Science

Technology and
Society
Module
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pngitem.com%2Fmiddle%2FwhJiw_collection-of-technology-art-science-technology-and-society%2F&psig=AOvVaw3uYG_LugiJvMI9QBgJQJmV&ust=1597295366829000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CA0QjhxqFwoTCPiHy-71lOsCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAJ
Module 1: General Concepts and Historical Developments
This module introduces students to the study of Science Technology and Society (STS) beginning with
general concepts and its historical developments. It also covers the impact of science and technology and their
interactions within various social contexts with emphasis on the role of science and technology in Philippine
nation building

Lesson 1. Introduction to Science, Technology, and Society

This section introduces Science, Technology, and Society (STS) as a field of study. After defining
science and technology, the section traces the historical roots of STS as an academic field. It also enumerates
emerging ethical dilemmas that reinforce the importance of be study of STS in an age of scientific progress
and technological development.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. discuss the general concepts related to science and technology;
2. explain the scope of the study of STS; and
3. demonstrate preparedness and readiness in the study of STS.

Diagnostics
Instructions: On the space provided, write TRUE if the statement is correct or FALSE if it is not.
1. Science is a methodical way of acquiring knowledge.________
2. Technology is the use of scientific knowledge for practical purposes.______
3. Science and technology can be dangerous._______
4. Science, Technology, and Society (STS) is the study of how science and technology shape and are
shaped by social influences.__________
5. STS deals with the historical development of scienceand technology but does not cover their
philosophical underpinnings________.
6. The study of STS primarily concerns students of science and technology programs, and not non-science
students as much.___________
7. STS is an important area of study because science and technology permeate every aspect of everyday
life.
8. Science and technology not crucial factors in nation building.___________
9. History cannot teach people about evaluating present-day science and technology.____________
10. STS draws from other disciplines, such as history, sociology, philosophy, economics, political science
and international relations, and science policy.__________

Science comes from the Latin word scientia, meaning knowledge. It refers
to a systematic and methodical activity of building and organizing knowledge about
how the universe behaves through observation, experimentation or both. According
to the famous American science historian, John Heilbron (2003, p. vii), "Modern
science is a discovery as well as an invention." Heilbron considered science as a
discovery of regularity in nature, enough for natural phenomena to be described by
principles and laws. He also explained that science required invention to devise
techniques, abstractions, apparatuses, and organizations to describe these natural
regularities and their law-like descriptions.

Technology, for its part, is the application of scientific knowledge, laws, and principles to produce
services, materials, tools, and machines aimed at solving real-world problems. It comes from the Greek root
word techne, meaning 'art, skill, or cunning of hand.' During a live public Q&A in December 2014, one member
of the audience asked Mark Zuckerberg what his definition of a technological tool is, and the CEO of Facebook
responded:
 "What defines a technological tool-one historical definition-is something
that takes human's sense or ability and augments it and makes it more powerful.
So, is a for example, I wear contact lenses or glasses; that technology that enhances
my human ability of vision and makes it better."

Wolpert (2005) made an interesting comparison between science and technology that is helpful in
the study of their interaction with society. In his landmark paper, The Medawar Lecture 1998: Is Science
Dangerous? Wolpert explained that reliable science knowledge has no moral or ethical value. It is meant
simply to explain how nature and universe work and that the obligation of scientist besides studying the nature
of the universe is to explain the possible use and applications of such scientific technology.

Along this line, Wolpert made it clear that science is not the
same as technology. Scientists are not responsible for the
application of knowledge in technology. He further explained
that the very nature of science is that it is not possible to predict
scientific discoveries and how these discoveries may be applied.
While scientist are responsible for the reliable conduct of
scientific inquiry and its honest interpretation and
dissemination, technological applications of science are
influenced by other sectors such as politics and governance,
religion, and business.

With this distinction, one can surmise the need the study of the various ways in which science and
technology act for are enacted in society. This is a particularly timely and relevant and concern because of the
advancements in science and technology today.

Nowadays, advancements in science and technology have become pervasive. They are manifested in
the activities that humans pursue and the tools they use every day. The beauty of this is that advancement
builds upon itself. As such, humans today live more productive and more exciting lives than their predecessors.
With the way things go, it could be expected that this generation's children and the children of their children
have the chance to lead even better lives than this generation already does.

However, the dynamism and immensity of scientific and technological progress also pose challenges
and drawbacks to the way humans live. The introduction of machines tremendously cut the need for human
workforce and gave rise to questions about whether machines will eventually replace humans. The invention
of drugs that cured the previously incurable diseases introduced new strains of bacteria and viruses that are
resistant to the very
same drugs that once fought them-take an antibiotic-resistant strain of gonorrhea as an example. The rise of
social media drastically changed the way humans communicate, interact, and share information; however, this
tends put people's privacy at risk. Indeed, science and technology have served a predominantly double-edged
function. This is succinctly captured in famous line of popular American scientist, Carl Sagan, quoted in Tom
Head's (2006) book: Introduction to Science Technology and society

"We live in a society absolutely dependent on science and technology and yet
have cleverly arranged thing so that almost no one understands science and
technology. That's a clear prescription for disaster."

As problems in science and technology continue to rise and become more observable, the need to pay
attention to their interactions with various aspects of human life, e.g., social, political, and economic, becomes
ever more necessary. How the different aspects of society shape and influence the progression and further
development of science and technology is the area of concern of a relatively new academic discipline called
Science, Technology, and Society.
 Science, Technology, and Society (STS) is a relatively young field that combines previously
independent and older disciplines, such as the history of science, philosophy of science, and sociology of
science. As an academic field, ST'S, according to Harvard University's Kennedy School (2018), traces its roots
from the interwar period and the start of the Cold War. It was during this period when historians and scientists
found interest in the interconnections of scientific knowledge, technological systems, and society. The rise of
STS as an academic field resulted from the recognition that many schools today do not really prepare students
to respond critically, reflectively, and proactively to the challenges posed by science and technology in the
contemporary world.
In general, STS applies methods drawn from history, philosophy, and sociology to study the nature
of science and technology and ultimately judge their value and place in society. As an interdisciplinary field,
the emergence of ST'S was a result of questions about science and technology's dynamic interaction with
various aspects of society and was thus viewed as a socially embedded enterprise. Thus, as the Kennedy School
effectively encapsulates, STS seeks to bridge the gap between two traditionally exclusive cultures-humanities
(interpretive) and natural sciences (rational)-so that humans will be able to better confront the moral, ethical,
and existential dilemmas brought by the continued developments in science and technology

The John J. Reilly Center the University of Notre Dame is responsible for listing the ten emerging
ethical dilemmas and policy issues in science and technology every year. Below is the list for 2018:
1. Helix - a digital app store designed to read genomes
2. Bless U-2 and Pepper- first robot priest and monk
3. Emotion-Sensing and Facial Recognition- a software being developed to assess your reactions to
anything such as shopping and playing games
4. Ransomware - a way of holding data hostage through hacking and requiring a ransom to be paid
5. Textalyzer - a device that analyzes whether a driver was using his or her phone during an accident
6. Social Credit System - a system of scoring citizens through their actions by placing them under
constant surveillance (which China plays to adopt)
7. Google Clips - a hands-free camera that lets the user capture every moment effortlessly
8. Sentencing Software - a mysterious algorithm designed to aid courts in sentencing decisions
9. Friendbot - an app that stores the deceased's digital footprint so one can still "chat" with them
10. Citizen App- an app that notifies users of ongoing crimes or major events in a specific area

Even though several items in the list sound unfamiliar to it can be a useful springboard in the study
of science and technology. The list points to the ever growing challenges, questions, and issues that need to be
addressed and resolved when science and technology and humanity intertwine. However, methods of critiquing
these emerging ethical dilemmas may come from similar methods used in previous critiques of science and
technology issues. For example, one can use methods used in critiquing the rise of clinical trials of gene therapy
in the 1990s. Today's approach in critiquing emerging science and technology issues, such as the ones listed
above, may be influenced by how scientists and non-scientists evaluated the positive
and negative implications of clinical trials of gene therapy in the 1990s. For this purpose, one can continue to
specifically draw from the tenets of history, philosophy, and sociology in making informed and critical
innovations in judgments of the ethical and moral values of these innovations in science and technology.

Exercise1. Reflection Task

Instructions: On the space below, paste a magazine or newspaper cutout or print of any photograph that depicts
an issue or problem in science and technology. Then, answer the questions that follow.

1. What is the issue or problem depicted in the photograph?

2. How does this particular issue or problem impact the well-being of humans today?

3. Why is it important for people to study and an academic field, especially in learn about STS as depicted
in the photograph? addressing the issue or problem
Exercise 2. Our View of Science and Technology
Instructions: On a LETTER SIZE (short) bond paper create a slogan that reflects your view of
science and technology. It should specifically state whether you view science and technology as good or bad,
both, or neutral. Be creative. You can use different art materials to make it visually appealing and impactful.

Exercise 3. Issues in Science and Technology

Instructions: Review the ten emerging ethical and policy issue dilemmas compiled by the John J. Reilly Center
for Science, Technology, and Values of the University of Notre Dame for 2018.
Choose one among emerging ethical dilemma in science and technology. Research about the nature of the
dilemma you choose. Use the guide questions below in preparing your output. Write your output in a letter
size bond paper.
1. What is the emerging ethical dilemma all about?
2. What factors or events led to this dilemma?
3. What are the societal implications of this dilemma?
4. Why is it important to question the moral and ethical issues surrounding innovations in science and
technology?
5. In the face of this dilemma, why is it important to study STS?

Assignment 1. Metacognitive Reading Report

Instructions: Read Lewis Wolpert's The Medawar Lecture 1998 Is Science Dangerous?
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569503)..

The Medawar Lecture 1998: Is science dangerous?

Lewis Wolpert
Abstract
The idea that science is dangerous is deeply embedded in our culture, particularly in literature, yet
science provides the best way of understanding the world. Science is not the same as technology. In contrast
to technology, reliable scientific knowledge is value-free and has no moral or ethical value. Scientists are not
responsible for the technological applications of science; the very nature of science is that it is not possible to
predict what will be discovered or how these discoveries could be applied. The obligation of scientists is to
make public both any social implications of their work and its technological applications. A rare case of
immoral science was eugenics. The image of Frankenstein has been turned by the media into genetic
pornography, but neither cloning nor stem cells or gene therapy raise new ethical issues. There are no areas of
research that are so socially sensitive that research into them should be proscribed. We have to rely on the
many institutions of a democratic society: parliament, a free and vigorous press, affected groups and the
scientists themselves. That is why programs for the public understanding of science are so important. Alas, we
still do not know how best to do this.

Keywords: genes, technology, trust, bioethics, social responsibility, public understanding

Introduction
The idea that scientific knowledge is dangerous is deeply embedded in our culture. Adam and Eve
were forbidden to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, and in Milton's Paradise Lost the serpent addresses the
Tree as the ‘Mother of Science’. Moreover, the archangel Raphael advises Adam to be lowly wise when he
tries to question him about the nature of the universe. Indeed, the whole of Western literature has not been kind
to scientists and is filled with images of scientists meddling with nature with disastrous results. Also, there is
a persistent image of scientists as a soulless group of males who can do damage to our world.
 Just consider Shelley's Frankenstein, Goethe's Faust and Huxley's Brave New World. One will search
with very little success for a novel in which scientists come out well. And where is there a film sympathetic to
science?

There is a fear and distrust of science: genetic engineering and the supposed ethical issues it raises,
the effect of science in diminishing our spiritual values—even though many scientists are themselves religious,
the fear of nuclear weapons and nuclear power, the impact of industry in despoiling the environment. There is
something of a revulsion in humankind's meddling with nature and a longing for a golden Rousseau-like return
to an age of innocence. There is anxiety that scientists lack both wisdom and social responsibility and are so
motivated by ambition that they will follow their research anywhere, no matter the consequences. Scientists
are repeatedly referred to as ‘playing at God’. Many of these criticisms coexist with the hope, particularly in
medicine, that science will provide cures to all major illnesses, such as cancer, heart disease and genetic
disabilities like cystic fibrosis. But is science dangerous and what are the special social responsibilities of
scientists?

It is worth noting from the start one irony; while scientists are blamed for despoiling the environment
and making us live in a high risk society, it is only because of science that we know about these risks, such as
global warming and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).

The media must bear much of the responsibility for the misunderstanding of genetics as genetic
pornography which is, unfortunately, widespread—pictures and stories that titillate. A recently widely
publicized picture of a human ear on the back of a mouse is a nice, or rather a nasty, example. This was just
ear-shaped cartilage stuck under the skin for no obvious scientific reason—not an ear at all. Images of the
phoney ear, which many find distasteful, are linked to an effluvium of headlines like ‘Monsters or Miracles?’
and phrases like ‘moral nightmare’. This genetic pornography does, however, sell newspapers, and exploiting
people's anxieties attracts large audiences. It is also a distraction from the real problems in our society.

Yet science provides the best way of understanding the world in a reliable, logical, quantitative,
testable and elegant manner. Science is at the core of our culture, almost the main mode of thought that
characterizes our age. But, for many people, science is something rather remote and often difficult. Part of the
problem is that almost all scientific explanations go against common sense, our natural expectations, for the
world is just not built on a common sense basis (Wolpert 1992). It is quite unnatural to think of the Earth
moving round the sun, to take a very simple example, but there are many similar ideas that we now generally
accept, such as force causing acceleration, not motion, and the very idea of Darwinian evolution, that we
humans came from random changes and selection.

Technology
A serious problem is the conflation of science
and technology. The distinction between science and
technology, between knowledge and understanding on the
one hand, and the application of that knowledge to making
something, or using it in some practical way, is
fundamental. Science produces ideas about how the world
works, whereas the ideas in technology result in usable
objects. Technology is much older than anything one
could regard as science and unaided by any science,
technology gave rise to the crafts of early humans, like
agriculture and metalworking. Science made virtually no
contribution to technology until the nineteenth century (Basalla 1988). Even the great triumphs of engineering
like the steam engine and Renaissance cathedrals were built without virtually any impact of science. It was
imaginative trial and error and they made use of the five minute theorem—if, when the supports were removed,
the building stood for five minutes, it was assumed that it would last forever. Galileo made it clear that the
invention of the telescope was by chance and not based on science.
 But it is technology that generates ethical issues,
from motor cars to cloning a human. Much modern
technology is now founded on fundamental science.
However, the relationship between science, innovation and
technology is complex. Basic scientific research is driven
by academic curiosity and the simple linear model which
suggests that scientific discoveries are then put into practice
by engineers is just wrong. There is no simple route from
science to new technology. Moreover, marketing and
business skills are as important as those of science and engineering and scientists rarely have the money or
power to put their ideas into practice.

In contrast to technology, reliable scientific knowledge is

value-free and has no moral or ethical value. Science tells us
how the world is. That we are not at the centre of the universe
is neither good nor bad, nor is the possibility that genes can
influence our intelligence or our behaviour. Dangers and ethical
issues only arise when science is applied in technology.
However, ethical issues can arise in actually doing the scientific
research, such as carrying out experiments on humans or
animals, as well as issues related to safety, as in genetically
modified (GM) foods. There are now claims that the techniques
used in nanotechnology may release dangerous chemical compounds into the environment.

Social Responsibility
Are scientists in favour of the technological applications of science? In a
recent issue of the journal Science, the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Sir Joseph
Rotblat, proposed a Hippocratic oath for scientists. He is strongly opposed to the idea
that science is neutral and that scientists are not to be blamed for its misapplication.
Therefore, he proposes an oath, or pledge, initiated by the Pugwash Group in the USA.
‘I promise to work for a better world, where science and technology are used in socially
responsible ways. I will not use my education for any purpose intended to harm human
beings or the environment. Throughout my career, I will consider the ethical
implications of my work before I take action. While the demands placed upon me might
be great, I sign this declaration because I recognize that individual responsibility is the
first step on the path to peace.’

These are indeed noble aims

to which all citizens should wish to
subscribe, but it does present some
severe difficulties in relation to
science. Rotblat does not want to
distinguish between scientific
knowledge and its applications, but
the very nature of science is that it is
not possible to predict what will be
discovered or how these discoveries
could be applied. Cloning provides a
good example of this. The original
studies related to cloning were largely
the work of biologists in the 1960s.
They were studying how frog embryos develop and wanted to find out if genes, which are located in the cell
nucleus, were lost or permanently turned off as the embryo developed. It was incidental to the experiment that
the frog that developed was a clone of the animal from which the nucleus was obtained.

The history of science is filled with such examples.

The poet Paul Valery's remark that ‘We enter the
future backwards’ is very apposite in relation to the
possible applications of science. Scientists cannot
easily predict the social and technological implications
of their current research. It was originally argued that
radio waves would have no practical applications, and
Lord Rutherford said that the idea of applying atomic
energy was ‘moonshine’. It was this remark that
sparked Leo Szilard to think of a nuclear reaction that
led to the atom bomb (Rhodes 1986). There was,
again, no way that those investigating the ability of certain bacteria to resist infection by viruses would lead to
the discovery of restriction enzymes, an indispensable tool for cutting up DNA and the genetic material which
is fundamental to genetic engineering.

The social obligations that scientists have as distinct from those responsibilities they share with all
citizens, such as supporting a democratic society and taking due care of the rights of others, comes from them
having access to specialized knowledge of how the world works that is not easily accessible to others. Their
obligation is to both make public any social implications of their work and its technological applications and
to give some assessment of its reliability. In most areas of science, it matters little to the public whether a
particular theory is right or wrong, but in some areas, such as human and plant genetics, it matters a great deal.
Whatever new technology is introduced, it is not for the scientists to make the moral or ethical decisions. They
have neither special rights nor skills in areas involving moral or ethical issues. There is, in fact, a grave danger
in asking scientists to be more socially responsible if that means that they have the right and power to take
such decisions on their own. Moreover, scientists rarely have power in relation to applications of science; this
rests with those with the funds and the government. The way scientific knowledge is used raises ethical issues
for everyone involved, not just scientists.

