PHILIPPINE ADVENT COLLEGE

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE SUBJECT OF

SOC SCI 101: SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY

ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT WEEK 11-12

Submitted by:

ATACA, RUEL JR B.

BSBA 1 SECTION 3

Submitted to:

RESONABLE, RISTLEY A.

1.Who is Bill Joy? What authority does he have to write on technology?

Bill Joy is Chief Scientist at Sun Microsystems, his job is about computer networking, where the
sending and receiving of messages creates the opportunity for out-of-control replication., he is more a
computer architect than a scientist, and heenjoyed participating in the creation of advanced
microprocessor technologies and Internet technologies such as Java and Jini.He has the authority
to write on technology not just because of his job but also for the reason that his life has been driven
by a deep need to ask questions and find answers.He work as code signer of three
microprocessor architectures—SPARC, picoJava, and MAJC—and as the designer of several
implementationshe wasbotheredby the thought that his works or future work mightaffect or help in the
extinctionof human racealso lead him to write about technology.
2.Does Joy agree or disagree with Kurzweil's basic claims? Explain.

Joy didn’t agree with Kurzweil basic claims, that humans become robots or fuse with robots, humans
merging with robots, Kurzweil”svision of near immortalitythrough robotswhich Joy’s assert that latercan
leads to an accumulation of great power and, concomitantly, great danger. He conducted his
research to accumulate information and help individual to have a visual of what technologies might
provide in the future, if those technology will bring wealth or not, which in Joy’s argument Kurzweil
vision about robots will not bring us wealth or complete happiness but rather bring us to danger and
human extinction.

3.Why, in Joy’s opinion, is humility necessary in developing technology?

For Joy, when you are at the vertex of changeit is always hard to see the bigger impact. Asserting that
failing to understand the consequences of yourown inventionswhile in the rapture of discovery and
innovation seems to be a common fault of scientists and technologists; because of the overarching
desire to know, we are unable to notice that the progress to newer and more powerful technologies
can take on a life ofits own.That is why, Humility is necessary in developing technology, humility to
accept that there is a way that may be better than choosing a complicated and troubling one, knowing
and accepting when to stop ifnecessary is a best attitude one mustpossessand eventually this attitude
will prevent situations that youmight regret at the end.

4.What is Joy’s dilemma, with respect to knowledge? How does he view it, compared with
Oppenheimer?

Joy understand that knowledge is good, as it is the search for new truths. Just like what Aristotle stated,
“All men by nature desire to know." We tend to value theopen access to information, as well as in
recognizing theproblems that may arise with the attempts inrestrictingaccess toitand in the
development of knowledge. In recent times, we have come to revere scientific knowledge.But despite
the strong historical precedents, if open access to and unlimited development of knowledge
henceforth puts us all in clear danger of extinction, forexample, the effort to build the first
atomic bomb whichled by Robert Oppenheimer, wherein the bombkilled a million of people in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But despite of the tragedy that happened Oppenheimer stood firmly behind
the scientific attitude, saying, "It is not possible to be a scientist unless you believe that the knowledge
of the world, and the power which this gives, is a thing which is of intrinsic value to humanity,
and that you are using it to help in the spread of knowledge and are willing to take the
consequences."because of launching that kind of destructive invention which comes from the
human knowledge. Ifthis is the kind of attitude towards knowledge, thenitis not good at all, thereforeby
the commonsense demands that we reexamine even these basic, long-held beliefs.

5.In the passage beginning “If we could agree, as a species, what we wanted ...”, do you get the feeling
Joy is expressing a longing? What is it for?
In the passage,Joy expressing a longing for humanness, if only humankind agree as one of what we
want, where we headed, and why, where weunderstand what we canholdand what we must give
up,then that’s when we canmake our future much less dangerous.

6.Summarize Joy’s thesis.

