Michelle R.

Mabalay
BSPSY 1-2 12-03-2021

POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES GEED 10083

– SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY 

ACTIVITY - WEEK 6-7 

DEADLINE: DECEMBER 3, 2021 – 5:00 PM 

Essay : (10 Points each question) 

1. According to Heidegger, “the essence of technology is by no means anything

technological.”  What does he mean by this statement? 
 So, when Heidegger says that "the essence of technology is by no means
anything technological," he means that the driving force behind modern modes
of production is not found in devices that are part of an individual, nor in
pollution sources that are connected to them.This allows Heidegger to move his
discussion of technology aside from the scope of technical "experts." Heidegger's
claim that the role of science existed prior to the historical development of
"concrete" forms of technology in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries allows
him to widen the historical scope of his debate. AndHeidegger will argue later
that the highest form predates the historical appearance of "real" types of
technology in the 18th and 19th centuries.
2. How did Heidegger connect the essence of technology with the concept of poiesis?
How do the  concepts of technology, knowledge, and truth relate to one another? 
 Martin Heidegger employs poiesis in his book The Question Concerning
Technology. Heidegger adopted the word from Plato and Aristotle in order to
explain the character of today's technology. In a word, the ingredients for
making a pine mug were always available, but the concept of a wooden cup is a
revelation. As a sense, all technological operations may be viewed as revelatory.
So, where does the concept of "poiesis" come into all of thisPoiesis is the act of
revealing or coming into that is something that did not exist before.Martin
Heidegger refers to it as a "coming forth," in the broadest sense of the term.
Poiesis is the process of a blossom blooming, a butterfly releasing from its
cocoon, or a waterfall cascading as the snow melts, he explained. He advanced
human understanding to the point where the ordinary became extraordinary.
Heidegger spoke on more fundamental concepts. In his early and middle
writings, he concentrates on the following important topics: truth, freedom, life,
humanity, and history. Despite his great mind, he has been unable to articulate
the meaning of these basic concepts that we often take for granted. For him,
understanding the fundamental and essential concepts is the first step toward
 climbing the knowledge tower. In his final remarks, one of the most important
issues he discussed was technology. This would be the main topic of discussion
in this article. In his speech paper, "The Question Concerning Technology," he
tackled technology. This presentation will serve as the framework for our study
of his technological ideas
3. What does the term “standing reserve” mean? In the context of modern
technology, can humans  be considered as standing reserve? Why or why not? 
 Standing-reserve, I suppose, is a big worry for Martin Heidegger, depending on
what I've gathered from what I've read. The act of separating a topic from an
item, including a human, and restricting their potential is known as "standing-
reserve." "Standing-reserve equipment" refers to innovation that is prepared to
be used in the present; everything that is on hold in the sense of backup is no
more a sword against us. Heidegger is saying that what was once considered a
standing reserve is now the center of attention. It might seem futile because
something held in escrow should not be discussed, yet it could have major
consequences. This serves as a cautionary tale about the hazards of allowing
technology to manage various scenarios.
4. Heidegger asserted that the danger of technology lie within its essence
itself. Give some  concrete examples on what Heidegger believed to be the
dangers of technology. 
 This danger, according to Martin Heidegger, is that technology's supremacy
causes us to lose track of ourselves as humans able to stand within the same
universe. Heidegger emphasizes technology's role in our decline in his later
works on technology by limiting our awareness of realities since they are in his
early works.He claims that we now only see nature, and eventually human
beings, through the glass of technology, and that we regard landscapes as raw
resources for processes. Heidegger wants to shed light on this occurrence and
create a style of thinking that will allow us to be free of the oppressive authority
that the feels has imprisoned modern civilisation in both the socialist and
democratic West. Heidegger believes we may break free from this servitude by
accepting the dangers of technology rather than condemning them. He uses the
Rhine River to illustrate the hazards of current technical thought. At the one side,
there's the old Rhine, which, as Hölderlin's poetry The Rhine portrays, has long
been a source of wide eyes for Germans. Here, the archaic "technology" of a
rickety walkway looks to blend in with the river's main features, as if the
footbridge organically grew from the river. The old bridge does nothing to
enhance the river's appeal as an unfathomable wonder and a precious source of
life. A modern hydroelectric power station, on the other hand, alters the river
such that it is viewed primarily as a material resource, a reserve that exists just
in case it is needed to generate power later. Hölderlin's spell has indeed been
broken, and those who still regard the river as a natural source beauty have
been relegated to a visitor asset suitable for plunder. Essentially, our modern
way of life, which has us unknowingly viewing everything in existence as a
possible asset to use for our own purposes, seems to mean the end of all else. It
 removes the chance of a more genuine existence in which our true selves can
speak freely to ourselves in the world. Heidegger's answer is to protect a lyrical
way of being in the world, which would be the polar opposite of this harmful
technological mentality in these regards.

