Daria, Jerico Clyde C.

BS BIO – 2A
October 7, 2021 Science, Technology, and Society
ACTIVITY 1
Instruction: Complete the table below based on your own perception.

Know-Want-Learn

What are the things you already Know, what you Want to learn and what you have
learned from the topics above?

Know Want Learned

• Flourishing • Essence of Meditative
• Human Flourishing Thinking
• Reflective Thinking • More on how
technology should be
viewed as a way of
revealing or
discovering truth
• I learned that there is
more to technology
than being
instrumental and
anthropological
• and that reality is
reality is relative to
one’s perception and
senses
 ACTIVITY 2
Watch the video on “The Magician’s Twin”: CS LEWIS AND THE Case Against Scientism.
Answer the following guide questions.
1. What is scientism?
In “The Magician’s Twin: CS Lewis and the Case Against Scientism” it was defined that “scientism
is the effort to use the methods of science to explain and control every part of human life”,
furthermore, Dr. Richards, Co-author of Indivisible, expressed scientism as “…this idea that the
method or the methods, really, of natural science should be the bar by which every other
intellectual discipline must be held”.
2. How is science comparable to magic?
Science and magic as described by Lewis have 3 similarities: (1) they both have the “ability to
function as a religion” (2) “their encouragement of a lack of skepticism” resulting into credulous
and gullible following, and (3) science and magic both are about “quest for power”.
3. Why is science more dangerous than magic?
Lewis argued that science is far more dangerous than magic due to the simple fact that magic is
simply non-existent. It did not prove itself to be a legitimate and true concept and therefore
practitioners and its follower could not use it to take hold or control of the world while modern
science, on the other hand, has factually has the potential to gain control and manipulate the
world through its methods.
4. What is the presented essence of modernity and its consequence?
According to Daniel Bella, the essence of modernity is that nothing is sacred, this concept leads
to the abolishment of traditional ethics and restraints, and distinction between species and
organisms (which ultimately mean that the human person will be objectified and disposable)
5. What do we need for the science to be good?
In order for sciences to be good, interaction among other disciplines of science is a must. To this
logic, claims made by a scientist in any field of science must be open to rational and critical review
and inspection not only by peers but by everyone (given that they have the ability to think critically
and rationally), in order for them to be kept in check. Additionally, Lewis claimed that science
should go together hand in hand with moral and ethical questioning to be able to be aligned with
what is “good”. For the society.
 ACTIVITY 3
Instructions: Read this article: Forget 'developing' poor countries, it's time to 'dedevelop'
rich countries. Make a Reflection Paper.
Guide Questions for Reflection:
1. Why must we change our paradigm of growth and consumption to that of de-
development?
2. What are the terms de-development, de-growth, and zero growth seemingly
unacceptable to the usual framework of human progress?
3. How have we been enframed by the notion of growth?
4. How do we improve our lives and yet reduce consumption?
5. What are the similarities and differences between Heidegger’s and Hickel’s article?

An Alternative to Growth for Development

For decades, growth has been instilled by orthodox and conventional economy to be t he
solution to poverty and that the “Trickle-down” effect was a promise for wealth and opportunity
distribution to the whole economical issue. On the other hand, shifting the focus on poorer
segments of the population to be the main beneficiaries of growth to level the playing field is also
an inadequate approach in addressing the issue.
The real problem that sustains poverty is our overconsumption of resources that leads to
overshooting beyond the planet’s bio-capacity. It can be said that we are “enframed” by the notion
of growth because of the advancement and development which offers convenience and ease that
we utilize and enjoy. This notion of growth as a solution to poverty should be rebranded with the
idea of richer and more powerful countries to catch down to those of poorer status, albeit the idea
sounds the opposite of progress, we should start changing our perception of such countries not
as underdeveloped, but rather as appropriately developed. In accordance, off-putting
terminologies of “zero growth”, “de-growth”, and “de-development”, are repulsive in the sense that
it contradicts our concept of human progress and purpose which we, certainly, need to work on
redefining. Take for example the comparison between life expectancy and GDP per capita in the
US and Cuba. The US, leading a $53,000 GDP per capita over Cuba’s $6,000, consumes 6.1
global hectares of resources more which, without analyzation, is at an alarming rate.
What does this mean for us? Simply put, we need to reorient ourselves toward a positive
future, one that we can consider a truer form of progress not just economical but environmental
as well which geared toward quality instead of quantity. A lower consumption rate, by defining to
ourselves “how much is enough?” is the key to improving our lives while reducing our
overconsumption of resources to a more sustainable rate. Concluding what was tackled in
Hickel’s “Forget 'developing' poor countries, it's time to 'de-develop' rich countries”, and
comparing to the ideologies presented by Heidegger, the former claims that modern-day
technology has become an essential aspect of our daily lives. While, on the other hand, Hickel
argued that natural disasters that is caused but is an impact cannot be aided nor remedied by our
current milestones in technological advancement.