In relation to the building of the atomic bomb, the scientists behaved

morally and fulfilled their social obligations by informing their governments
about the implications of atomic theory. The decision to build the bomb was taken
by politicians, not scientists. And it was an enormous engineering enterprise. Had
the scientists decided not to participate in building an atomic weapon, that
decision could have led to losing the war. Should scientists on their own ever be
entitled to make such decisions? No! Scientists have an obligation to make the reliability of their ideas in such
sensitive areas clear to the point of over cautiousness, and the public should be in a position to demand and
critically evaluate the evidence. That is why programmes for the public understanding of science are so
important.
Eugenics
It is not easy to find examples of scientists as a group
behaving immorally or in a dangerous manner—BSE is not an
example—but the classic was the eugenics movement, which
is the classic immoral tale of science. In 1883, Darwin's cousin,
Francis Galton, coined the word from the Greek ‘good in birth’
(Kevles 1985). Eugenics was defined as the science of
improving the human stock by giving ‘the more suitable races
or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over
the less suitable.’ Would it not, he conjectured, be ‘quite
practicable to produce a highly gifted race of men by judicious
marriages during consecutive generations?’ The scientific
assumptions behind this proposal are crucial; the assumption is
that most desirable and undesirable human attributes are inherited. Not only was talent perceived of as being
inherited, but so too were pauperism, insanity and any kind of so-called feeblemindedness. The eugenicists
considered many undesirable characteristics such as prostitution as being genetically determined. As Kevles
points out in his book In the Name of Eugenics, the geneticists warmed to their newly acquired priestly role.
Between 1907 and 1928 approximately 9000 people were sterilized in the USA on the general grounds that
they were ‘feebleminded’.

The ideas of eugenics received support from a wide group of both scientists and non-scientists. An
American, Charles Davenport, was particularly influenced by the ideas of eugenics, and in 1904 he persuaded
the Carnegie Foundation to set up the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories in order to study human evolution.
Davenport collected human pedigrees and came to believe that certain undesirable characteristics were
associated with particular races; Negroes were inferior, Italians tended to commit crimes of personal violence
and Poles were self-reliant, though clannish. He expected the American population to change through
immigration and become ‘darker in pigmentation, smaller in stature, more mercurial, more given to crimes of
larceny, kidnapping, assault, incest, rape and sexual immorality’. He
therefore proposed a programme of negative eugenics aimed at
preventing proliferation of the bad. He favoured a selective immigration
policy to prevent contamination of what he called the germ plasma—the
genetic information parents transmitted to their offspring.

Davenport and his followers viewed genetics in terms of the

action of a single gene, even though they knew that many characters are
polygenic, that is, they are influenced by many genes. The eugenicists
considered many undesirable characteristics such as prostitution as being
genetically determined. The geneticists warmed to their newly acquired
priestly role. The list of distinguished scientists that initially gave eugenics positive support is, depressingly,
impressive enough.

In the 1930s, the geneticists, who included Huxley, Haldane, Hogben and Jennings, began to react
and resist the wilder claims for eugenics. But it was too late, for the ideas had taken hold in Germany. As the
geneticist Muller-Hill (1988) put it: ‘The ideology of the National Socialists can be put very simply. They
claimed that there is a biological basis for the diversity of mankind. What makes a Jew, a Gypsy, an asocial
individual asocial and the mentality abnormal, is in their blood, that is to say in their genes’. And one can even
detect such sentiments, regrettably, in the writings of the famous animal behaviourist, Konrad Lorenz: ‘It must
be the duty of social hygiene to be attentive to a more severe elimination of morally inferior human beings
than is the case today’ and then argued that asocial individuals have become so because of a defective
contribution.
 In 1933, Hitler's cabinet promulgated a eugenic sterilization
law which made sterilization compulsory for anyone who suffered from
a perceived hereditary weakness, including conditions that ranged from
schizophrenia to blindness. This must rank as the outstanding example
of the perversion of science. And it can also be regarded as leading
directly to the atrocities carried out by doctors and others in the
concentration camps.

With the somewhat smug wisdom of hindsight, we may think

how misguided were many of the eugenicists. Many of the scientists
may well have been honourable, and in some respects, good scientists. But they were bad scientists in terms of
some of their genetics and more significantly, in relation to their social obligations. They could perhaps plead
ignorance with respect to their emphasis on genes determining so many human characteristics, but they
completely failed to give an assessment of the reliability of their ideas or to sufficiently consider their
implications. Quite to the contrary, and even more blameworthy, their conclusions seem to have been driven
by what they saw as the desirable social implications. The main lesson to be learned from the story of the
eugenics movement is that scientists can abuse their role as providers and interpreters of complex and difficult
phenomena. Scientific knowledge should be neutral, value-free. When mixed with a political or social aim it
can be perverted.

Terrible crimes have been committed in

the name of eugenics. Yet I am a eugenicist. For it
now has another, very positive, side. Modern
eugenics aims to both prevent and cure those with
genetic disabilities. Recent advances in genetics and
molecular biology offer the possibility of prenatal
diagnosis and so parents can choose whether or not
to terminate a pregnancy. There are those who abhor
abortion, but that is an issue that should be kept
quite separate from discussions about genetics. In
Cyprus, the Greek Orthodox Church has cooperated
with clinical geneticists to dramatically reduce the
number of children born with the crippling blood
disease thalassemia. This must be a programme that
we should all applaud and support. I find it
hard to think of a sensible reason why
anybody should be against curing those with
genetic diseases such as muscular dystrophy
and cystic fibrosis.

Reproduction: Cloning, Genes and Stem Cell

Mary Shelley could be both proud
and shocked. Her creation of a scientist
creating and meddling with human life has
become the most potent symbol of modern
science. She could be shocked because her
brilliant fantasy has become so distorted that
even those who are normally quite sensible
lose all sense when the idea of cloning humans
appears before them.

Ironically, the real clone of sheep has been the media blindly and unthinkingly following each other—how
embarrassed Dolly ought to be. The moral masturbators have been out in force telling us of the horrors of
cloning. Jeremy Rifkin in the USA demanded a world wide ban and suggests that it should carry a penalty ‘on
a par with rape, child abuse and murder.’ Many others, national leaders included, have joined in that chorus of
horror. But what horrors? What ethical issues? In all the righteous indignation I have not found a single new
relevant ethical issue spelled out.

It seems distasteful, but the ‘yuuk’

factor is, however, not a reliable basis for
making judgments. There may be no genetic
relation between a mother and a cloned child,
but that is true of adoption and cases of in vitro
fertilization (IVF). Identical twins who are a
clone are not uncommon, and this upsets no one
except the hard stressed parents. What fantasy
is it that so upsets people? If, for example, one
could clone Richard Dawkins, who seems to
quite like the idea, how terrible would that be?
While genes are very important, so is the
environment, and since his whole upbringing
would be completely different and he might
even have a religious disposition—clones might
make very rebellious children. Indeed the
feelings that a cloned child might have about its
individuality must be taken into account.
However, this is an issue common to several
other types of assisted reproduction such as surrogate mothers and anonymous sperm donors. I am totally
against cloning as it carries a high risk of abnormalities as numerous scientific studies on other animals show.
Those who propose to clone a human are medical technologists not scientists.

The really important issue is how the child will be cared for. Given the terrible things that humans
are reported to do each other and
even to children, cloning should
take a very low priority in our
list of anxieties. Or perhaps it is
a way of displacing our real
problems with unreal ones.
Having a child raises real ethical
problems as it is parents who
play God, not scientists. Here
lies a bitter irony. A parent's
relation to a child is infinitely
more God-like than anything
that scientists may discover.
Parents hold tremendous power
over young children. They do
not always exercise it to the
child's benefit and there is
evidence that as many as 10% of
children in the UK suffer some
sort of abuse.

Would one not rather accept 1000 abortions and the destruction of all unwanted frozen embryos than
a single unwanted child who will be neglected or abused? I take the same view in regard to severely crippling
and painful genetic diseases. On what ground should parents be allowed to have a severely disabled child when
it could be relatively easily prevented by prenatal diagnosis? It is nothing to do with consumerism but the
interests and rights of the child. The hostility to choosing a child's genetic make-up—designer babies—ignores
the possibility that quite unsuitable parents can have children even if they are child abusers, drug addicts and
suffering from disabling diseases like AIDS.

It is not, as the bio-moralists claim, that scientific innovation has outstripped our social and moral
codes. Just the opposite is the case. Their obsession with the life of the embryo has deflected our attention
away from the real issue, which is how the babies that are born are raised and nurtured. The ills in our society
have nothing to do with assisting or preventing reproduction, but are profoundly affected by how children are
treated. Children that are abused grow up to abuse others.

So what dangers does genetics pose? Bioethics is a growth industry, but one should regard the field
with caution as the bioethicists have a vested interest in finding difficulties. Moreover, it is hard to see what
contribution they have made. Some of these common fears are little more than science fiction at present, like
cloning enormous numbers of genetically identical individuals. Who would the mothers be, and where would
they go to school? In fact, it is quite amusing to observe the swing from moralists who deny that genes have
an important effect on intelligence to saying that a cloned individual's behaviour will be entirely determined
by the individual's genetic make-up.

It is all too easy to be misled as to what genes actually do for us. There is no gene, for example, for
the eye; many hundreds, if not thousands, are involved, but a fault in just one can lead to major abnormalities.
The language in which many of the effects of genes are described leads to confusion. No sensible person would
say that the brakes of a car are for causing accidents. Yet, using a convenient way of speaking, there are
numerous references to, for example, the gene for homosexuality or the gene for criminality. When the brakes
of the car, which are there for safe driving, fail, then there is an accident. Similarly, if criminality has some
genetic basis then it is not because there is a gene for criminality but because of a fault in the genetic
complement, which has resulted in this particular undesirable effect. It could have affected how the brain
developed—genes control development of every bit of our bodies or it could be owing to malfunction of the
cells of the adult nerve cells.

A report by the Nuffield

Council on Bioethics (1998)
emphasizes that the whole human
be viewed as a person, and in doing
so may have neglected to explain
just how genes affect all aspects of
our life, not least our behaviour.
They thus have leaned somewhat
towards a holistic anti-reductionist
view of human psychology and
made no attempt to respond to the
anti-reductionist approach which
even goes so far as to oppose
genetic research into mental
disorders. I would argue that all of
science is essentially reductionist.
In failing to make this clear they may have done bad service to genetics, developmental biology and
neuroscience.

Gene therapy, introducing genes to cure a genetic disease such as cystic fibrosis, carries risks as does
all new medical treatments. There may well be problems with insurance and testing but are these any different
from those related to someone suspected of having AIDS? Anxieties about designer babies are at present
premature as it is far too risky, and we may have, in the first instance, to accept what Dworkin (1993) has
called procreative autonomy, a couple's right ‘to control their own role in procreation unless the state has a
compelling reason for denying them that control’. One must wonder why the bio-moralists do not devote their
attention to other technical advances, such as that convenient form of transport which claims over 50 000 killed
or seriously injured each year. Could it be that in this case they themselves would be inconvenienced?
Applications of embryology and genetics, in striking contrast, have not harmed anyone.

Stem cells, cells that can give rise to a wide variety of different cell types, have the potential to
alleviate many medical problems from
damaged hearts to paralysis owing to
damage to nerves. The best stem cells
can be obtained from early embryos but
as this causes the death of the embryo,
there are those who oppose this method
as they see the fertilized egg as already
a human being. There is no justification
for this view, as the early embryo can
give rise to twins and so is not in any
way an individual. Also, IVF involves
the destruction of many embryos and
one could oppose this very valuable
treatment as well as getting embryonic
stem cells, but ethically they are
indistinguishable. The same is true for therapeutic cloning to make stem cells that would not be rejected by the
immune system of the patient.

Politics
John Carey, a professor of English in Oxford, writes, ‘The real antithesis of science seems to be not
theology but politics. Whereas science is a sphere of knowledge and understanding, politics is a sphere of
opinion.’ (Carey, 1995) He goes on to point out that politics depends on rhetoric, opinion and conflict. It also
aims to coerce people. Politics, I would add, is also about power and the ability to influence other people's
lives. Science, ultimately, is about consensus as to how the world works and if the history of science were
rerun, its course would be very different but the conclusions would be the same—water, for example, would
be two hydrogens combined with one oxygen and DNA the genetic material, though the names would not be
similar.

There are surveys that show some distrust of scientists, particularly those in government and industry.
This probably relates to BSE and GM foods and so one must ask how this apparent distrust of science actually
affects people's behaviour. I need to be persuaded that many of those who have this claimed distrust would
refuse, if ill, to take a drug that had been made from a genetically modified plant, or would reject a tomato so
modified that is was both cheap and would help prevent heart disease. Who refuses insulin or growth hormone
because it is made in genetically modified bacteria? It is easy to be negative about science if it does not affect
your actions.

No politician has publicly pointed out, or even understood, that the so-called ethical issues involved
in therapeutic cloning are indistinguishable from those that are involved in IVF. One could even argue that
IVF is less ethical than therapeutic cloning. But no reasonable person could possibly want to ban IVF, which
has helped so many infertile couples. Where are the politicians who will stand up and say this? Genetically
modified foods have raised extensive public concerns and there seems no alternative but to rely on regulatory
bodies to assess their safety as they do with other foods and similar considerations apply to the release of
genetically modified organisms. New medical treatments, requiring complex technology, cannot be given to
all. There has to be some principle of rationing and this really does pose serious moral and ethical dilemmas
much more worthy of consideration than the dangers posed by genetic engineering.
 Are there areas of research that are so socially sensitive that research into them should be avoided,
even proscribed? One possible area is that of the genetic basis of intelligence, and particularly, the possible
link between race and intelligence. Are there then, as the literary critic George Steiner has argued, ‘certain
orders of truth which would infect the marrow of politics and would poison beyond all cure the already tense
relations between social classes and these communities.’ In short, are there doors immediately in front of
current research which should be marked ‘too dangerous to open’? I realize the dangers but I cherish the
openness of scientific investigation too much to put up such a note. I stand by the distinction between
knowledge of the world and how it is used. So I must say ‘no’ to Steiner's question. Provided, of course, that
scientists fulfil their social obligations. The main reason is that the better understanding we have of the world
the better chance we have of making a just society, the better chance we have of improving living conditions.
One should not abandon the possibility of doing good by applying some scientific idea because one can also
use it to do bad. All techniques can be abused and there is no knowledge or information that is not susceptible
to manipulation for evil purposes. I can do terrible damage to someone with my glasses used as a weapon.
Once one begins to censor the acquisition of reliable scientific knowledge, one is on the most slippery of
slippery slopes.

To those who doubt whether the public or politicians are capable of taking the correct decisions in
relation to science and its applications, I strongly commend the advice of Thomas Jefferson; ‘I know no safe
depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened
enough to exercise that control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to
inform their direction.’

But how does one ensure that the public are involved in decision making? How can we ensure that
scientists, doctors, engineers, bioethicists and other experts, who must be involved, do not appropriate decision
making for themselves? How do we ensure that scientists take on the social obligation of making the
implications of their work public? We have to rely on the many institutions of a democratic society: parliament,
a free and vigorous press, affected groups and the scientists themselves. That is why programmes for the public
understanding of science are so important. Alas, we still do not know how best to do this. The law which deals
with experiments on human embryos is a good model: there was wide public debate and finally a vote in the
Commons leading to the setting up of the Human Embryology and Fertilization Authority.

At a time when the public are being urged and encouraged to learn more science, scientists are going
to have to learn to understand more about public concerns and interact directly with the public. It is most
important that they do not allow themselves to become the unquestioning tools of either government or
industry. When the public are gene literate, the problems of genetic engineering will seem no different in
principle from those such as euthanasia and abortion, since they will no longer be obfuscated by the fear that
comes from the alienation due to ignorance.

Complete the metacognitive reading report below

1. Difficult Concepts
a.

b.

c.

2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that
 However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

b. Before Reading the article I thought that

However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

c. Before Reading the article I thought that

However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

3. Discussion Questions
a.

b.

c.

Lesson 2 Historical Antecedents of Science and Technology

This section tackles how social contexts shaped and were shaped by science and technology across
three historical periods. By introducing the historical antecedents of science and technology, the section
explores the dynamic interactions between different societal factors and science and technology. Along with
the discussion of these antecedents during the ancient period, middle ages, and modern ages, this section also
includes a discussion on important Philippine inventions and innovations. It emphasizes the various social,
cultural, economic, and political impacts of scientific and technological innovation throughout history.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. discuss the historical antecedents of science and technology across time; and
2. explain how Philippine scientific and technological inventions shaped and were shaped by various
social contexts.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Watch an 18.minute TEDx Talk by Hannu Rajaniemi titled The Big History of
Modern Science (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcWsjlGPPFQ). Afterwards, write a 200 to 250-words
essay on the topic, "Why is it important to study the history of Science and Technology?" Come up with a five-
to seven-word title for your essay. Write your essay on a letter size bond paper.

Historical Antecedents of Science and Technology

One of the key interests of STS a an academic field is the history of science and technology. As a
strand of STS the history of science and technology focuses on how science and technology have changed
across time. Also, it explores the impacts of scientific and technological innovations on the prevailing social,
cultural, political, and economic contexts throughout history. Conversely it also pay attention to the conditions
that shaped science and technology. Quite often, interests lie in historical antecedents of scientific and
technological innovations.
An antecedent is defined as a precursor to the unfolding or existence of something. Thus, historical
antecedents in science and technology paved the way for the presence of the advanced and sophisticated
scientific and technological innovations today. Knowledge of the history of science and technology is useful
in appraising these innovations today. By understanding how previous generations influenced and were
influenced by developments in science and technology, today's generation can come up with informed
decisions on the proper application of science and technology to daily life.

Ancient Period
The rise of ancient civilizations paved the way for advances in science and technology. These
advances during the Ancient period allowed civilizations to flourish by finding better ways of communication,
transportation, self-organization, and of living in general.