5. When Heidegger suggests that art is the way to avoid the dangers of technology,
does he mean  that man should become artists? Why or why not? 
 Heidegger doesn't really imply that men must be painters; instead, he says that
art has the power to save mankind in this terrible moment because it has its
roots in technology while also being greatly different from it through its own
concept of revelation. Moreover, as a result of massive theoretical and material
revolutions in the fine arts over the past few years, modern contemporary art
has challenged Heidegger's notion of art and an artist in different ways. Paik's
work is an exemplar as well. On the one hand, he violates Heidegger's definition
of art, but his TV Buddhism also demonstrates how, when brought into the
domain of art, technology is no longer considered in terms of its purpose, but as
a way of revealing truths regarding humans. Its conserving ability can only be
developedin an environment that is both related to and radically different from
innovation. However, one domain is art. Technology and art both belong to
technology because they are primarily techniques for revealing and bringing out
the truth. As a result, he concludes that art is the sphere of being that is said to
acquire capacity first and exclusively in its extension. Art, being the highest
value, not only maintains, it actively encourages the increase of power. Since the
will to power reveals itself in the mechanical misuse of the planet, promoting the
growth of the drive to power involves encouraging the terrible danger of
technology.

6. What is scientism? Why was Lewis against it? 

 According to Wikipedia, "scientism" is defined as the "promotion of science as
the best or only objective means by which society should determine normative
and philosophical norms." Whereas the term was originally defined as
"techniques and behaviors typical of or credited to the scientist," it was later
approved as a term of abuse by some church officials that meant "an
exaggerated confidence in the usefulness of natural science methods applied to
all areas of research (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)"
(and later by many others). Lewis objected to "scientism," which is defined as
the "delusional notion that modern science is the only credible source of
knowledge of the world and that scientists should be the ones to dictate public
 policy and even our moral and religious beliefs solely on the basis of their
scientific training."

7. How does scientism threaten the human person thriving in science and technology?
Why should  science adhere to a moral basis that is not dictated by science itself? 
 Scientism is a threat to civilization happiness in scientific and technological since
it paints everyone who succeeds as bad, even if not everyone has bad motives.
Science should be guided by an ethical foundation since, as noted previously, it
has massive potential and infinite possibilities that, if unguided, could be
exploited and utilized for malicious ends. While doing scientific research, ethical
rules must be followed. The regulations help to ensure that science is carried out
safely and that scientific data is reliable. Individuals can sometimes use science
to help them make ethical decisions in their personal life, but other factors must
usually be considered. Certainly, research can aid in the discovery of unforeseen
effects or causal relationships with ethical norms or values. People also desire
reliable info to make well-informed actions.

8. How do you feel about the term “de-development”? Do you feel that it is
counterintuitive for the  concept of human flourishing and progress? 
 Jason Edward Hickel, an economic anthropologist who examines global inequality
and political ecology, was born in 1982. Instead of helping poor nations to "make
up ground," he says we should look for ways to encourage wealthy countries to
"catch down" to more acceptable levels of development. Rather from being
deadbeats which need to be developed towards Western models, countries
where people live lifetime of happiness lives on extremely low levels of wealth
and consumption should be viewed as exemplars of efficient existence. It is
ridiculous to argue that wealthy countries should wait for poorer countries to
"catch up," as this will make it more difficult for other countries to use their own
resources to strengthen their economies, and it would help poverty stricken or
developing countries of asia become even nicer than they are presently.

