Exercise 1.

Reading Comprehension Task

Juan Miguel N. Caparas 3/31/22

GED104/BM6

1. What is the framework of de-development of rich countries all about?

• The de-developing framework is a response to the world's economy from

overgrowing. We are growing too much, and there's a massive percentage

of consumption from powerful countries. This issue puts our planet a

considerable risk. Rich countries are considered developed because they

consume a lot and have a higher GDP. The framework suggests that rich

countries should lessen their consumption of the world's resources. It can

be described as a catch down; instead of the countries catching up with

wealthier countries, the framework suggests that they would catch down

and promote efficient living.

2. How is the de-development framework different from traditional frameworks of

development?

• The world considers poor countries as underdeveloped, but this theory or

idea suggests that they are appropriately developed. It shows that quality

is more important than quantity. Happiness isn't measured by how much

an individual consumes in their daily lives. Richness and wealth surely can

improve the quality of life of a person, but it is shown by statistics that

countries with lower per capita income rank high in overall happiness and
 wellbeing. The traditional framework is the growth for all countries, growth

for the rich and underdeveloped countries. This conventional framework

doesn't work effectively because as richer countries grow and consume

more, there will be less for the emerging countries to consume. Wealthy

countries already consume a lot of resources and if they grow and

consume more, it will drastically affect the appropriately developed

countries.

3. According to Hickel, how can rich countries de-develop?

• Rich countries should catch down to the appropriately develop. This

creates an equal balance of consumption of resources on our planet. He

suggested that humanity should slow it down when it comes to taking up

resources. We should buy and own less because it doesn't affect our well-

being and happiness as a person. We should start to live efficiently and to

sustain our way of living where we can provide all the things, we need

without compromising the need of others. Humans are overshooting our

planet's biocapacity because of the continuous overly consumption of rich

countries. Rich countries should prioritize viewing societies where people

live long and happily; communities with lower income and consumption

are appropriately developed.

4. Why does Hickel frown upon pundits using terms such as de-growth, zero

growth, or de-development in describing an alternative framework?

• This de-developing and catching down to average countries causes some

to misinterpret it. Some people use terms when describing the framework
 are de-growth, zero growth, or de-development. Some people do not

understand and take it as something that could harm a rich country.

Negative understandings and interpretations will produce no union in our

world. Conflicts can arise, and there will be no results of development. We

must create a positive future where there is constant progress.

5. Some people might think that de-development is about giving things up. How

does Hickel explain that this is not the case?

• It is not giving things up because it only suggests efficiency, less buying,

less own, but with higher life efficiency and good living. Quality of life may

not be measured by how much money or how much an individual

consumes in their daily lives. The framework suggests that rich countries

should look at more than improving their quality of life in terms of

happiness and longevity. It is more of a giving to the environment; we

should slow down on taking up resources because if we don't, climate

change and other existing environmental issues will do it for us. It is

something that we could all benefit from.

Exercise 2. Personal Consumption Audit

My Personal Consumption Audit

Product Average No. of hours/day/I Impact of this de-

amount reduce/do away developing on my

consumed with everyday living

Watching 7 hours per day 3 hours a day It makes me study more

videos and do things that is more

productive and will help me

to be happy.

Playing Games 4 hours per day 2 hours per day It makes me focus more on

my studies and it helps me

to calm my mind more and

relax my body.

Eating/Food 2500 calories 1500 calories per This will help me to lose

per day day weight, improve my sleep

and it makes me active in

my daily life.

Eating foods Consuming food from fast

from Fast food 3x a week 1x a week food chains are proven to

chains be unhealthy. It can also

save more money if I cook

 and consume home-

cooked foods.

Plastic usage 10pcs per 1-3pcs per month Plastic bags are harmful to

month the environment. I am now

using eco bags that are

reusable and not harmful to

the environment.

Assignment 6. Documentary Film Analysis

1. Why was C.S. Lewis very much a skeptic and critic of scientism? Was he against

science?

- He is not against science because he studied it himself; he took

an interest in how it works and how it can affect society. He is a

critic of scientism, and he criticized the method of natural science

because he believes that science may be pursued because of

gaining power. It beholds power. He saw how world wars are

fueled by scientific methods, scientific ideas, and faith, and he

believes that science can be corrupted.

2. How did C.S. Lewis explain the following:

a. Science as Religion

- Science can create an idea of something. It serves as an

alternative religion. Science can explain the phenomenon in this

world that can give meaning to humanity, which has the same
 purpose as religion. Science sparked atheism in parts of the world

which were fueled by Charles Darwin, a famous scientist who

introduced the evolution of humans. A lot of people celebrated his

findings, and their community reflected the same practices as a

religion.

b. Science as Credulity

- Lack of skepticism. A lot of people are trusting science and have

faith in it. Humanity will easily believe in any knowledge when it is

from science. He exposed Freudianism and stated that when you

deconstruct everything, you will be left with nothing. He also took

an interest in unguided evolution, and he thought that

evolutionism could create a fatal self-contradiction in our minds.

Lewis said that if we evolved from other animals, would we trust

our thought process if we knew that we came from a smaller level

of species.

c. Science as power

- Magicians have the power of the world. Modern science is caused

by the urge of people for power. Although science can benefit us

in many ways, this can be controlling and dangerous for

humanity. People can be controlled and manipulated by modern

science. The Germans used science to gain control and spread

doom to the world. We can compare this to Elon Musk; we can all
 agree that he is one of the most powerful and influential people in

the world. His power is fueled by science, aeronautics.

3. Why did C.S. Lewis think that modern science is far more dangerous than

magic?

- Modern science is more dangerous than magic because magic

fails, and it cannot control the world. Magic is something that can

be explained and can be exposed to what trick a person is doing.

But in science, it is proven by statistics and relevant theories that

can manipulate people and give power to the beholder. It has

unlimited possibilities on what science can discover and what

power it could give to a person.

4. Why did C.S. Lewis become increasingly concerned about the rise scientocracy?

How does scientocracy relate to scientism?

- Lewis called the people that are dictating by the name of science

is a part of the rising phenomenon he called scientocracy. It is

where expert people speak for science, but they are using it to

dictate to people. They are claiming their knowledge as part of

modern science. Scientism is the extension of scientific ideas,

methods, and theories, while scientocracy is the implementation

of public policies on science itself.

5. Based on what you learned in the documentary film, how does scientism pose a

threat to the human person flourishing in science and technology? Why should

science be guided by an ethical basis that is not dictated by science itself?

- Control and power is the main threat that modern science can

produce. Modern science causes risks in this world that are

harmful to us and to the environment in many ways. Scientists

and powerful people can manipulate others because people can

believe anything in the name of science. We can be easily

manipulated because of the trust that we put in the knowledge of

science. When science is not guided by an ethical basis, there

would be no limits on what science can gain and innovate in the

future society. But with an ethical basis, it creates boundaries and

limitations as it would be validated by the set of values or ethics

that modern society has.