Sumerian Wheel Potter's Wheel

Ancient Wheel.
People from ancient civilizations used animals for
transportation long before the invention of the wheel. No
One knows exactly who invented the wheel and when. There is,
however ageneral agreement that the ancient wheel grew out of a
mechanical device called the potter's wheel a heavy flat disk made
of hardened clay which was spun horizontally on an axis. It is
believed that the Sumerians invented the potter's wheel shortly
after 3500 BC. The invention of the ancient wheel is often
credited to the Sumerians since no other ancient civilization used
a similar device at the time. It could be that a potter thought of shifting the potter's wheel to a 90-degree angle
for the purpose of transportation or the wheel was reinvented for this purpose. Nonetheless, it would not be
until 1000 to 1500 years later that the wheel was first used on carts.

Paper.
Roughly around 3000 BC, the ancient Egyptians began
writing on papyrus, a material similar to thick paper. Papyrus is
made from the pith of the papyrus plant cyperus papyrus. It is
lightweight, strong, durable, and most importantly, portable.
Before the Egyptians invented the papyrus, writing was done on
stone. Because of the difficulty of writing on stone, writing was
reserved only for very important occasions. With the advent of
the papyrus, documentation and record-keeping became
efficient, widespread, and vast. Through its use, information
dissemination became exponentially faster. Records were kept
and stood the
test of time.

Shadoof.
The shadoof was an early tool invented and used by ancient Egyptians to
irrigate land. Among Egyptians who lived near the Nile river, irrigation was
necessary to water their crops. The shadoof, also spelled as shaduf, is a hand-
operated device used for lifting water. Its invention introduced the idea of lifting
things using counterweights. Because of this invention, irrigation and farming became much more efficient.
The shadoof is also believed to be an ancient precursor of more sophisticated irrigation tools.

Antikythera mechanism.
Even before the invention of the antecedents of the modern computer,
the Greeks had already invented the ancient world's analog computer orrery.
Discovered in 1902 and retrieved from the waters of
Antikythera, Greece, the Antikythera mechanism is similar to a mantel clock.
Upon its discovery, the bits of wood seen on its fragments suggest that it must
have been housed in a wooden case. It is akin to a clock in the way that the case
has a circular face and rotating hands. A knob on the side makes it possible for
it to be wound forward or backward. As this knob moves forward its
mechanism allows it to display celestial time.
Thus, it is widely believed that the Antikythera mechanism was used to
predict astronomical positions and eclipses for calendar and astrological
purposes. It is also believed that the Antikythera mechanism, which is one of
the oldest known antecedents of modern clockwork, was invented by Greek
scientists between 150 - 100 BC.

Aeolipile.
Also known as the Hero's engine, the aeolipile is widely believed to
be the ancient precursor of the steam engine. Hero of Alexandria is credited for the
demonstration of the use of the aeolipile
during the 1st century AD. The aeolipile is a steam- powered turbine which spun
when the water container at its center was heated, thus making it practically the first
rudimentary steam engine. It is not clear whether the
aeolipile served any practical purpose, but it is believed to be one of many
"temple wonders" at the time. Nonetheless, Vitruvius,
a Roman author, architect, and civil engineer,
described the aeolipile as a scientific invention through which "the mighty and
wonderful laws of the heavens and the nature of winds" may be understood and
judged.

Middle Ages
Between the collapse of the Roman Empire in 5th century AD and the
colonial expansion of Western Europe in late 15th century AD, major advances in
scientific and technological development took place. These include steady increase
of new inventions, introduction of innovations in traditional production, and
emergence of scientific thinking and method. The Middle Ages was not as stagnant
as alternate terms such as the “Medieval Period" or 'Dark Ages' suggest. In fact,
many medieval universities at the time stirred scientific thinking and built
infrastructures for scientific communities to flourish. As such, some of humanity's
most important present-day technologies could be traced back to their historical
antecedents in the Middle Ages.

Heavy Plough.
 Perhaps one of the most important technological innovations
during the middle ages is the invention of the heavy plough. Clay
soil, despite being more fertile than lighter types of soil, was not
cultivated because of its heavy weight. However, through the
invention of the heavy plough, it became possible to harness clay
soil. Professor Thomas Bernebeck Andersen of the University of
Southern Denmark succinctly describes the impact of the invention
of the heavy plough: "The heavy plough turned European
agriculture and economy on its head. Suddenly, the fields with the
heavy, fatty, and moist clay soils became those that gave the greatest yields." Because of this, Europe,
particularly its northern territories, saw rapid economic prosperity. The heavy plough stirred an agricultural
revolution in Northern Europe marked
by higher and healthier agricultural yields and more efficient agricultural practices.

Gunpowder.
Around 850 AD Chinese alchemists invented black powder or
gunpowder. Multiple accounts suggest that the gunpowder might have
been an unintended byproduct of attempts made by the Chinese to
invent the elixir or life which is why the Chinese called it huoyao,
roughly translated as fire potion, Prior to the invention of the
gunpowder, swords and spears were used in battles and wars. Towards
the end of the 13th century, the explosive invention crept into most parts
of Europe and Asia. Since its invention, the gunpowder has allowed for
more advanced warfare. From fiery arrows to cannons and grenades,
the gunpowder has prompted warrior using gunpowder In foundation for the functionality of weapons almost
every new weapon used in war since its invention. It ushered in an unprecedented advancement in warfare and
combat throughout the Middle Ages.

Paper Money.
Although it was not until the 17th century that bank notes began to be used in
Europe, the first known versions of paper money could be traced back to the Chinese in
17th century AD as an offshoot of the invention of block printing, which is similar to
stamping. Before the introduction of paper money, precious metals, such as gold and
silver were used as currency. However, the idea of assigning value to a marked piece of
paper did not immediately become popular. In fact, when the Mongols attempted to
introduce paper money into the Middle East market in the 13 th century, it did not gain
immediate success. Nonetheless, traders and merchants eventually realized the huge
advantage of using paper money because it was easier to transport around compared to
the previous forms of currencies.

Mechanical Clock.
Although devices for timekeeping and recording sprung from the ancient
times, such as the Antikythera mechanism, it was not until the Middle Ages that
clockwork technology was developed. The development of mechanical clocks paved
the way for accurately keeping track of time. The sophistication of clockwork
technology of the mechanical clock drastically changed the way days were spent and
work patterns were established, particularly in the more advanced Middle Age cities.

Spinning Wheel.
 Another important invention of the Middle Ages is the spinning wheel, a machine
used for transforming fiber into thread or yarn and eventually woven into cloth on
a loom. Although no consensus could be made regarding the origin of the spinning
wheel, it theorized that the Indians invented the spinning wheel between 6th and
11th century A.D. Prior to the invention of the spinning wheel, weaving was done
predominantly through the more time-consuming and tedious process of hand
spinning. According to White (1974), the invention of the spinning wheel sped up
the rate at which fiber could be spun by a factor of 10 to 100 times. Thus, White
argued that this invention ushered in a breakthrough in linen production when it
was introduced in Europe in 13th century AD.

Modern Ages
As the world population steadily increased, people of the Modern Ages realized the utmost
importance of increasing the efficiency of transportation, communication, and production. Industrialization
took place with greater risks in human health, food safety, and environment which had to be addressed as
scientific and technological progress unfolded at an unimaginable speed.

Compound Microscope.
A Dutch spectacle maker
named Zacharias Janssen is credited
for the invention of the first
compound microscope in 1590.
Together with his father Hans,
Zacharias began experimenting with
lenses by putting together several
lenses on tube. This led to an amazing
discovery that an object, when placed
near the end of the tube, can be
magnified far larger than what a
simple magnifying lens can do.
Janssen's compound microscope was
an important progression from the
single lens microscope. It was capable
of magnifying objects three times
their size when fully closed and up to
ten times when extended to the
maximum. Today, the compound
microscope is an important instrument in many scientific studies, such as in the areas of medicine, forensic
studies, tissue analysis, atomic studies, and genetics.

Telescope.
Perhaps the single, most important
technological invention in the study of astronomy
during the Modern Ages was the practical telescope
invented by Galileo Galilei. This invention could
magnify objects 20 times larger than the Dutch
perspective glasses. It was Galileo who first used
the telescope skyward and
made important astronomical discoveries, and
identified the presence of craters and mountains on
the moon. Galileo's remarkable telescope
technological contribution drastically changed the
study of astronomy. For the first time, it became clear that the universe is far larger than previously imagined
and the Earth far smaller compared to the entire universe.

Jacquard Loom.
As the Industrial Revolution reached full speed, the Jacquard loom was
considered as one of the most critical drivers of the revolution. Built by French
weaver Joseph Marie Jacquard, the Jacquard loom simplifies textile manufacturing.
Prior to the invention of the Jacquard loom, a drawloom was used which required
two individuals to operate the weaver and a "drawboy"-if figured designs on
textiles were needed. As such, intensified manual labor and greater effort had to be
exerted to produce complex designs. In 1801, Jacquard demonstrated the ingenuity
of his version of aloom in which a series of cards with punched holes automatically
created complex textile designs and made mass production easier. The Jacquard
loom is also an important antecedent of modern computer technology as it
demonstrated the use of punched cards to instruct a machine to carry out complex
tasks, i.e., making different textile patterns.

Engine-Powered Airplane.
Orville Wright and Wilbur Wright are credited for
designing and successfully operating the first engine -
powered aircraft. The Wright brothers approached the
design of powered aircrafts and flight scientifically.
Orville and Wilbur proved that aircraft could fly without
airfoil-shaped wings. They demonstrated this in their
original Flying Machine patent (US patent #821393),
showing that slightly-tilted wings, which they referred to
as aeroplanes were the key features of powered aircrafts.
Their pioneering success marked an age of powered
flights. Sans modern knowledge on aerodynamics and a
comprehensive understanding of the working of aircraft
wings, the Wright brothers were brilliant scientists who paved the way for modern aircraft technology.

Television.
The Scottish engineer John Logie Baird is largely
credited for the invention of the modern television. Baird
successfully televised objects in outline in 1924, recognizable
human faces in 1925, and moving objects in 1926, and
projected colored images in 1928. Baird's television technology
caught on really swiftly. In the British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC) used this for its earliest in 1929. Despite
television programming was later on being the first television invented, Baird's television criticized for its
fuzzy and flickering images, primarily because it was mechanical compared to electronic versions that were
developed much later.

Inventions by Filipino Scientists

The Philippines boasts of its own history and tradition of scientific and technological innovations.
Filipinos have long been known for their ingenuity. As with all other inventions, necessity has always been the
mother of Philippine inventions. Most of these inventions appealed to the unique social and cultural context of
the archipelagic nation. Throughout Philippine history, Filipinos are responsible for developing many scientific
and technological innovations focused on navigation, traditional shipbuilding, textiles, food processing,
indigenous arts and techniques, and even cultural inventions. The following are some of the most important
inventions by Filipino scientists.
Electronic Jeepney (e-jeepney).
The jeepney is perhaps one of the most recognizable national symbols of the Philippines and the most popular
mode of public transportation in the country. It is also perhaps
one of the most enduring symbols of Filipino ingenuity.
Jeepneys were designed and improvised from scratch out of
military jeeps that the Americans left in the country after World
War II. As demand for more responsive transportation
technology arose, the e-jeepney was introduced in Metro
Manila and Bacolod City. The e-jeepney is the inventive
response to criticisms to the traditional jeepney that belched
smoke, directly causing air pollution which made it
unsustainable and uneconomical. E-jeepneys are designed to
be environment-friendly, eliminating noise and air pollution as
they run on electricity. They are also more economical for
electricity is far cheaper than ordinary diesel, allowing jeepney
drivers to earn more profit.

Erythromycin.
Perhaps one of the most important medical inventons is the
Erythromycin. The Ilonggo scientist Abelardo Aguila,
invented this antibiotic out of a strain of bacterium called
Streptomyces erythreus, from which this drug derived its
name. As with the case of several other local scientists,
however, Aguilar wa not credited for this discovery by Eli
Lilli Co., Aguilar's US employer, to whom he sent the strain
for separation. The US company eventually owned the merits
for this discovery.

Medical Incubator.
World-renowned Filipino pediatrician and
national scientist, Fe del Mundo, is credited for the
invention of the incubator and jaundice relieving
device. Del Mundo was the first woman pediatrician
to be admitted to the prestigious Harvard
University's School of Medicine. She is also the
founder of the first pediatric hospital in the country.
Her pioneering work in pediatrics that spanned a
total of eight decades won her the 1977 Ramon
Magsaysay Award, Asia's premier prize granted to
outstanding individuals whose selfless service remarkably contributed to the betterment of society. Her originl
I, provised incubator consisted of two native laundry baskets of different sizes that are placed one inside the
other. Warmth is generated by bottles with hot water placed around the baskets. A makeshift hood over the
baskets allows
oxygen to circulate inside the incubator. Del Mundo's incubator was particularly outstanding as it addressed
the state of Philippine rural communities that had no electricity to aid the regulation of body temperatures of
newborn babies. For this purpose, del Mundo's invention was truly ingenious.

Mole Remover
 In 2000, a local invention that had the ability to
easily remove moles and warts on the skin without the
need for any surgical procedure shot to fame. Rolando
dela Cruz is credited for theinvention of a local mole
remover that made use of extracts of cashew nuts
(Annacardium occidentale) which is very common in the
Philippines .The indigenous formula easily caught on for
its accessibility, affordability and painless and scarless
procedure. DEla Cruz won a Ggold medal for this
invention in the International Invention, Innovation,
Industrial Design and Technology Exhibition in Kuala
Lumpur Malaysia in 2000.

Banana Ketchup
Filipino Fool Scientist Maria Orosa is credited for the
invention of banana ketchup, a variety of ketchup different from
the commonly known tomato ketchup. Her invention appeals
particularly who love using condiments to go along foods.
Historical accounts posit that Orosa invented the banana ketchup
at the backdrop of World War II when there was a huge shortage
of tomatoes. As a result, Orosa developed a variety of ketchup
that made used of mashed banan, sugar vinegar and spices, which
were readily available. Orosa’s banana ketchup is brownish-
yellow in natural color, but is dyed red to resemble the color of
most loved tomato ketchup.

Exercise 1. Poster Making

Instructions:
1. Choose one among the group of inventions
a. Ancient Period b.Middle Ages c. Modern Ages, and d. Philippine inventions.
2. On short bond paper draw, paint, or stick a photograph of an invention from your chosen group of
inventions
3. At the back of the poster, place 100 word write-up about the invention that specifically addresses the
following questions:
a. What is the invention?
b. What are the precursors of your chosen invention?
c. What tools existed prior to it or how did people carry out activities before its invention?
d. What were the social, political, cultural, or economic contexts in which the invention was made?

Assignment 2. If were an Inventor...

Instructions: In this section, you learned that necessity is the mother of inventions and innovations. Inventions
are not simply made, but are motivated by various social, political, cultural, and economic contexts. In this
task, you will address this question: "If you were an inventor, what would you invent?" In thinking about an
invention, make sure that you come up with one that has not been invented yet but is possible to be invented in
the near future. On the space below, sketch a draft of your invention then answer the questions that follow.
 1. What is your invention? What does it do?

2. How is your invention similar to or different from existing tools or technologies in terms of function?

3. Why is there need for this invention? How will this invention make the world a better place to live in?

Lesson 3 Intellectual Revolutions and Society

This section reviews the intellectual revolutions that changed the way people perceive the influence
of science on society in general. It focuses on three of the most important intellectual revolutions in history:
Copernican, Darwinian, and Freudian. By discussing these intellectual revolutions in the context of science,
technology, and society, the attention of students are drawn again toward the complex interplay of the various
social contexts and the development of modern science. The section also engages students in a critical analysis
of ongoing intellectual and scientific revolutions, which they may find themselves to be part of.
Intended Learning Outcomes
At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. identify the intellectual revolutions that shaped society across time;
2. Explain how intellectual revolutions transformed the views of society about dominant scientific
thought; and research on other intellectual revolutions that advance modern science and scientific
thinking.

Diagnostics
Instructions: On the space provided, write TRUE if the statement is correct or FALSE if it is not.
1. An intellectual revolution emerges as a result of the interaction of man and society.________
2. Intellectual revolutions are necessary in understanding how society is transformed by science and
technology._________
3. Intellectual revolutions are often met with huge support and general acceptance._______
4. Intellectual revolutions shape science and technology and often spare society from its influence.____
5. The Copernican Revolution introduced the concept of heliocentricism.__________
6. According to Copernicus, the Earth is at the center of the solar system.___________
7. The Darwinian Revolution changed the way people understood nature and evolution._________
8. Charles Darwin received huge support from the church._________
9. Sigmund Freud introduced scientific approaches to understanding the human subconscious.
10. The Freudian Revolution was, in itself, controversial and met with resistance._________

In the study of the history of science and technology, another important area of interest involves the
various intellectual revolutions across time. In this area, interest lies in how intellectual revolutions emerged
as a result of the interaction of science and technology and of society. It covers how intellectual revolutions
altered the way modern science was understood and approached.
 For this discussion, intellectual
revolutions should not be confused with the Greeks'
pre-Socratic speculations about the behavior of the
universe. In science and technology, intellectual
revolutions refer to
the series of events that led to the emergence of
modern science and the progress of scientific
thinking across critical periods in history. Although
there are many intellectual revolutions, this section
focuses on three of the most important ones that
altered the way humans view science and its
impacts on society: the Copernican, Darwinian, and
Freudian revolutions. In the words of French astronomer, mathematician, and freemason, Jean Sylvain Bailley
(1976 in Cohen, 1976), these scientific revolutions involved a two-stage process of sweeping away the old and
establishing the new.

In understanding intellectual revolutions, it is worth noting that these revolutions are, in themselves,
paradigm shifts. These shifts resulted from a renewed and enlightened understanding of how the universe
behaves and functions. They challenged long-held views about the nature of the universe. Thus, these
revolutions were often met with huge resistance and controversy.