9. What is the centrality of human flourishing to science and innovation? 

 Human flourishing is interpreted as the capability to live a good life. It is founded
on Aristotelian principles, which places importance on health and is inherently
equal in society. Since it respects our shared humanity, human flourishing is all
in the greatest advantage. Everyone should be able to thrive and succeed in
terms of health. They can put their values, talents, and abilities to good use in
order to attain their own goals and improve their health. Human Flourishing has
worked to promote ego and achievement as part of a broader community of
individuals who are individually free to pursue their own aims. It also means
rationally utilizing one's inherent human abilities, such as talents, abilities, and
 virtues, to the pursuit of freely and rationally selected values and goals.
Technology has numerous effects with ourselves and the world surrounding.

10.Do you agree on John Hickel’s views regarding progress and development and
how to measure  them? Why or why not?
 Rather than 'developing' poor nations, Jason Hickel believes it is necessary to
'de-develop' developed countries. The gap between developed and developing
countries is expanding, according to recent reports. A hazy method for detecting
these gaps exists too though. Many ways have been offered to achieve this and
ascertain whether or not we are actually flourishing. Jason Hickel suggested a
new perspective to what is widely regarded as a solution. He investigated
poverty and how existing efforts to eradicate it have failed, resulting in the gap
between rich and poor counties expanding in his essay Forget 'developing' poor
countries; it's time to de-develop rich countries. He voiced concerns about the
need for continuing growth and its implications for countries. He also invented
the term "de-development" to describe a means of closing the development gap
among countries phases.Hickel's vision of development, as stated previously, is a
fascinating concept, but I do dont think it will benefit the economy as a whole. It
will aid impoverished nations in catching up to successful countries, but it will be
unreasonable and impossible for prosperous countries to do so, especially given
their international standing.

Mechanics:  

a. Use letter size paper (soft copy) 

b. Tahoma Font 12 
c. NO PDF FILE – only use MS Word Format 

Rubrics for Essay: 

3 = 7-10 points 
2 = 4-6 points 
1 = 0 – 3 points
This risk, as per Martin Heidegger, is that innovation's incomparability makes us forget
about ourselves as people ready to remain inside a similar universe. Heidegger stresses
innovation's job in our decrease in his later chips away at innovation by restricting our
familiarity with real factors since they are in his initial works. He asserts that we
currently just see nature, and in the end individuals, through the glass of innovation,
and that we see scenes as crude assets for processes. Heidegger needs to reveal
insight into this event and make a way of reasoning that will permit us to be liberated
from the severe power that the feels has detained current civilization in both the
communist and popularity-based West. Heidegger accepts we might break liberated
from this subjugation by tolerating the risks of innovation rather than denouncing them.
He utilizes the Rhine River to delineate the risks of flow specialized thought. At the one
side, there's the old Rhine, which, as Hölderlin's verse The Rhine depicts, has for some
time been a wellspring of wide eyes for Germans. Here, the old "innovation" of a
dilapidated walkway hopes to mix in with the stream's fundamental highlights, as
though the footbridge naturally developed from the waterway. The old scaffold never
really upgrades the stream's allure as an incomprehensible marvel and a valuable
wellspring of life. An advanced hydroelectric power station, then again, changes the
waterway with the end goal that it is seen essentially as a material asset, a hold that
exists in the event it is expected to create power later. Hölderlin's spell has for sure
been broken, the people who actually see the stream as a characteristic source
excellence have been consigned to a guest resource appropriate for loot. Basically, our
cutting-edge lifestyle, which has us unwittingly seeing everything in presence as a
potential resource for use for our own motivations, appears to mean the finish of all
else. It eliminates the opportunity of a more veritable presence wherein our actual
selves can talk uninhibitedly to ourselves on the planet. Heidegger's response is to
safeguard a melodious approach to being on the planet, which would be the