In Joy’s thesis “Why theFuture Doesn't Need Us” he discussesthe effect of the new emerging
technologies which others claims that will help the human race in dealing with the recent and future
problem but the truth is might as well help in the extinction of human race. Although Joy is not a
Luddite, because he as his own create or helps in making technologies, still he isworried about what
these technologies will cause animpact tothehumanity. Joy argues that developing technologies
provide a much greater danger to humanity than any technology before has ever presented
which he connects it withthe novel The White Plague as a potential nightmare scenario, in which a
mad scientist creates a virus capable of wiping out humanity.But instead of scientist creating virus,
scientist creates destructive bombs which can wipe out a country, and robots which can replace
humans andallow human to be immortal. Joy also voices concern about increasing computer
power. He worriesthat computers will eventually become more intelligent than we are, leading to
such dystopian scenarios as robot rebellion. And by these changes brought by technology Joy
expresses concerns that eventually the rich will be the only ones that have the power to control the
future robots that will be built, and that these people could also decide to take life into their
own hands and control how humans continue topopulate and reproduce. He started doing more
research into robotics and people that specialize in robotics, and outside of his own thoughts he tried
getting others opinions on the topic. By collecting information, he concluded that we would create
additional threats to ourselves by pursuing those weapons such as bombs and robots,and that we would
be more secure if we did not pursue them. We each seek to be happy, but it would seem
worthwhile to question whether we need to take such a high risk of total destruction to gain yet more
knowledge and yet more things; common sense says that there is a limit to our material needs—and
that certain knowledge is too dangerous and is best forgoneand also neither should we pursue near
immortality without considering the costs, without considering the commensurate increase in the risk
of extinction. Immortality, while perhaps the original, is certainly not the only possible utopian dream.

7.On what ethical principles would you say Joy bases his critique of technology?He found anidea in the
book Ethics for the New Millennium, by the Dalai Lama, wherein itargues that the most important thing
is for us to conduct our lives with love and compassion for others, and that our societies need to
develop a stronger notion of universal responsibility and of our interdependency; he proposes a
standard of positive ethical conduct for individuals and societies that seems consonant with Attali's
Fraternity utopia.In the book, it further argues that we must understand what it is that makes people
happy, and acknowledge the strong evidence that neither material progress nor the pursuit of the
power of knowledge is the key—that there are limits to what science and the scientific pursuit
alone can do.That creating robots that might replace or can gives us immortality can lead us to
happiness.
8.Joy believes that “we must find alternative outlets for our creative forces, beyond the culture of
perpetual economic growth ...” What should we say to future generations who will face prospects of
less prosperity than their parents if we curtail the technological development that drives economic
growth?

This growth has largely been a blessing for several hundred years, but it has not brought us
completehappiness, but we must now choose between the pursuit of unrestricted and undirected
growth through science and technology and the clear accompanying dangers.Perils are inevitable,
that is why you must be careful of what decisions and action you will make, because failure
inidentifying the consequences of your actions will lead you to risk and undesirable situation.

9.“Each of us has our precious things,” Joy says, “and as we care for them,we locate the essence of our
humanity. In the end, it is because of our great capacity for caring that I remain optimistic we will
confront the dangerous issues now before us.” Do you share his optimism? Explain.

Yes, indeed each one of us has our precious things that we care and wanted to protect. By
means ofprotecting, we must be careful of what are the choices and actions we take. Evaluating and
knowing the consequences before actually doing it, is a must. Being optimistic that through the helps
from the people we care and love, we can face the future with hope and attain a successful outcome of
the hardships that humanity facing right now.

10.Are you more in agreement with Kurzweil or with Joy? Why?

After I read the thesis of Joy “Why the Future Doesn't Need Us” I agree with Joythat others technology
will create chaos to humans if the intention of creating it will lead to a harmful effect to humanity.
With Kurzweil's dream, “near immortality through robotics” wherein humans will be replaced by
robots, the human’s capacity to understand and make decisions even memories will be pass and
installed to robot to be immortal. This kind of solution to human dilemmas isnot themost desirable
utopia, and its pursuit brings clear dangers. That’s why we should rethink our utopian choices.