Copernican Revolution
Reference Video: Copernicus - Astronomer | Mini Bio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0p6NKANE08

The Copernican Revolution refers to the 16th-century paradigm shift named after the Polish
mathematician and astronomer, Nicolaus Copernicus. Copernicus formulated the heliocentric model of the
universe. At the time, the belief was that the Earth was the center of the Solar System based on the geocentric
model of Ptolemy (i.e., Ptolemaic model).
Copernicus introduced the heliocentric model in a 40 page outline entitled Commentariolus. He
formalized his model in the publication of his treatise, De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (The Revolution
of Celestial Spheres) in 1543. In his model, Copernicus repositioned the Earth from the center of the Solar
System and introduced the idea that the Earth rotates on its own axis. The model illustrated the Earth, along
with other heavenly bodies, to be rotating around the Sun.
The idea that the Sun is at the center of the universe instead of the Earth proved to be unsettling to
many when Copernicus first introduced his model. In fact, the
heliocentric model was met with huge resistance, primarily from
the Church, accusing Copernicus of heresy. At the time, the idea
that it was not the Earth, and, by extension, not man, that was at
the center of all creation was unthinkable. Copernicus faced
persecution from the Church because of this. Moreover, although
far more sensible than the Ptolemaic model, which as early as the
13th century had been criticized for its shortcomings, the
Copernican model also had multiple inadequacies that were later
filled in by astronomers who participated in the revolution.
Nonetheless, despite problems with the model and the
persecution of the Church, the heliocentric model was soon
accepted by other scientists of the time, most profoundly by
Galileo Galilei.
The contribution of the Copernican Revolution is far-reaching. It served as a catalyst to sway
scientific thinking away from age long views about the position of the Earth relative to an enlightened
understanding of the universe. This marked the beginning of modern astronomy. Although very slowly, the
heliocentric model eventually caught on among other astronomers who further refined the modeland
contributed to the recognition of heliocentrism. This was capped off by Isaac Newton's work a century later.
Thus, the Copernican Revolution marked a turning point in the study of cosmology and astronomy making it
a truly important intellectual revolution.

Reference Video: Copernicus: A Revolution of Astronomical Proportions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXi6YSkddD8

Darwinian Revolution
The English naturalist,
geologist, and biologist, Charles Darwin,
is credited for stirring another important
intellectual revolution in the mid-19th
century. His treatise on the science of
evolution, On The
Origin of Species, was published in 1859
and began a revolution that brought
humanity to a new era of intellectual
discovery.
The Darwinian Revolution
benefitted from earlier intellectual
revolutions especially those in the 16th
and 17th centuries, such that it was guided by
confidence in human reason's ability to explain
phenomena in the universe. for his part, Darwin
gathered evidence pointing to what is now known
as natural selection, an evolutionary process by
which organisms, including humans, inherit,
develop, and adapt traits that favored survival and
reproduction. These traits are manifested in
offsprings that are more fit and well-suited to the
challenges of survival and reproduction.

The beak of an ancestral species of Finches found

in the Galapagos had evolved to be able to survive
in acquiring different food sources. Darwin's
theory of evolution was, of course, met with
resistance
and considered to be controversial. Critics accused the theory of being either short in accounting for the broad
and complex evolutionary process or dismissive of the idea that the functional design of organisms was a
manifestation of an omniscient God. The Darwinian Revolution can be likened to the Copernican Revolution
in its demonstration of the power of the laws of nature in explaining biological phenomena of survival and
reproduction.

The place of the Darwinian Revolution in modern science cannot be underestimated. Through the
Darwinian Revolution, the development of organisms and the origin of unique forms of life and humanity
could be rationalized by a lawful system or an orderly process of change underpinned by laws of nature.

Reference Video: DARWINIAN REVOLUTION https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjLOvrx0_o4

Freudian Revolution
 Austrian neurologist, Sigmund Freud, is credited for stirring
20th-century intellectual revolution named after him, the Freudian
Revolution. Psychoanalysis as a school of thought in psychology is the
center of this revolution. Freud developed psychoanalysis- scientific
method of understanding inner and unconscious conflicts embedded
within one's personality, springing from free associations, dreams, and
fantasies of the individual. Psychoanalysis immediately shot into
controversy for it emphasized the existence of the unconscious where
feelings, thoughts, urges, emotions. and memories are contained outside
of one's conscious mind. Psychoanalytic concepts of psychosexual developments, libido, and ego were met
with both support and resistance from many scholars. Freud suggested that humans are inherently pleasure-
seeking individuals. These notions were particularly caught in the crossfire of whether Freud's psychoanalysis
fit in the scientific study of the brain and mind.

Scientists working on a biological approach in studying human behavior criticized psychoanalysis

for lack of vitality and bordering on being unscientific as a theory. Particularly, the notion that all humans are
destined to exhibit Oedipus and Electra complexes (i.e., sexual desire towards the parent of the opposite sex
and exclusion of the parent of the same sex) did not seem to be supported by empirical data. In the same vein,
it appeared to critics that psychoanalysis, then, was more of an ideological stance than a scientific one.

Amidst controversy, Freud's psychoanalysis is widely credited for dominating psychotherapeutic

practice in the early 20th century. Psychodynamic therapies that treat a myriad of psychological disorders still
remain largely informed by Freud's work on psychoanalysis.

Reference Video: FREUDIAN REVOLUTION https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWGjOvhpmGw

Exercise 1.

Instructions: Choose one among the three revolutions being discussed and write a 100 word reaction paper on
a letter size bond paper.

Exercise 2.
Instructions: Aside from the three intellectual revolutions discussed in this section, other intellectual
history in revolutions also took place across many parts of the world, such as in North America, Asia,
Middle East, and Africa. Research on a particular intellectual revolution that took place in any of the four
geographical locations Prepare a written that will highlights your chosen intellectual revolution. Use the
following guide questions for your output. (letter size bond paper)
1. What is the intellectual revolution all about?
2. Who are the key figures in the revolution?
3. How did the revolution advance modern science and scientific thinking at the time?
4. What controversies met the revolution?

Assignment 3.
Metacognitive Reading Report
Instructions: Following the same intellectual revolution you choose during the earlier task read one of the three
articles and accomplish the Metacognitive Reading Report after.
A. Chapters 5-7 of Thomas S. Kuhn's The Copernican Revolution
B. Tim M. Berra's Charles Darwin's Paradigm Shift
C. George J. Makari's Revolution in Mind: The Creation of Psychoanalysis

Complete the metacognitive reading report below

1. Difficult Concepts
a.
 b.

c.

2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that

However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

b. Before Reading the article I thought that

However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

c. Before Reading the article I thought that

However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that

3. Discussion Questions
a.

b.

c.

Lesson 4 Science and Technology and Nation Building

This section situates science, technology, and society in the context of Philippine nation building. It
initially surveys contributions of Filipino scientists to science and technology. It then traces the historical
development and impact of science and technology on the various segments of Philippine society. These
discussions are geared toward engaging students in a critical analysis of science and technology as a tool for
nation building.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. identify the contributions of Filipino scientists in science and technology;
2. enumerate critical points in the history of science and technology in the Philippines and how these
developments affected society and the environment; and
3. explain the role of science and technology in nation building.

Diagnostics
Instructions: research on the major contribution of the following Filipino scientists. Alternatively,
you may identify 10 Filipino scientists and their contributions that are not part of the list. (Letter size bond
paper)
1. Anacleto Del Rosario 6. Ignacio Mercado
2. Francisco Quisumbing 7. Trinidad Pardo de Tavera
3. Gregorio Zara 8. Ramon Barba
4. Julian Banzon 9. Agapito Flores
5. Manuel Guerrero 10. Juan Salcedo, Jr.

Science and technology in the Philippines had its

beginnings during the pre-colonial times.
During this period, people used herbal medicine to treat
illnesses. To facilitate trading, Filipinos made use of writing,
numerical, measurement, and calendar systems. Farming,
fishing, mining, and weaving were the
best livelihood skills developed by Filipinos. In some cases, the
techniques Filipinos developed for livelihood purposes resulted
in majestic architectural designs that managed to attract
worldwide attention like the Banaue Rice Terraces of Ifugao.

During the Spanish colonial period, science and technology developed through the establishment of
formal education institutions and the launching of scientific organizations. Schools were mandated to teach
religion, mathematics, reading and writing, music and arts, and
health and sanitation. Medicine and biology were taught in
different educational and training institutions. Since agriculture
was the major livelihood of Filipinos, the natives were trained to
use innovative approaches in farming. To construct buildings,
churches, bridges, roads and forts, engineering was introduced and
developed as well. The rapid development of scientific principles
influenced by Western culture during the Spanish colonial period
was shortchanged.
This is why agriculture and industrial developments latter were
during the part of the Spanish era. Instead, trade was prioritized
due to possible bigger profits.

When the Americans came, institutions for science and technology were reorganized as well. For
example, the former Laboratorio Municipal was replaced by the Bureau of Government Laboratories under
the United States Department of Interior. The Bureau was established for the purpose of studying tropical
diseases and pursuing other related research projects. Eventually in 1905, the Bureau was changed to Bureau
of Science, which became the main research center of the Philippines.

In 1933, the National Research Council of the Philippines was established. Developments in
science and technology during the American regime were focused on agriculture, medicine and pharmacy,
food processing, and forestry. In 1946, the Bureau of Science was replaced by the Institute of Science.
 During the time of former President Ferdinand Marcos, the role of
science and technology in national development was emphasized. He mandated
the Department of Education and Culture, now known as the Department of
Education (DepEd), to promote science courses in public high schools. Additional
budget for research projects in applied sciences and science education was granted
by Marcos. A big chunk of the war damage fund from the Japanese was donated
to private universities and colleges for the creation of science and technology-
related courses and to promote research. The 35-hectare lot in Bicutan, Taguig was
proclaimed in 1968 as the Philippine Science Community, now the site of the
Department of Science and Technology (DOST). Seminars, workshops, training
programs, and scholarships on fisheries and oceanography were also sponsored by
the government during Marcos' presidency. The Philippine Coconut Research
Institute (PHIL CORIN) was tasked to promote the modernization of
the coconut industry. Several agencies and organizations were then
established like the Philippine Textile Research Institute, Philippine
Atomic Energy Commission (now the Philippine Nuclear Institute),
National Grains Authority (now the National Food Authority),
Philippine Council for Agricultural Research (now the Philippine
Council for Agriculture, Aquatic, and Natural Resources Research and
Development), Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and
Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA), Philippine
National Oil Company, Plant Breeding Institute, International Rice
Research Institute (IRRI), Bureau of Plant Industry), Bureau of Forest
Products, and the National Committee on Geological Sciences.

The National Science Development Board (ANSDB) was

reorganized as the National Science and Technology Authority (NSTA) established in 1981. In 1976, Marcos
established the National Academy of
Science and Technology (NAST) to be the reservoir of National Academy of Science scientific and
technological expertise in the country. Salary increases for the teachers and administrators at the Philippine
Science High School were granted and the Mindanao and Visayas campuses of the Philippine Science High
School were established during Marcos' time.

In 1986, under President Corazon Aquino, NSTA was

renamed DOST. This was done in order for the science and technology
sector to be represented in the cabinet and thus play an integral role in
the country's sustainable economic recovery and growth. The Science
and Technology Master Plan penned by DOST aimed to update the
production sector, improve research activities, and develop
infrastructures for the science and technology sector.
 In 1987, during the presidency of Fidel Ramos, the Philippines had
approximately 3,000 competent scientists and engineers. The "Doctors to the
Barrio" Program made healthcare accessible even in far-flung areas in the
country. Incentives were given to people who played significant roles in the
science and technology sector. The National Program for Gifted Filipino
Children in Science and Technology was created for high school students who
wanted to major in science and engineering in college. It was also during
Ramos' term that a number of laws and statutes related to the science and
technology sector were mandated such as RA 8439: Magna Carta for Scientist
Engineers, Researchers and other Science and Technology Personnel in
Government,; RA 7687: Science and Technology Scholarship Act of 1994;
RA 7459: Inventors and Inventions Incentives Act and RA 8293; Intellectual
Property Code of the Philippines.

RA 8749: The Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 and RA 8792:

Electronic Commerce Act of 2000 were both signed and mandated during
the term of President Joseph Estrada. He was also responsible for
implementing cost-effective basic health irrigation technologies and
providing care services for those who could not afford them.

During the administration of President Cloria Macapagal Arroyo, the

science and technology sector were developed to strengthen thee ducation system
and to address poverty. The term Filipinnovation was coined to refer to the
Philippines as an innovation hub in Asia. Arroyo also promulgated RA 9367: Biofuels
Act, to utilize indigenous materials as sources of energy. However, the act was not
able to produce positive outcomes because of the lack It was also in Arroyo's term
that farmers were encouraged to use rice that can withstand environmental hazards.
RA 10601: Agriculture and Fisheries Mechanization (AFMech) Law was also
passed to modernize. agricultural and fisheries machinery and equipment.

In 2014, President Benigno Aquino III named new National Scientists

namely, Gavino C. Trono, for Marine Biology, Angel C: Alala, for Biological
Science, Ramon C. Barba, for Horticulture, and Edgardo D. Gomez also for Marine
Biology.

Today, in the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte, the science and technology sector is seen to be a
priority based on the budget for research and development (R&D) that grew by nearly six times over the same
period. Formulation of program and policies that will aid in shaping the county is backed up President Duterte.
The focus of DOST is to put the results of R& D into commercialization in order to gain new intellectual
properties. Currently, the Philippines has the Philippine Space Technology Program which launched Diwata-
2 in 2018 after the launch of Diwata-1 in 2016 that displayed the Philippine flag in space. Besides space
technology, the current administration also gives importance to agriculture and disaster preparedness.

Science and Technology in the Philippines and the environment contributions to society.
Science and technology have numerous contributions to
society. The mechanization of farming, for instance, is
necessary for agriculture, being the number one source of
food production. Agricultural development needs to cope
with the rapidly and exponentially growing population.
Tools such as water pumps and sprinklers help in
managing the damaging effects of extreme heat caused by
climate change on crops.

Science and technology have also made it possible to produce genetically modified crops, which
grow faster and are more resistant to pests. Fertilizers that increase nutrients in the soil enhance the growth of
the crops and produce high quality yields. However, many researches show that genetically modified crops
and fertilizers made from strong chemicals are not environment friendly.

Science and technology has improved transportation by land, air, and

sea. Communication has also improved through technological advancements

With the internet and the rise of social media, information is

transmitted easily and rapidly. Through technological developments, ways of
learning also changed. Learning management systems used in education are
now accessible through computers, mobile phones, tablets, and other gadgets.
Online learning has also become popular in various disciplines like
mathematics, physics, biology, geography, economics, and others.
 These contributions of science and come
with adverse impacts technology, however, always
especially on the environment. One is resource
depletion. The increasing number of new and
advanced technologies in the production and
manufacture of different goods and services results
in the depletion of the Earth's natural resources.
Wastes are also generated as these technologies are
developed. People have also become too dependent
on science and technology, making them
disregards its consequences that may be damaging
to the environment

Exercise 1. Philippine Science and Technology Innovation

Instructions: Choose two among the following Filipino scientists and inventors:
1. Paulo Campos 8. Ame Garong
2. Angel Alcala 9.Raymundo
3. Ricardo Sigua Punongbayan 10. Gavino Tronio
4.Maria Ligaya Braganza 11. Proceso Alcala
5. Baldomero Olivera 12. Alfredo Galang
6.Dioscoro Umali 13. Benito Lumen
7. Diosdado Banatao

Create a flash card (Letter size) showing the profession of the scientist/ inventor, his or her specialization, and
his or her most significant contribution.

Exercise 2. The Fate of the Philippine Science and Technology Innovation

Instructions: Among the chosen scientists and inventors featured in

your flash cards, identify the impact of their inventions and discoveries. Address the questions below
to create a written output.
1. How did these inventions and discoveries impact the society?
2. How were these inventions and discoveries supported by the government?
3. Did these inventions and discoveries serve the public good?
Explain your answer.

Module 2 Science Technology and Society and Human Condition

This module introduces students to a number of relevant and timely philosophical foundations that
will aid in examining the functions, roles, and impacts of science and technology on society. The module is
divided into five sections. These sections aim to provide students with cogent and comprehensive knowledge
on the concept of human flourishing in the face of rapid scientific progress and technological development.

Lesson 1. Technology as a Way of Revealing

This section tackles the essence of technology based on Martin Heidegger's work,The Question
Concerning shall engage The i the Question Concerning Technology. The lesson shall engage in the process
of questioning concerning technology. It discusses the key concepts related to Heidegger’s work and how these
concepts relate to an understanding of the essence of technology.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to:
 1. differentiate the essences of technology and modern technology;
2. discuss and illustrate the dangers of modern technology; and
3. explain why art is the saving power of modern technology.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Rate the extent of your agreement to the following statements using the Osgood scale. You are
also given space to write any comment to further clarify your response.

Statements Agree Disagree Comments if (any)

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Technology is a means to an end
Technology is a human activity
Poetry is technology
Nature is a standing reserve
Man is an instrument of the exploitation
of nature
Man is in danger of being swallowed by
technology.
There is a saving power or a “way out”
of the danger of technology.
Art maybe the saving power

At A Glance: Who Is Martin Heidegger?

" The essence of technology is by no means anything technological." Martin Heidegger (1977)
Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) is widely acknowledged as one of the most
important philosophers of the 20th century.He was a German philosopher who was
part of the Continental tradition of philosophy.
His stern opposition to positivism and technological world domination received
unequivocal support from leading postmodernists and post-structuralists of the time,
including Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, and Jean-Francois Lyotard.
In 1933, he joined the Nazi Party (NSDAP) and remained to be a member
until it was dismantled toward the end of World War II. This resulted in his dismissal
from the University of Freiburg in 1949. He was only able to resume teaching in 1951.
Heidegger's membership to the Nazi Party made him controversial-his philosophical
work was often eclipsed by his political affiliation, with critics saying that his
philosophy would always be rooted in his political consciousness.

Heidegger's work on philosophy focused on ontology or the study of

'being or dasein in German. His philosophical works are often described as
complicated, partly due to his use of complex compound German words, such as
Seinsvergesesnheit (Forgetfulness of Being), Bodenstandigkeit (Rootedness in
Soil), and Wesensverfassung (Essential Constitution).

To know more about the life and philosophy of Heidegger, watch a five-minute You Tube video
entitled, The Philosophy of Martin Heidegger which can be accessed on this link: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=Br1sGtA7XTU. Remember, it is important to understand basic concepts related to Heidegger's
philosophy to better make sense of his work.

