irresponsible of express, war technology, high-tech items, among others, that are in need of criticism and have to stop.