Other Reference Video

PHILOSOPHY - Heidegger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br1sGrA7XTU

The Essence of Technology

 It cannot be denied that science and technology are responsible for the ways society is continuously
being modernized. Science and technology continuously seep into the way people go about their daily lives.
However, the omnipresence of science and technology must not eclipse the basic tenets of ethics and morality.
Instead, it should allow the human person to flourish alongside scientific progress and technological
development. In order to spark the discussion on the role of ethics and social morality in science and
technology, it is necessary to go back to the very essence of technology, i.e., its definition.

The essence of technology can be captured in its definition. In his treatise, The Question Concerning
Technology, Martin Heidegger (1977) explains the two widely embraced definitions of technology:
(1)instrumental and (2) anthropological.

1. Instrumental definition: Technology is a means to an end.

Technology is not an end in itself, it is a means to an
end. In this context, technology is viewed as a tool
available to individuals, groups, and communities that
desire to make an impact on society. How technology is
used varies from individual to individual, groups to
groups, and communities to communities according to
their individual and collective functions, goals, and
aspirations. While technology is omnipresent, knowing its
functions requires paying attention to how humans use it
as a means to an end. In this sense, technology is an
instrument aimed at getting things done.

2. Anthropological definition: Technology is a human activity.

Alternatively, technology can also be defined as a human activity
because to achieve an end and to produce and use a means to an end
is, by itself, a human activity. The production or invention of
technological equipment, tools and machines, the products and
inventions, and the purpose and functions they serve are what define
technology.

Both definitions, i.e., instrumental and anthropological, arecorrect.

However, neither touches on the true essence of technology.

Technology as a Way of Revealing

Heidegger stressed that the true can only be pursued through the correct. Simply, what is a correct
lead to what is true. In this sense, Heidegger envisioned technology as a way of revealing-a mode of 'bringing
forth.' Bringing forth can be understood through the Ancient Greek philosophical concept, poiesis, which refers
to the act of bringing something out of concealment. By bringing something out of concealment, the truth of
that something is revealed. The truth is understood through another Ancient Greek concept of aletheia, which
is translated as unclosedness, unconcealedness, disclosure, or truth.

Thus, for Heidegger, technology is a form of poeisis-a way of revealing that unconceals aletheia or
the truth. This is seen in the way the term techne, the Greek root word of technology, is understood in different
contexts. In philosophy, techne resembles the term episteme that refers to the human ability to make and
perform. Techne also encompasses knowledge and understanding. In art, it refers to tangible and intangible
aspects of life. The Greeks understood techne in the way that it encompasses not only craft, but other acts of
the mind, and poetry.

Technology as Poiesis: Does Modern Technology Bring Forth or Challenge Forth?

Heidegger, in The Question Concerning Technology, posited that both primitive crafts and modern
technology are revealing. However, he explained that modern technology is revealing not in the sense of
bringing forth or poeisis. Heidegger made a clear distinction between technology and modern technology in
that the latter 'challenges' nature. Modern technology challenges nature by extracting something from it and
transforming, storing, and distributing it.
On the surface, Heidegger's criticism of modem technology might appear counterintuitive to the
purpose of nature to human existence. However, by digging deeper into Heidegger's question, it becomes clear
that the essence of modern technology is not to bring forth in the sense of poiesis. Instead, Heidegger considers
modern technology's way of revealing as a way of challenging forth. Modern technology challenges forth,
because it makes people think how to do things faster, more effectively, and with less effort. It prompts people
into dominating and enframing the earth's natural resources. Challenging forth reduces objects as standing-
reserve or something to be disposed of by those who enframe them--humans. This is evident in the way people
exploit natural resources with very little concern for the ecological consequences that come with it. Challenging
forth as a result of modern technology is also evident in the information age, such that greater control of
information to profit from its value gives rise to concerns about privacy and the protection of human rights.
The challenging forth of modern technology is seen everywhere: in the rise and depletion of
petroleum as a strategic resource; the introduction and use of synthetic dyes, artificial flavorings, and toxic
materials into the consumer stream that bring about adverse effects on human health; and the use of ripening
agents in agriculture that poses threats to food safety and health security.

Enframing as Modern Technology's Way of Revealing

If the essence of technology can be understood as a way of bringing forth the truth in the sense of
poiesis, Heidegger distinguished the way of revealing of modern technology by considering it as a process of
enframing. Humankind's desire to control everything, including nature, is captured in this process. By putting
things, in this case nature, in a frame, it becomes much easier for humans to control it according to
their desires.

Enframing, according to Heidegger, is akin to two ways of looking the world: calculative thinking
and meditative thinking. In calculative thinking, humans desire to put an order to nature to better understand
and control it. In meditative thinking, humans allow nature to reveal itself to them without the use of force or
violence. One thinking is not necessarily better than the other. In fact, humans are capable ofusing both and
will benefit from being able to harmonize these ways of looking at the world. Yet, calculative thinking tends
to be more commonly utilized, primarily because humans' desire to control due to their fear of irregularity.

Enframing, then, is a way of ordering (or framing) nature to better manipulate it. Enframing happens
because of how humans desire for security, even if it puts all of nature as a standing reserve
ready for exploitation. Modern technology challenges humans to enframe nature. Thus, humans become part
of the standing reserve and an instrument of technology, to be exploited in the ordering of nature. The role
humans take as instruments of technology through enframing is called destining. In destining, humans are
challenged forth by enframing to reveal what is real. However, this destining of humans to reveal nature carries
with it the danger of misconstruction or misinterpretation.

The Dangers of Technology

The dangers of technology lie in how humans let themselves be
consumed by it. Although humans are looped into the cycle of
bringing forth or challenging forth, it is their responsibility to
recognize
how they
become

instruments of technology. The Brazilian novelist,

Paulo Coelho, once remarked that it is boastful for
humans to think that nature needs to be saved, whereas Mother Nature would remain even if humans cease to
exist. Hence, in facing the dangers of technology, the fear of disappearing from the face of the Earth should
concern people more potently than the fear of the Earth disappearing. As mere tenants on Earth, people must
not allow themselves to be consumed by technology lest they lose the essence of who they are as human beings.
In this sense, humans are in danger of becoming merely part of the standing reserve or, alternatively, may find
themselves in nature.

Recognizing its dangers of technology requires critical and reflective thinking on its use. For
example, social media has indeed connected people in the most efficient and convenient way imaginable, but
it also inadvertently gave rise to issues such as invasion of privacy, online disinhibition, and proliferation of
fake news. The line has to be drawn between what constitutes a beneficial use of social media and dangerous
one. As exemplified, social media comes with both benefits and drawbacks.

However, the real threat of technology comes from its essence not its activities or products. The
correct response to the danger of technology is not simply dismissing technology altogether. Heidegger (1977)
explained that people are delivered over to technology in the worst
possible way when they regard it as something neutral. This
conception of technology, according to Heidegger, to which today
humans particularly like to pay homage, makes them utterly blind
the essence of technology. Ultimately, the essence of technology
is by no means anything technological (Heidegger, 1977).

Art as the Saving Power

Necessary
reflection upon and
confrontation with
technology are
required in order to
proactively address the dangers of technology. Friedrich
Holderlin, a German poet quoted by Heidegger, said: “But where
danger is, grows the saving power also" (1977, p. 14). Following
this, the saving power can be traced exactly where the danger is
in the essence of technology. As mentioned, this essence is not neutral and by no means anything technological.
Along this line, Heidegger proposed art as the saving power and the way out of enframing: "And art was simply
called techne. It was a single, manifold revealing" (1977, p. 18). Heidegger saw art as an act of the mind, i.e.,
a techne, that protected and had great power over the truth. By focusing on art, people are able to see more
clearly how art is embedded in nature. Art encourages humans to think less from a calculative standpoint where
nature is viewed as an ordered system. Instead, it inspires meditative thinking where nature is seen as an art
and that, in all of art, nature is most poetic. Heidegger encapsulated this as follows:

Because the essence of technology is nothing technological, essential reflection upon technology and
decisive confrontation with it must happen in a realm that is, on the one hand, akin to the essence of technology
and, on the other, fundamentally different from it. Such a realm is art. But certainly only if reflection on its
part, does not shut its art, for eyes to the constellation of truth after which we are questioning (1977, p. 19).

Questioning as the Piety of Thought

Heidegger concluded his treatise on technology by saying:
The closer we come to the danger, the more brightly do the ways into the saving power begin to shine
and the more questioning we become. For questioning is the piety of thought (1977, p. 19).
 Heidegger underscored the importance of questioning in the midst of technology. For him, there is
unparalleled wisdom gained only when humans are able to pause, think, and question what is around them.
Humans are consumed by technology when they are caught up in enframing and fail to pay attention to the
intricacies of technology, the brilliance of the purpose of humankind, and the genius of humans
to bring forth the truth.
Questioning is the piety of thought. It is only through questioning that humans are able to reassess
their position not only in the midst of technology around them, but also, and most importantly, in the grand
scheme of things. Heidegger posited that it is through questioning that humans bear witness to the crises that
a complete preoccupation with technology brings, preventing them from experiencing the essence of
technology. Thus, humans need to take a step back and reassess who they were, who they are, and who they
are becoming in the midst of technology in this day and age.

Other Reference Videos:

Martin Heidegger: the Question Concerning Technology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaVmEN-vGWk

Exercise 1. Bring Forth or Challenge Forth

Instructions: Do the photos (a) bring forth or (b) challenge forth?
Encircle the letter of your answer below each photo and explain your choice.

a. bring forth b. challenge forth a. bring forth b. challenge forth

_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ __________________________________________
_______________________________________ ____________________________________________

a. bring forth b. challenge forth a. bring forth b. challenge forth

_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ __________________________________________
_______________________________________ ____________________________________________

a a. bring forth b. challenge forth a. bring forth b. challenge forth

_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ _____________________________________________
_______________________________________ __________________________________________
_______________________________________ ____________________________________________

Exercise 2. Reflection
Instructions: After studying the full text of Martin Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology,
available on https://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil394/The%20Question%20Concerning
%20Technology.pdf Answer the following:
1. What three concepts remain unclear or difficult for you to understand?
a.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
b. _____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
c.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
2. What three significant insights did you gain in studying this text?
a.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
b.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
c.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
3. What three questions do you want to ask about the text?
a.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
b.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
c.______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 3. Art as Saving Power

Instructions: Heidegger explained that art holds power that could save humans from the danger of being
consumed by technology.
 In his words,"[art] is pious... yielding to the holding-sway and the safekeeping of truth" (1977, p. 18).
In this activity, focus on art as the saving power of technology. Look for an artwork that 'reveals' the human
person in the midst of technology. Explain the artwork in relation to general concepts discussed in Martin
Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology. Use another sheet of paper for the picture and explanation.

Assignment1. The Dangers of Technology.

Instructions: Read the article below after reading, answer the questions that follow.

Facebook says 87 million may be affected by data privacy scandal

By Agnes France-Presse
WASHINGTON DC, USA.- Facebook said Wednesday, April 4, the personal data up to 87 million
users was improperly hared with British political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, as Mark Zuckerberg
defended his leadership at the huge social network.
Facebook’s estimate was far higher than news reports suggesting 50 million users my have been
affected in the privacy scandal which has roiled the company and sparked questions for the entire internet
sector on data protection.
Zuckerberg told reporters on a conference call he accepted responsibility for the failure to protect
user data but maintained that he was still the best person to leadthe network of two billion users.
“Ï think life is about learning from mistakes and figuring out how to move forward,”he said to a response to
aquestion on his ability to lead the company.
“When you’re building something like Facebook which is unprecedented in the world, there are things you are
going to mess up….What I think people should hold us accountable for is if we are learning from our mistakes.”
Zuckerberg said 97 millionwas a high estimateof those affected by breach, based on the maximum
number of connections to users who downloaded academic researcher’s quiz that scooped up personal files.
“I’m quite confident it will not be more than 87 million, it could well be less,”he said.
To remedy the problem, Zuckerberg said Facebook must "rethink our relationship with people across
everything we do” and that it will take a number of years to regain user trust.
The new estimate came as Facebook unveiled clearer terms of service to enable users to better
understand data sharing, and as a congressional panel said Zuckerberg would appear next week to address
privacy issues.

Facebook has been scrambling for weeks in the face of the disclosures on hijacking of private data
by the consulting group working for Donald Trump's 2016 campaign.
The British firm responded to the Facebook announcement by repeating its claim that it did not use
data from the social network in the 2016 election.

"Cambridge Analytica did not use GSR (Global Science Research) Facebook data or any derivatives of this
data in the US presidential election," the company said in a tweet. "Cambridge Analytica licensed data from
GSR for 30 million individuals, not 87 million."

Zuckerberg on the Hill

Facebook's chief technology officer Mike Schroepfer meanwhile said new privacy tools for users of
the huge social network would be in place by next Monday, April 9.
"People will also be able to remove apps that they no longer want. As part of this process we will
also tell people if their information may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica," he said in
a statement.
Schroepfer's post was the first to cite the figure of 87 million while noting that most of those affected
were in the United States.
Facebook also said its new terms of service would provide clearer information on how data is
collected and shared without giving the social network additional rights.
Earlier Wednesday, the House of Representatives' Energy and Commerce Committee announced
what appeared to be the first congressional appearance by Zuckerberg since the scandal broke.
 The April 11 hearing will "be an important opportunity to shed light on critical consumer data privacy
issues and help all Americans better understand what happens to their personal information online," said the
committee's Republican chairman Greg Walden and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone in a statement.
The Facebook co-founder is also invited to other hearings amid a broad probe on both sides of the
Atlantic.

Deleting Russian 'trolls'

Zuckerberg told the conference call he was committed to ensuring that Facebook and its partners do
a better job of protecting user data, and that it must take a more serious approach after years of being “idealistic"
about how the platform is used.
"We didn't take a broad enough view on what our responsibility is, and that was a huge mistake. It
was my mistake."
He said that while "there are billions of people who love the service,” there is also a potential for
abuse and manipulation.

"It's not enough just to give people a voice," he said. "We have to make sure people don't use that
voice to hurt people or spread disinformation."
Late Tuesday, April 3, Facebook said it deleted dozens of accounts linked to a Russian-sponsored
internet unit which has been accused of spreading propaganda and other divisive content in the United States
and elsewhere.
The social networking giant said it revoked the accounts of 70 Facebook and 65 Instagram accounts,
and removed 138 Facebook pages controlled by the Russia-based Internet Research Agency (IRA).
The agency has been called a "troll farm" due to its deceptive post aimed at sowing discord and
propagating misinformation.
The unit "has repeatedly used complex networks of inauthentic accounts to deceive and manipulate
people who use Facebook, including before, during and after the 2016 US presidential elections,"
said a statement Facebook chief security officer Alex Stamos. Rappler.com

Source: Agence France-Presse. (2018, April 5). Facebook says 87 million may be affected by data privacy
scandal. Rappler. Retrieved on April 24, 2018 from https:// www.rappler.com/technology/news/199588
facebook-data-affected-cambridge- analytica-scandal.

Questions:
1. What is this data privacy scandal all about?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2. How does this Facebook privacy scandal relate to Heidegger's notion of revealing of modern
technology as challenging forth?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. How are Facebook users 'enframed' in this particular data privacy scandal?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
4. How do you think Facebook can be used in a way that is more consistent with Heidegger's idea of
poiesis or a bringing forth of technology?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
5. How can the Heideggerian notion of 'questioning' guide Facebook users toward a beneficial use of
social media?
 ____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 2. Human Flourishing in Progress and De-development

This section presents Jason Hickel's development framework focused

on de-development. As departure from traditional frameworks of growth and
development, Hickel's concept of de-development is discussed as an alternative
to narrowing the gap between rich and poor countries. Thus, taking off from
this alternative framework, the lesson critiques human flourishing vis-i-vis
progress in science and technology.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this unit, the students should be able to:
1. discuss human flourishing in the context of progress in science and
technology;
2. explain de-development as framework; and a progress and development
3. differentiate between traditional frameworks of progress and
development and Hickel's concept of de-development.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Examine the picture and follow the prompt that follows.

Recent researches found that 70% of people in middle- and high-income countries believe that
overconsumption is putting the planet and society at risk. Discuss your thoughts about the following:
1. How do you think overconsumption puts the planet and society at risk?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2. What are the manifestations of society's tendency to over produce and over consume?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Should middle- and high-income countries regulate their growth and consumption? Why or why not?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

Thoughts to Ponder
 Despite efforts to close out the gap
between the rich and poor countries, a BBC report
in 2015 stated that the gap in growth and
development just keeps on widening. Although
there is no standard measure of inequality, the
report claimed that most indicators suggest that the
widening of the growth gap slowed during the
financial crisis of 2007 but is now growing again.
The increasing inequality appears paradoxical
having in mind the efforts that had been poured
onto the development programs designed to assist
poor countries to rise from absent to slow
progress.
With this backdrop and in the context of
unprecedented scientific and technological advancement and economic development, individually humans
must ask themselves whether they are flourishing individually or collectively. If development efforts to close
out the gap between the rich and poor countries have failed, is it possible to confront the challenges of
development through nonconformist framework?

In the succeeding article, Jason Hickel, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics,
criticizes the failure of growth and development efforts to eradicating poverty seven decades ago. More
importantly, he offers a nonconformist perspective toward growth and development.

Forget developing' poor countries, it's time to 'de-develop' rich countries by Jason Hickel
This week, heads of state are gathering in New York to UN's new sustainable development sign the
UN’s new sustainable development goals (SDGs). The main objective is to eradicate poverty by 2030. by 2030.
Beyoncé, One Direction and Malala are on board. It's set to be a monumental international celebration.
Given all the fanfare, one might think the SDGs are about to offer a fresh plan for how to save the
world, but beneath all the hype, it's business as usual. The main strategy for eradicating poverty is the same:
growth.
 Growth has been the main object of development for the past 70 years, despite the fact that it's not
working. Since 1980, the global economy has grown by 380%, but the number of people living in poverty on
less than $5 (£3.20) a day has increased by more than 1.1 billion. That's 17 times the population of Britain so
much for the trickle-down effect.
Orthodox economists insist that all we need is
yet more growth. More progressive types tell us that we
need to shift some of the yields of growth from the richer
segments of the population to the poorer ones, evening
things out a bit. Neither approach is adequate. Why?
Because even at current levels of average global
consumption, we're overshooting our planet's biocapacity
by more than 50% each year.

In other words, growth isn't an option any more

we've already grown too much. Scientists are now telling
us that we're blowing past planetary boundaries at
breakneck speed. And the hard truth is that this global
crisis is due almost entirely to overconsumption in rich countries.
Right now, our planet only has enough resources for each of us to consume 1.8 "global hectares"
annually - a standardized unit that measures resource use and waste. This figure is roughly what the average
person in Ghana or Guatemala consumes. By contrast, people in
the US and Canada consume about 8 hectares per person, while
Europeans consume 4.7 hectares - many times their fair share.
What does this mean for our theory of development?
Economist Peter Edward argues that instead of pushing poorer
countries to "catch up" with rich ones, we should be thinking of
ways to get rich countries to catch down' to more appropriate
levels of development. We should look at societies where people
live long and happy lives at relatively low levels of income and
consumption not as basket cases that need to be developed
towards western models, but as exemplars of efficient living.
How much do we really need to live long and happy lives? In the US, life expectancy is 79 years
and GDP per capita is $53,000. But many countries have achieved similar life expectancy with a mere fraction
of this income. Cuba has a comparable life expectancy to US and one of the highest literacy rates in the world
with GDP per capita of only $6,000 and consumption of only 1.9 hectares - right at the threshold of ecological
sustainability. Similar claims can be made of Peru, Ecuador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Tunisia.
Yes, some of the excess income and consumption we see in the rich world yield improvements in
quality of life that are not captured by life expectancy, or even literacy rates. But even if we look at measures
of overall happiness and wellbeing in addition to life expectancy, number of low- and middle-income countries
rank highly. Costa Rica manages to sustain one of the highest happiness indicators and life expectancies in the
world with a per capita income one-fourth that of the US.
In light of this, perhaps we should regard such countries not as underdeveloped, but rather as
appropriately developed. And maybe we need to start calling on rich countries to justify their excesses.
The idea of de-developing" rich countries might prove to be a strong rallying cry in the global south,
but it will be tricky to sell to westerners, Tricky, but not impossible. According to recent consumer research,
70% of people in middle and high-income countries believe overconsumption is putting our planet and society
at risk. A similar majority also believe we should strive to buy and own less, and that doing so would not
compromise our happiness. People sense there is something wrong with the dominant model of economic
progress and they are hungry for an alternative narrative.
The problem is that the pundits promoting this kind of transition are using the wrong language. They
use terms such as zero growth or worst of all- de-development, which are technically accurate but off putting
for anyone who's not already on board. Such terms are repulsive because they run against the deepest frames
we use to think about human progress, and, indeed, the purpose of life itself. It's like asking people to stop
moving positively through life, to stop learning, improving, growing.
Negative formulations won’t get us anywhere. The idea of "steady-state" economics is a step in the
right direction and is growing in popularity, but it still doesn't get the framing right. We need to reorient
ourselves toward a positive future, a truer form of progress.
One that is geared toward quality instead of quantity.
One that is more sophisticated than just accumulating
ever increasing amounts of stuff, which doesn't make
anyone happier anyway. What is certain is that GDP as a
measure is not going to get us there and we need to get
rid of it.
Perhaps we might take a cue from Latin Americans,
who are organizing alternative visions around the
indigenous concept of buen vivir, or good living. The
west has its own tradition of reflection on the good life
and it's time we revive it. Robert and Edward Skidclsky
take us down this road in his book, How Much is
Enough?, where they lay out the possibility of interventions such as banning advertising, a shorter working
week and a basic income, all of which would improve our lives while reducing consumption.
Either we slow down voluntarily or climate change will do it for us. We can't go on ignoring the laws
of nature. But rethinking our theory of progress is not only an ecological imperative, it is also a development
one. If we do not act soon, all our hard-won gains against poverty will evaporate, as food systems collapse and
mass famine re-emerges to an extent not seen since the 19th century.
This is not about giving anything up. And it's certainly not about living a life of voluntary misery or
imposing harsh limits on human potential. On the contrary, it's about reaching a higher level of understanding
and consciousness about what we're doing here and why.

Source: Hickel, (2015, Sep 23). Forget 'developing' poor countries, it's time to de- develop' rich countries. The
Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global-developmentprofessionals-
network/2015/sep/23/developing-poor-countries-de-developrich-countries-sdgs.

Other Reference Videos:

Jason Hickel: ‘Our addiction to economic growth is killing us’ – Viewsnight Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HckWP75yk9g
Puzzle of Growth: Rich Countries and Poor Countries Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5P8AZRBLac

Exercise 1. Reading Comprehension Task

Instructions: After reading Hickel's article on the concept of de-development, answer the following questions
in two to three sentences.
1. What is the framework of de-development of rich countries all about?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
2. How is the di-development framework different from traditional frameworks of development?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
3. According to Hickel, how can rich countries de-develop?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
4. Why does Hickel frown upon pundits using terms such as de-growth, zero growth, or de-development
in describing an alternative framework?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
5. Some people might think that de-development is about giving things up. How does Hickel explain that
this is not the case?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2. Personal Consumption Audit

Instructions: People believe that the more they are able to purchase things and avail of services, the more
'developed' and 'progressive' are the lives they lead. Yet, Hickel made it clear in his article that huge
consumption does not necessarily equate to long and happy lives. In this sense, is it possible for people to also
de-develop their consumption, but still remain happy and contented? Accomplish the personal consumption
audit table below and see what things you can reduce or minimize without sacrificing, or even improving, the
quality of your daily life. For your guidance, the first row has been provided as an example.

My Personal Consumption Audit

 Product/Food Average daily, No.of hours/day I Impact of this de-developing on my
weekly or reduce/do away everyday living
monthly amount with
consumed
Example: Eight (8) hours/day Seven (7)hours/day By minimizing the number of hours I spend
Social Media on social media I can pursue authentic
Usage personal interactions. I can also spend more
time doing schoolwork or helping in
household chores.
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Exercise 3. Reaction Paper

Discuss the similarities and differences between Jason Hickel's framework of de-development and Martin
Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology. Then, write a 200- to 300-word reaction paper on Hickel's
article. Use Heideggerian concepts learned in the previous section in explaining your thoughts and ideas about
Hickel's. Develop your on title. (Write in a separate paper)

Assignment 2. Documentary Film Analysis

Instructions: Watch and take notes on the documentary film, The Magician's Twin: C. S. Lewis and the
Case Against Scientism, available You Tube https://www.youtube.com/?~FPeyJvXU68k]/ Then answer
the following questions:
1. Why was C. S. Lewis very much a skeptic and critic of scientism? Was he against science?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
2. How did C. S. Lewis explain the following:
2.1.science as religion
 _________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2.2. science as credulity
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2.3. science as power
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3. Why did C. S. Lewis think that modern science is far more dangerous than magic?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
4. Why did C. S. Lewis become increasingly concerned about thebrise of scientocracy? How does
scientocracy relate to scientism?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
5. Based on what you learned in the documentary film, how does scientism pose 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?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 3. The Good Life

This section introduces concepts from Aristotle's Nichomachean
Ethics and examines issues in contemporary science and technology using the
same philosophical lens. It tackles the important Aristotelian concepts of
eudaimonia and arete, and how these can be used to assess one's relationship
and dealings with science and technology. As such, the section also aims to
answer question, "Are we living the good life?"

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. define the idea of the good life;
2. discuss Aristotle's concept of eudaimonia and aréte; and
3. examine contemporary issues and come up with innovative and
creative solutions to contemporary issues guided by ethical standards
leading to a good life.
Diagnostics
Instructions: Before the number write whether you AGREE or DISAGREE with each statement
1. The purpose of life is happiness.
2. Happiness comes from pleasure, wealth, and recognition.
3. Happiness means merely feeling good or joyful.
4. Reason is an important element of human happiness.
5. To achieve happiness, humans must pursue only extremely positive things.
6. A life of happiness is a result of a balance between two extremes.
7. A happy life is a virtuous life.
8. Intellectual and moral virtues are the ingredients of happiness.
 9. It is not the role of science and technology to guide humans toward a virtuous life.
10. Ethical standards must be imposed upon science and technology to avoid excesses and
deficiencies.
Are we living the good life? This question is inarguably one universal human concern. Everyone
aims to lead a good life. Yet, what constitutes a happy and contented life varies from person to person. Unique
backgrounds, experiences, social contexts, and even preferences make it difficult to subscribe to a unified
standard on which to tease out the meaning of 'the good life.' Thus, the prospect of a
standard of the good life-one that resonates across unique human experiences-is inviting.

Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics and the Good Life

To answer the question, "Are we living the good life?," necessary reflection must
be made on two things: first, what standard could be used to define 'the good life?"' Second,
how can the standard serve as guide toward living the good life in the midst of scientific
progress and technological advancement?
In the documentary film, The Magician's Twin: C. S. Lewis and the Case Against
Scientism, C. S. Lewis posited that "science must be guided by some ethical basis that is
not dictated by science itself." One such ethical basis is Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics.
Aristotle, who lived from 384 to 322 BC, is probably the most important ancient
Greek philosopher and scientist. He was a student of Plato, who was then a student of
Socrates. Together, they were considered
the 'Big Three of Greek Philosophy.'
Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics,
the fundamental basis of Aristotelian
ethics, consists of ten books. Originally,
they were lecture notes written on scrolls
when he taught at the Lyceum. It is widely
believed that the lecture notes were
compiled by or were dedicated to one of
Aristotle's sons, Nichomacus.
Alternatively, it is believed that the work
was dedicated to Aristotle's father who was
of the same name.
The Nichomachean Ethics,
abbreviated as NE or sometimes EN based on the Latin version of the name, is a treatise on the nature of moral
life and human happiness based on the unique essence human nature. The NE is particularly useful in defining
what the good life is.
Everyone has a definition of what good--is getting a collegedegree, traveling across the world,
succeeding in a business venture, pursuing a healthy and active lifestyle, or being a responsible parent.
However, although everyone aims to achieve that which is good, Aristotle posited two types of good. In NE
Book 2 Chapter 2, (NE 2:2), Aristotle explained that every action aims at some good. However, some actions
aim at an instrumental good is better than while some aim at an intrinsic good. He made it clear that the
ultimate good is better than the instrumental good for the latter is good as a means to achieving something
else or some other end while the former is good in
itself.

Eudaimonia: The Ultimate Good

What then is the ultimate good? Based on
the contrast between two types of good, one could
reflect on some potential candidates for the ultimate
good.
 One might think that pleasure is the ultimate good. One
aims for pleasure in the food they eat or in the experiences they
immerse themselves into. Yet, while pleasure is an important human
need, it cannot be the ultimate good. First, it is transitory -it passes.
One may have been pleased with the food they had for lunch, but he
or she will be hungry again or will want something else after a while.
Second, pleasure does not encompass all aspects of life. One may be
pleased with an opportunity to travel but that may not make him or
her feel good about leaving, say, his or her studies or the relationship
he or she has been struggling with.

Others might think that wealth is a potential candidate for the

ultimate good, but a critique of wealth would prove otherwise. Indeed, many,
if not most, aim to be financially stable, to be rich, or to be able to afford a
luxurious life. However, it is very common to hear people say that they aim
to be wealthy insofar as it would help them achieve some other goals.
Elsewhere, it is also common to hear stories about people who have become
very wealthy but remain, by and large, unhappy with the lives they lead. In
this sense, wealth is just an intermediate good-that is, only instrumental. It is
not the ultimate good because it is not self-sufficient and does not stop one
from aiming for some other 'greater' good.

Another candidate for the ultimate good is fame and

honor. Many people today seem to be motivated by a desire to
be known-to be famous. Others strive for honor and recognition.
This is reflected by those people who use social media to acquire
large virtual following on the internet and wish to gain a
foothold on the benefits that fame brings. Many people act
according to how they think they will be admired and
appreciated by other people. However, these cannot constitute
the ultimate good, simply because they are based on the
perception of others. Fame and honor can never be good in themselves. If one's definition of the good life is
being popular or respected, then the good life becomes elusive since it is based on the subjective views of
others.
Unlike pleasure, wealth, fame, and honor, happiness is the ultimate good. In the Aristotelian sense,
happiness is "living well and doing well" (NE 1:4). Among the Greeks, this is known as eudaimonia from the
root words eu, meaning good, and daimon, meaning spirit.Combining the root words, eudaimonia means
happiness or welfare. More accurately, others translate it as human flourishing or prosperity.
Aristotle proposed two hallmarks of eudaimonia, namely virtue and excellence (NE 1:7). Thus, happiness in
the sense of eudaimonia has to be distinguished from merely living good. Eudaimonia transcends all aspects
of life for it is about living well and doing well in whatever one does.

Eudaimonia: Uniquely Human?

Eudaimonia or happiness is unique to humans for it is a uniquely human function. It is achieved only
through a rationally directed life. Aristotle's notion of a tripartite soul as summarized in Table 1 illustrates a
nested hierarchy of the functions and activities of the soul, The degrees and functions of the soul are nested,
such that the one which has a higher degree of soul has all of the lower degrees. Thus, on the nutritive degree,
all living things, i.e., plants, animals, and humans, require nourishment and have the ability to reproduce. On
the sensitive degree, only animals and humans have the ability to move and perceive. Finally, on the rational
degree, only humans are capable of theoretical and practical functions. Following this, humans possess the
nutritive, sensitive, and rational degrees of the soul. More importantly, only humans are capable of a life
guided by reason. Because this is so, happiness, too, is a uniquely human function for it can only be achieved
through a rationally directed life.
 Table 1. Aristotle’s Tripartite Soul
Aréte and Human Happiness
Eudaimonia is what defines the good life. To live a good life is to live a happy life. For Aristotle,
eudaimonia is only possible by living life of virtue. Aréte, a Greek term, is defined as "excellence of any kind"
and can also mean "moral virtue." A virtue is what makes one function well. Aristotle suggested two types of
virtue: intellectual virtue and moral virtue.

Intellectual virtue or virtue of thought is achieved through education, time, and experience. Key
intellectual virtues are wisdom, which guides ethical behavior, and understanding, which is gained from
scientific endeavors and contemplation. Wisdom and understanding are achieved through formal and non-
formal means. Intellectual virtues are acquired through self-taught knowledge and skills as much as those
knowledge and skills taught and learned in formal institutions.
Moral virtue or virtue of character is achieved through habitual practice. Some key moral virtues are
generosity, temperance, and courage. Aristotle explained that although the capacity for intellectual
virtue is innate, it is brought into completion only by practice. It is by repeatedly being unselfish that one
develops the virtue of generosity. It is by repeatedly resisting and foregoing every inviting opportunity that one
develops the virtue of temperance. It is by repeatedly exhibiting the proper action and emotional response in
the face of danger that one develops the virtue of courage. By and large, moral virtue is like a skill. A skill is
acquired only through repeated practice. Everyone is capable of learning how to play the guitar because
everyone has an innate capacity for intellectual virtue, but not everyone acquires it because only those who
devote time and practice develop the skill of playing the instrument.
If one learns that eating too much fatty foods is bad for the health, he or she has to make it a habit to
stay away from this type of food because health contributes to living well and doing well. If one believes that
too much use of social media is detrimental to human relationships and productivity, he or she must regulate
his or her use of social media and deliberately spend more time with friends, and family, and work than in
virtual platform. If one understands the enormous damage to the environment that plastic materials bring, he
or she must repeatedly forego the next plastic item he or she could do away with. Good relationship dynamics
and a healthy environment contribute to one's wellness, in how he or she lives and what he or she does.
Both intellectual virtue and moral virtue should be in accordance with reason to achieve eudaimonia.
Indifference with these virtues, for reasons that are only for one's convenience, pleasure, or satisfaction, leads
humans away from eudaimonia.
A virtue is ruined by any excess and deficiency in how one lives and acts. A balance between two
extremes is a requisite of virtue. This balance is a mean of excess not in the sense of geometric or arithmetic
average. Instead, it is a mean relative to the person, circumstances, and the right emotional response in every
experience (NE 2:2; 2:6).
Consider the virtue of courage. Courage was earlier defined as displaying the right action and
emotional response in the face of danger. The virtue of courage is ruined by an excess of the needed emotional
and proper action to address a particular situation. A person who does not properly assess the danger and is
totally without fear may develop the vice of foolhardiness or rashness. Also, courage is ruined by a deficiency
of the needed emotion and proper action. When one overthinks of a looming danger, that he or she becomes
too fearful and incapable of acting on the problem, he or she develops the vice of cowardice.

What then is the good life?

Putting everything in perspective, the good life in the sense of eudaimonia is the state way one of being happy,
healthy, and prosperous in the thinks, lives, and acts. The path to the good life consists of the virtues of thought
and character, which are relative mediators between the two extremes of excess and deficiency. In this way,
the good life is understood as happiness brought about by living a virtuous life.
One could draw parallels between moving toward the good life and moving toward further progress
and development in science and technology. In appraising the goodness of the next medical procedure, the new
social media trend, the latest mobile device, or the upcoming technology for food safety, one must be guided
by Aristotelian virtues. Science and technology can be ruined by under- or over-appreciation of the scope and
function it plays in the pursuit of the uniquely human experience of happiness. Refusing science and technology
altogether to improve human life is as problematic as allowing it to entirely dictate reason and action without
any regard for ethical and moral standards. By imposing on science and technology an ethical standard that is
not dictated by itself, as C. S. Lewis proposed, not only will scientific advancement and technological
development flourish, but also the human person.

Exercise 1. Reading Comprehension Task

Instructions: Compare and contrast each pair of terms related to Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics as discussed
in this lesson.
1. Instrumental Good - Ultimate Good
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
2. Pleasure – Happiness
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
3. Virtue – Vice
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
4. Intellectual Virtue - Moral Virtue
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
 ____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
5. Science and Technology - The Good Life
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2. Documentary Analysis

Instructions: Watch the documentary film, That Sugar Film (2014), directed by Damon Garnenu. After
watching the film, discuss your ideas on how the overproduction and overconsumption of sugar based products
potentially prevent humans from achieving eudaimonia. Is there indeed a need for industries to regulate the
production of sugar based products and for consumers to reduce their consumption if they are
to journey toward the good life together? Write your reflection on a letter size bond paper.

Exercise 3. Case Study

Instructions: Within your family (4 members) conduct a simple on the case of sugar consumption. You may
either hold brief interviews or use survey questionnaires to gather data for your case study. Your data gathering
may focus on but is not limited to the following:
1. Extent of overconsumption of sugar.
2. Awareness of hidden sugar content on food items
3. Food items that contain hidden sugars.
4. Agreement or disagreement on the need to regulate the production and consumption of sugar
5. Awareness on the impact of the overconsumption of sugar-based products on the pursuit of human
happiness
After gathering data, analyze and present your data following the guidelines below. Overall, your case study
report should not be more than 10 pages.

CASE STUDY REPORT FORMAT GUIDELINES

1. Cover Page - includes the title, names of student, and submission date
2. Introduction- discusses briefly the context and background of the case study (You might need to
present existing data on the consumption and production of sugar locally and internationally.)
3. Body - covers the following sub-items
3.1. Key Issues or Problem- explicitly presents the focus of the data gathering (e.g., low awareness
level, huge daily consumption rate, common sugary food items, the need to regulate production and
consumption of sugar, impact of overconsumption on the pursuit of happiness).
3.2.Assumptions- clarifies the respondents’ assumption about the current situation in relation to the
problem analyzed
3.3.Data Analysis presents excerpts of interviews, graphs statistical summaries of data
3.4.Proposed Alternative- makes explicit the respondents’ concrete recommendations about how to
face the dangers of the current state of sugar production and consumption
3.5.Impact of Proposal on the Pursuit of Happiness- explains the impact of the respondents’ proposed
alternative on the journey of humans toward living the good life (In what way/'s can you proposal
lead humans closer to eudaimonia?)
4. Conclusion - presents a concise summary of the case study and contains no more than five sentences
directly answering the problem explained in the body
5. References - lists all print and online materials that were used in writing the case study report (Follow the
guidelines of APA 6thEdition Reference and Citation Manual found in https://owl
english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/24/)
Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt.
Spacing: 1.5 spacing
Margins: 1 inch on all sides
Page Numbers: top right on every page
Assignment 3. Field Study
Instructions: inspect the packaging of a food item that you regularly consume. Cut the part of the packaging
that shows the nutritional label and paste it on the space below. What sugar, disguised in an unfamiliar term,
is found on the label? Research on the definition and effects of the hidden sugar you found on the label.

(Paste the label here)

___________________________________________________________________
Hidden Sugar Found on the Label
Description:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 4 When Technology and Humanity Cross

This section discusses quintessential documents that
protect human rights and ensure the well-being of the human
person in the face of scientific and technological developments.
Indeed, if humans are to journey toward living the good life, they
have to make informed choices in dealing with science and
technology. Thus, the lesson draws from S. Romi Mukherjee's
proposals for human rights-based approaches to science,
technology, and development. It reviews key principles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
UNESCO Recommendation on the Status of Scientific Researchers, and UNESCO Declaration on the Use of
Scientific Knowledge and how these international documents position human rights in the intersection of
technology and humanity.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to:
1. explain a human rights-based approach to science, technology, and development;
2. identify key documents and their principles that ensure the well-being of humans in the midst of
scientific progress and technological development; and
3. discuss the importance of upholding human rights in science, technology, and development.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Rate the extent of your agreement to each statements by marking (1) the box that corresponds to
your response in each row

5-Extremly Agree 4-Somewhat Agree 3- To a Limited Extent 2-Somewhat Disagree 1- Extremely Disagree

Statements 5 4 3 2 1
1. Human nights are fundamental rights.
2. Responding to urgent global challenges allows setting aside some human
rights.
3. It is not the duty of scientists and innovators to protect the well-being and
dignity of humans
4. Human rights should be at the core of any scientific and technological
endeavor.
5. A good life is a life where human rights are upheld
6. Human rights should be integrated in the journey toward the ultimate
good
7. It is not the primary function of science and technology to protect the
weak, poor, and vulnerable
8. There is no way for science and technology to fully function as a
safeguard of human rights
9. A human rights-based approach to science and technology development
is imperative
10. The protection of human rights and continued science technology and
advancement can work hand-in-hand

Human rights in the face of scientific and

technological advancement are critical factors in one's
journey toward eudaimonia of the good life. Exercising
the right to accept or reject, minimize or maximize, and
evaluate and decide on the scope and function of science
and technology indicates human flourishing in science
and technology. Protecting the well-being and upholding
the dignity of the human person must be at the core of continued scientific and technological progress and
development, Such is the focus of a human rights-based approach to science, technology, and development.
S. Romi Mukherjee, a senior lecturer in Political Theory and the History of Religions at the Paris
Institute of Political Studies, explained a human rights-based approach to science, technology, and
development as follows:
"[It:} seeks to place a concern for human rights at the heart of how the international
community engages with urgent global challenges. The UN Development Programme characterizes
this approach as one that 'leads to better and more sustainable outcomes by analyzing and addressing
the inequalities, discriminatory practices and unjust power relations which are often at the heart of
development problems. It puts the international human rights entitlements and claims of the people (the
'right-holders') and the corresponding obligations of the state (the 'duty-bearer') in the center of the
national development debate, and it clarifies the purpose of capacitydevelopment.'"

Mukherjee (2012) furthered that this approach identifies science as "a socially organized human
activity which is value-laden and shaped by organizational structures and procedures." Moreover, it requires
an answer to whether governments and other stakeholders can craft and implement science and technology
policies that "ensure safety, health and livelihoods; include people's needs and priorities in development and
environmental strategies; and ensure they participate in decision- making that affects their lives and resources”.
Multiple international statutes, declarations, and decrees have been produced to ensure well-being
and human dignity. Mukherjee listed some of the most important documents that center on a human rights-
based approach to science, development, and technology, and their key principles:
'.
Table 2 Useful documents for a human-rights based approach to science. technology, and development
Document Key Principles
Universal Declaration of Human This document affirms everyone's right to participate in and benefit from
Rights (Article 27) scientific advances, and be protected from scientific misuses The right
to the benefits of science comes under the domain of 'culture,' so it
usually examined from a cultural rights perspective.
UNESCO Recommendation on This document affirms that all advances in scientific and technological
the Status of Scientific knowledge should solely be geared towards the welfare of the global
Researchers – 1974 (Article 4) citizens, and calls upon member states to develop necessary protocol and
policies tomonitor and secure this objective Countries are asked to show
that science and technology are integrated into policies that aim to ensure
more humane and just society.
UNESCO Declaration on the This document states, "Today, more than ever, science and its
Use of Scientific Knowledge applications are indispensable for development. All levels of government
1999 (Art1icle 33) and private sector should provide enhanced support for building up an
adequate and evenly distributed scientific and technological capacity
through appropriate education and research programmes as an
indispensable foundation for economic, social, cultural and
environmentally sound development. This is particularly urgent for
developing countries. This Declaration encompasses issues such as
pollution-free production, efficient resource use, biodiversity protection,
and brain drains.

A human rights-based approach to science, technology, and development sets the parameters for the
appraisal of how science, technology, and development promote human well-being. Thus, the discussion of
human rights in the face of changing scientific and technological contexts must not serve as merely decorative
moral dimension of scientific and technological policies. As Mukherjee(2012) posited, this approach "can form
the very heart of sustainable futures.

Human rights should be integral to the journey toward the ultimate good. They should guide humans
not only to flourish as individual members of society, but also to assist each other in flourishing collectively
as a society. Human rights are rights to sustainability, as Mukherjee put it. They may function as the 'golden
mean,' particularly by protecting the weak, poor, and vulnerable from the deficiencies and excesses of science
and technology. By imposing upon technology the moral and ethical duty to protect science and uphold human
rishis, there can be a more effective and sustainable approach to bridging the gap between poor and rich
countries on both tangible (e.g; services and natural resources,) and intangible (e.g. well-being and human
dignity) aspects. Ultimately, all these will lead humans to flourish together through science and technology.

Exercise 1. Reading Comprehension Task

Instructions: Answer the following questions in your own words based on your understanding of Mukherjee's
human rights-based approach to science, technology, and development. Limit your responses to three or four
sentences only.
1. What is a human rights-based approach to science, technology and development?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
2. How do the documents and their key principles presented in Table 2 position human rights in the
intersection of technology and humanity?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
3. Why should human rights be at the core of scientific and technological advancement?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

4. What is the danger of using human rights as merely decorative moral dimension of scientific and
technological policies?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
5. Do you agree with Mukherjee's assertion that a human rights-based approach to science, technology,
and development can form the very heart of sustainable futures? Explain.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2. Document Analysis

Instructions: Aside from the three documents and their key principles presented in Table 2 in this lesson,
Mukherjee lists down six other instruments which are important for human rights-based approaches to science,
technology, and development:

1. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966)

2. Declaration on Social Progress and Development (1969)
3. Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interest of Peace for the Benefit
of Mankind (1975)
4. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005)
5. The Declaration of Dakar (2007)
6. The Cairo Declaration (2006)

Choose one among the six approaches and make an analysis. Be guided by the following questions. (Use letter
size bond paper).
1. What is the instrument all about?
2. Who are the parties/signatories to the instrument?
3. What article/s or section/s of the instrument articulate the centrality of human rights vis-i-vis science,
technology, and development?
4. How does the instrument safeguard human rights in the face of science and technology?
5. What challenges stand in the way of the instrument and its key principles in safeguarding human rights
amidst the changing vscientific and technological contexts?

Assignment 4. Reading Enrichment Task

Instructions: Choose and read one of the two reading materials and answer the enrichment questions that
follow:
1. Evans, D. (2007, March 9). The ethical dilemmas of robotics. BBC News. Retrieved from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/ technology/6432307.stm

Robotic age poses ethical dilemma

An ethical code to prevent humans abusing robots, and vice versa, is being drawn up by South Korea.
 The Robot Ethics Charter will cover standards for users and
manufacturers and will be released later in 2007.
It is being put together by a five member team of experts that
includes futurists and a science fiction writer.
The South Korean government has identified robotics as a key
economic driver and is pumping millions of dollars into research. "The
government plans to set ethical guidelines concerning the roles and
functions of robots as robots are expected to develop strong intelligence in
the near future," the ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy said.

Ethical questions
South Korea is one of the world's most hi-tech societies.
Citizens enjoy some of the highest speed broadband connections in the
world and have access to advanced mobile technology long before it hits western
markets.
The government is also well known for its commitment to future
technology.
A recent government report forecast that robots would routinely carry out surgery by 2018.
The Ministry of Information and Communication has also predicted that every South Korean
household will have a robot by between 2015 and 2020.
In part, this is a response to the country's aging society and also an acknowledgement that the pace
of development in robotics is accelerating.
The new charter is an attempt to set ground rules for this future.
"Imagine if some people treat androids as if the machines were their wives," Park Hye-Young of the
ministry's robot team told the AFP news agency.
"Others may get addicted to interacting with them just as many internet users get hooked to the
cyberworld."

Alien encounters
The new guidelines could reflect the three laws of robotics put forward by author Isaac Asimov in
his short story Runaround in 1942, she said.
Key considerations would include ensuring human control over robots, protecting data acquired by
robots and preventing illegal use.
Other bodies are also thinking about the robotic future. Last year a UK government study predicted
that in the next 50 years robots could demand the same rights as human beings.
The European Robotics Research Network is also drawing up a set of guidelines on the use of robots.
This ethical roadmap has been assembled by researchers who believe that robotics will soon come
under the same scrutiny as disciplines such as nuclear physics and Bioengineering.
A draft of the proposals said: "In the 21st Century humanity will coexist with the first alien
intelligence we have ever come into contact with - robots.
"It will be an event rich in ethical, social and economic problems."
Their proposals are expected to be issued in Rome in April.

a. What are the ethical dilemmas posed by robotics?

_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

b. Which among the instruments for a human rights-based approach to science, technology, and
development discussed in this section may be useful in contending with the ethical dilemmas of
robotics?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
c. How can the instrument inform lawyers and ethicists and engineers and scientists in answering the
moral and legal questions raised by the developments in robotics?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

2. Carr, N. (2008) Is Google making us stupid? What the internet is doing to our brains. The Atlantic.
Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.con/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-
stupid/306868/

"Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?” So the supercomputer HAL pleads
with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of
Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the
malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial “
brain. “Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. “I can feel it. I can feel it.”
I can feel it, too. Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something,
has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind
isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it
most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind
would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through
long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after
two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m
always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has
become a struggle.

I think I know what’s going on. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online,
searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. The Web has been a
godsend to me as a writer. Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries
can now be done in minutes. A few Google searches, some quick clicks on hyperlinks, and I’ve got the
telltale fact or pithy quote I was after. Even when I’m not working, I’m as likely as not to be foraging in
the Web’s info-thickets—reading and writing e-mails, scanning headlines and blog posts, watching videos
and listening to podcasts, or just tripping from link to link to link. (Unlike footnotes, to which they’re
sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)

For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information
that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind. The advantages of having immediate access to such
an incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely described and duly applauded.
“The perfect recall of silicon memory,” Wired’s Clive Thompson has written, “can be an enormous boon
to thinking.” But that boon comes at a price. As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the
1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also
shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for
concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes
it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along
the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.

I’m not the only one. When I mention my troubles with reading to friends and acquaintances—literary
types, most of them—many say they’re having similar experiences. The more they use the Web, the more
they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing. Some of the bloggers I follow have also begun
mentioning the phenomenon. Scott Karp, who writes a blog about online media, recently confessed that he
has stopped reading books altogether. “I was a lit major in college, and used to be [a] voracious book
reader,” he wrote. “What happened?” He speculates on the answer: “What if I do all my reading on the
web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the
way I THINK has changed?”

Bruce Friedman, who blogs regularly about the use of computers in medicine, also has described how
the Internet has altered his mental habits. “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a
longish article on the web or in print,” he wrote earlier this year. A pathologist who has long been on the
faculty of the University of Michigan Medical School, Friedman elaborated on his comment in a telephone
conversation with me. His thinking, he said, has taken on a “staccato” quality, reflecting the way he quickly
scans short passages of text from many sources online. “I can’t read War and Peace anymore,” he admitted.
“I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to
absorb. I skim it.”

Anecdotes alone don’t prove much. And we still await the long-term neurological and psychological
experiments that will provide a definitive picture of how Internet use affects cognition. But a recently
published study of online research habits, conducted by scholars from University College London, suggests
that we may well be in the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think. As part of the five-year
research program, the scholars examined computer logs documenting the behavior of visitors to two
popular research sites, one operated by the British Library and one by a U.K. educational consortium, that
provide access to journal articles, e-books, and other sources of written information. They found that people
using the sites exhibited “a form of skimming activity,” hopping from one source to another and rarely
returning to any source they’d already visited. They typically read no more than one or two pages of an
article or book before they would “bounce” out to another site. Sometimes they’d save a long article, but
there’s no evidence that they ever went back and actually read it. The authors of the study report:

It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms
of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts
going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.

Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of text-messaging on cell
phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our
medium of choice. But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—
perhaps even a new sense of the self. “We are not only what we read,” says Maryanne Wolf, a
developmental psychologist at Tufts University and the author of Proust and the Squid: The Story and
Science of the Reading Brain. “We are how we read.” Wolf worries that the style of reading promoted by
the Net, a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for
the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and
complex works of prose commonplace. When we read online, she says, we tend to become “mere decoders
of information.” Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read
deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.
 Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings. It’s not etched into our genes
the way speech is. We have to teach our minds how to translate the symbolic characters we see into the
language we understand. And the media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft
of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains. Experiments demonstrate
that readers of ideograms, such as the Chinese, develop a mental circuitry for reading that is very different
from the circuitry found in those of us whose written language employs an alphabet. The variations extend
across many regions of the brain, including those that govern such essential cognitive functions as memory
and the interpretation of visual and auditory stimuli. We can expect as well that the circuits woven by our
use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.

Sometime in 1882, Friedrich Nietzsche bought a typewriter—a Malling-Hansen Writing Ball, to be

precise. His vision was failing, and keeping his eyes focused on a page had become exhausting and painful,
often bringing on crushing headaches. He had been forced to curtail his writing, and he feared that he would
soon have to give it up. The typewriter rescued him, at least for a time. Once he had mastered touch-typing,
he was able to write with his eyes closed, using only the tips of his fingers. Words could once again flow
from his mind to the page.

But the machine had a subtler effect on his work. One of Nietzsche’s friends, a composer, noticed a
change in the style of his writing. His already terse prose had become even tighter, more telegraphic.
“Perhaps you will through this instrument even take to a new idiom,” the friend wrote in a letter, noting
that, in his own work, his “‘thoughts’ in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper.”

“You are right,” Nietzsche replied, “our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”
Under the sway of the machine, writes the German media scholar Friedrich A. Kittler , Nietzsche’s prose
“changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”

The human brain is almost infinitely malleable. People used to think that our mental meshwork, the
dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the
time we reached adulthood. But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case. James Olds, a
professor of neuroscience who directs the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study at George Mason
University, says that even the adult mind “is very plastic.” Nerve cells routinely break old connections and
form new ones. “The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the
way it functions.”

As we use what the sociologist Daniel Bell has called our “intellectual technologies”—the tools that
extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those
technologies. The mechanical clock, which came into common use in the 14th century, provides a
compelling example. In Technics and Civilization, the historian and cultural critic Lewis Mumford
described how the clock “disassociated time from human events and helped create the belief in an
independent world of mathematically measurable sequences.” The “abstract framework of divided time”
became “the point of reference for both action and thought.”

The clock’s methodical ticking helped bring into being the scientific mind and the scientific man.
But it also took something away. As the late MIT computer scientist Joseph Weizenbaum observed in his
1976 book, Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, the conception of the
world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments “remains an impoverished version
of the older one, for it rests on a rejection of those direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed
constituted, the old reality.” In deciding when to eat, to work, to sleep, to rise, we stopped listening to our
senses and started obeying the clock.
 The process of adapting to new intellectual technologies is reflected in the changing metaphors we
use to explain ourselves to ourselves. When the mechanical clock arrived, people began thinking of their
brains as operating “like clockwork.” Today, in the age of software, we have come to think of them as
operating “like computers.” But the changes, neuroscience tells us, go much deeper than metaphor. Thanks
to our brain’s plasticity, the adaptation occurs also at a biological level.

The Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching effects on cognition. In a paper published in
1936, the British mathematician Alan Turing proved that a digital computer, which at the time existed only
as a theoretical machine, could be programmed to perform the function of any other information-processing
device. And that’s what we’re seeing today. The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is
subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing
press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.

When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s
content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the
content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival
as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and
diffuse our concentration.

The Net’s influence doesn’t end at the edges of a computer screen, either. As people’s minds become
attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new
expectations. Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten
their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets.
When, in March of this year, TheNew York Times decided to devote the second and third pages of every
edition to article abstracts , its design director, Tom Bodkin, explained that the “shortcuts” would give
harried readers a quick “taste” of the day’s news, sparing them the “less efficient” method of actually
turning the pages and reading the articles. Old media have little choice but to play by the new-media rules.

Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad
influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today. Yet, for all that’s been written about the Net,
there’s been little consideration of how, exactly, it’s reprogramming us. The Net’s intellectual ethic remains
obscure.

About the same time that Nietzsche started using his typewriter, an earnest young man named
Frederick Winslow Taylor carried a stopwatch into the Midvale Steel plant in Philadelphia and began a
historic series of experiments aimed at improving the efficiency of the plant’s machinists. With the
approval of Midvale’s owners, he recruited a group of factory hands, set them to work on various
metalworking machines, and recorded and timed their every movement as well as the operations of the
machines. By breaking down every job into a sequence of small, discrete steps and then testing different
ways of performing each one, Taylor created a set of precise instructions—an “algorithm,” we might say
today—for how each worker should work. Midvale’s employees grumbled about the strict new regime,
claiming that it turned them into little more than automatons, but the factory’s productivity soared.

More than a hundred years after the invention of the steam engine, the Industrial Revolution had at
last found its philosophy and its philosopher. Taylor’s tight industrial choreography—his “system,” as he
liked to call it—was embraced by manufacturers throughout the country and, in time, around the world.
Seeking maximum speed, maximum efficiency, and maximum output, factory owners used time-and-
motion studies to organize their work and configure the jobs of their workers. The goal, as Taylor defined
it in his celebrated 1911 treatise, The Principles of Scientific Management, was to identify and adopt, for
every job, the “one best method” of work and thereby to effect “the gradual substitution of science for rule
of thumb throughout the mechanic arts.” Once his system was applied to all acts of manual labor, Taylor
assured his followers, it would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a
utopia of perfect efficiency. “In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must
be first.”

Taylor’s system is still very much with us; it remains the ethic of industrial manufacturing. And now,
thanks to the growing power that computer engineers and software coders wield over our intellectual lives,
Taylor’s ethic is beginning to govern the realm of the mind as well. The Internet is a machine designed for
the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of
programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every
mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”
Google’s headquarters, in Mountain View, California—the Googleplex—is the Internet’s high church, and
the religion practiced inside its walls is Taylorism. Google, says its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, is “a
company that’s founded around the science of measurement,” and it is striving to “systematize everything”
it does. Drawing on the terabytes of behavioral data it collects through its search engine and other sites, it
carries out thousands of experiments a day, according to the Harvard Business Review, and it uses the
results to refine the algorithms that increasingly control how people find information and extract meaning
from it. What Taylor did for the work of the hand, Google is doing for the work of the mind.

The company has declared that its mission is “to organize the world’s information and make it
universally accessible and useful.” It seeks to develop “the perfect search engine,” which it defines as
something that “understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.” In
Google’s view, information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be mined and processed
with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract
their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.

Where does it end? Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the gifted young men who founded Google while
pursuing doctoral degrees in computer science at Stanford, speak frequently of their desire to turn their
search engine into an artificial intelligence, a HAL-like machine that might be connected directly to our
brains. “The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,” Page said in a speech a
few years back. “For us, working on search is a way to work on artificial intelligence.” In a 2004 interview
with Newsweek, Brin said, “Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain,
or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.” Last year, Page told a convention
of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large scale.”

Such an ambition is a natural one, even an admirable one, for a pair of math whizzes with vast
quantities of cash at their disposal and a small army of computer scientists in their employ. A fundamentally
scientific enterprise, Google is motivated by a desire to use technology, in Eric Schmidt’s words, “to solve
problems that have never been solved before,” and artificial intelligence is the hardest problem out there.
Why wouldn’t Brin and Page want to be the ones to crack it?

Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even
replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling. It suggests a belief that intelligence is the output of a
mechanical process, a series of discrete steps that can be isolated, measured, and optimized. In Google’s
world, the world we enter when we go online, there’s little place for the fuzziness of contemplation.
Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer
that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.

The idea that our minds should operate as high-speed data-processing machines is not only built into
the workings of the Internet, it is the network’s reigning business model as well. The faster we surf across
the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies
gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements. Most of the proprietors of the
commercial Internet have a financial stake in collecting the crumbs of data we leave behind as we flit from
link to link—the more crumbs, the better. The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely
reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.
 Maybe I’m just a worrywart. Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological progress, there’s a
countertendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine. In Plato’s Phaedrus, Socrates bemoaned
the development of writing. He feared that, as people came to rely on the written word as a substitute for
the knowledge they used to carry inside their heads, they would, in the words of one of the dialogue’s
characters, “cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful.” And because they would be able to
“receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable
when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” They would be “filled with the conceit of wisdom instead
of real wisdom.” Socrates wasn’t wrong—the new technology did often have the effects he feared—but he
was shortsighted. He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread
information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge (if not wisdom).

The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th century, set off another round of teeth gnashing.
The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to
intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds. Others argued that cheaply
printed books and broadsheets would undermine religious authority, demean the work of scholars and
scribes, and spread sedition and debauchery. As New York University professor Clay Shirky notes, “Most
of the arguments made against the printing press were correct, even prescient.” But, again, the doomsayers
were unable to imagine the myriad blessings that the printed word would deliver.

So, yes, you should be skeptical of my skepticism. Perhaps those who dismiss critics of the Internet
as Luddites or nostalgists will be proved correct, and from our hyperactive, data-stoked minds will spring
a golden age of intellectual discovery and universal wisdom. Then again, the Net isn’t the alphabet, and
although it may replace the printing press, it produces something altogether different. The kind of deep
reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from
the author’s words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet
spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation,
for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own
ideas. Deep reading, as Maryanne Wolf argues, is indistinguishable from deep thinking.
If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will sacrifice something important not only
in our selves but in our culture. In a recent essay, the playwright Richard Foreman eloquently described
what’s at stake:

I come from a tradition of Western culture, in which the ideal (my ideal) was the complex, dense and
“cathedral-like” structure of the highly educated and articulate personality—a man or woman who carried
inside themselves a personally constructed and unique version of the entire heritage of the West. [But now]
I see within us all (myself included) the replacement of complex inner density with a new kind of self—
evolving under the pressure of information overload and the technology of the “instantly available.”
As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,” Foreman concluded, we risk
turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information
accessed by the mere touch of a button.”

I’m haunted by that scene in 2001. What makes it so poignant, and so weird, is the computer’s
emotional response to the disassembly of its mind: its despair as one circuit after another goes dark, its
childlike pleading with the astronaut—“I can feel it. I can feel it. I’m afraid”—and its final reversion to
what can only be called a state of innocence. HAL’s outpouring of feeling contrasts with the
emotionlessness that characterizes the human figures in the film, who go about their business with an
almost robotic efficiency. Their thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an
algorithm. In the world of 2001, people have become so machinelike that the most human character turns
out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to
mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.

a. Do you agree that Google is making us stupid? Why or Why not?

_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
b. What are the moral and ethical duty must be imposed upon the “duty-bearer” in this case Google, in
protecting the well-being and dignity of humans?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
c. What responsibilities do the “right holders” in this case Google users, carry in ensuring a human
rights-based approach to the use of the internet?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 5. Why the Future Does Not Need Us

This Lesson tackles the danger posed by science and technology unchecked by moral and ethical
standards. It primarily draws insights from William Nelson Joy's (2000) article, Why the future doesn't need
us?, in evaluating contemporary human experience in the midst of rapid developments in science and
technology. Such experience will be discussed to see whether it strengthens and enlightens the human person
functioning in society or not.
Intended Learning Outcomes
At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. identify William Nelson Joy's arguments as to why the future does not need us;
2. evaluate contemporary human experiences with science and technology; and
3. write an essay that emphasizes the importance of humankind in visualizing the future.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Look at the picture. Do you think that there will come a time in the future that will no longer
need humans? Write your brief opinion on the space provided.

Can you imagine a future without the human race? Do you think that robots and machines can replace
humans? Do you believe that there will come a time when human existence will be at the mercy of robots and
machines? Is it also possible that medical breakthroughs in the future may go terribly wrong that a strain of
drug-resistant viruses could wipe out the entire human race?
 For some, imagining a future without humans is nearly synonymous to the end of world. Many choose
not to speculate about a future where humans cease to exist while the world remains. However, a dystopian
society void of human presence is the subject of many works in literature and film. The possibility of such
society is also a constant topic of debates.
In April 2000, William Nelson Joy, an American computer scientist and chief scientist of Sun
Microsystems, wrote an article for Wired magazine entitled Why the future doesn't need us? In his article,
Joy warned against the rapid rise of new technologies. He explained that 21st-century technologies-genetics,
nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR)-are becoming very powerful that they can potentially bring about new
classes of accidents, threats, and abuses. He further warned that these dangers are even more pressing because
they do not require large facilities or even rare raw materials knowledge alone will make them potentially
harmful to humans.
Joy argued that robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology pose much greater threats than
technological developments that have come before. He particularly cited the ability of nanobots to self-
replicate, which could quickly get out of control. In the article, he cautioned humans against overdependence
on machines. He also stated that if machines are given the capacity to decide on their own, it will be impossible
to predict how they might behave in the future. In this case, the fate of the human race would be at the mercy
of machines.
Joy also voiced out his apprehension about the rapid increase of computer power. He was also
concerned that computers will eventually become more intelligent than humans, thus ushering societies into
dystopian visions, such as robot rebellions. To illuminate his concern, Joy drew from Theodore Kaczynski's
book, Unabomber Manifesto, where Kaczynski described that the unintended consequences of the design and
use of technology are clearly related to Murphy's Law: "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong." Kaczynski
argued further that overreliance on antibiotics led to the great paradox of emerging
antibiotic-resistant strains of dangerous bacteria. The introduction of Dichlorodiphenytrichloroethane (DDT)
to combat malarial mosquitoes, for instance, only gave rise to malarial parasites with multi-drug- resistant
genes.
Since the publication of the article, Joy's arguments against 21st- century technologies have received
both criticisms and expression of shared concern. Critics dismissed Joy's article for deliberately presenting
information in an imprecise manner that obscures the larger picture or state of things. For one, John Seely
Brown and Paul Duguid (2001), in their article A Response to Bill Joy and the Doom-and- Gloom
Technofuturists, criticized Joy's failure to consider social factors and only deliberately focused on one part of
the larger picture. Others go as far as accusing Joy of being a neo-Luddite, someone who rejects new
technologies and shows technophobic leanings.
As a material, Joy's article tackles the unpleasant and uncomfortable possibilities that a senseless
approach to scientific and technological advancements may bring. Whether Joy's propositions are a real
possibility or an absolute moonshot, it is unavoidable to think of a future that will no longer need the human
race. It makes thinking about the roles and obligations of every stakeholder a necessary component of scientific
and technological advancement. In this case, it preeminently necessary that the scientific community,
governments, and businesses engage in a discussion to determine the safeguards of humans against the
potential dangers of science and technology.

Exercise 1 Metacognitive Reading Report

Instructions: Read William Nelson Joy's Why the future doesn't need us? htttp://www.wired.com/2000104/
7oy.amv/itrm then complete the metacognitive reading report.

4. Difficult Concepts
d. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
e. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
f. _______________________________________________________________________________
 ________________________________________________________________________________
5. Learning Insights
d. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
e. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
f. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________

6. Discussion Questions
d. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
e. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
f. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2, Film Viewing

Instructions: watch Steven Spielberg's science fiction drama film, A.1: Artificial Intelligence (2001). After
watching the film, reflect on the story of David, a childlike android uniquely programmed with the ability to
love, and write a 200-300 word essay on the topic, "Why does the future need us?" Cite particular scenes and
insights from the movie to support your arguments. Make a title for your essay.
 Module 3
Specific Issues in Science, Technology, and Society
This module tackles specific issues in science and technology in the context of the information age,
biodiversity and health, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and gene therapy, nanotechnology, and
climate change and environmental awareness. By critiquing specific issues in science and technology in the
context of how these affect human lives, the module aims to empower students toward a renewed understanding
and appreciation of science and technology in the present context of society.

Lesson 1 Information Age

This section traces the development of the information age and discusses its impact on society. It
tackles the various ways the information age and social media have influenced society and human lives.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. trace the development of the information age from the introduction of Gutenberg's press up to the era
of social media;
2. determine the impacts of the information age to society; and
3. analyze the ways in which the information age and social media influence human lives.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Answer the questions that follow. Write the answer before the number.
1. Who invented the printing press?
2. When was the printing press invented?
3. What device first compiled actuarial tables, did engineering calculations, and served as
computers?
4. Who is the Father of the Computer Age?
5. What electromechanical machine enabled the British to read all daily German Naval
Enigma traffic?
6. What machine can solve any problem and perform any task from a written a program:
7. Who is the Filipino engineer who created the new silicon chip?
8. Who built a simple computer with around 8080 microprocessors that were hooked up
to a keyboard and television?
9. What did Steve Jobs call the computer described in no. 8?
10. Who is the creator of Microsoft?

German goldsmith, Johannes Gutenberg, invented the printing press around 1440. This invention was
a result of finding a way to improve the manual, tedious, and slow printing methods. A printing press is a
device that applies pressure to an inked surface lying on a print medium, such as cloth or paper, to transfer ink.
Gutenberg's hand mold printing press led to the creation of metal movable type. Later, the two inventions were
combined to make printing methods faster and they drastically reduced the costs of printing documents.
The beginnings of mass communication can be traced back to the invention of the printing press. The
development of a fast and easy way of disseminating information in print permanently reformed the structure
of society. Political and religious authorities who took pride in being learned were threatened by the sudden
rise of literacy among people. With the rise of the printing press, the printing revolution occurred which
illustrated the tremendous social change brought by the wide circulation of information. The printing press
made the mass production of books possible which made books accessible not only to the upper class.
As years progressed, calculations became involved in communication due to the rapid developments
in the trade sector. Back then, people who compiled actuarial tables and did engineering calculations served as
"computers." During World War II, the Allies (U.S., Canada, Britain, France, USSR, Australia, etc.), countries
that opposed the Axis powers (Germany, Japan, Italy, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria), were challenged with
a serious shortage of human computers for military calculations. When soldiers left for war, the shortage got
worse, so the United States addressed the problem by creating the Harvard Mark 1, a general purpose
electromechanical computer that was 50 feet long and capable of doing calculations in seconds that usually
took people hours. At the same time, Britain needed mathematicians to crack the German Navy's Enigma code.
The Enigma was an enciphering machine that the German armed forces used to securely send messages.
Alan Turing, an English mathematician, was hired in 1986 by the British top-secret Government
Code and Cipher School at Bletchley Park to break the Enigma code. His code-breaking methods became an
industrial process having 12,000 people working 24/7.
To counteract this, the Nazis made the Enigma more complicated having approximately 10114 possible
permutations of every encrypted message. Turing, working on the side of the Allies, invented Bombe, an
electromechanical machine that enabled the British to decipher encrypted messages of the German Enigma
machine. This contribution of Turing along with other cryptologists shortened the war by
two years (Munro, 2012).
In his paper On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem first
published in 1937, Turing presented a theoretical machine called the Turing machine that can solve problem
from simple instructions encoded on a paper tape. He also demonstrated the simulation of the Turing machine
to construct a single Universal Machine. This became the foundation science and the invention of a machine
later called computer that can solve any problem by performing any task from a written program (DeHaan,
2012).
In the 1970s, the generation who witnessed the dawn of the computer age was described as the
generation with "electronic brains. The people of this generation were the first to be introduced to personal
computers (PC). Back then, the Homebrew Computer Club, an early computer hobbyist group, gathered
regularly to trade parts of computer hardware and talked about how to make computers more accessible to
everyone. Many members of the club ended up being high-profile entrepreneurs, including the founders of
Apple Inc. In 1976 Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Inc., developed the computer that made him famous:
the Apple I. Wozniak designed the operating system, hardware, and circuit board of the computer all by himself.
Steve Jobs, Wozniak's friend, suggested to sell the Apple I as a fully assembled printed circuit board, this
jumpstarted their career as founders of Apple Inc.
From 1973 onward, social media platforms were introduced from variations of multi-user chat rooms;
instant-messaging applications (e.g., AOL, Yahoo messenger, MSN messenger, Windows messenger);
bulletin-board forum systems, game-based social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, Friendster, Myspace) and
business-oriented social networking websites (e.g., Xing); messaging, video
and voice calling services (e.g., Viber, Skype); blogging platform, image and video hosting websites (e.g.,
Flicker); discovery and dating oriented websites,( Tagged, Tinder); video sharing services (eg, YouTube); real-
time social media feed aggregator (e.g., FriendFeed); live-streaming (e.g. Justin.tv, Twich.tv); photo-video
sharing websites (Pinterest, Instagram, Snapchat, Keek, Vine), and question-and answer platforms
(eg. Quora). To date, these social media platforms enable information exchange at its most efficient level.
The information age, which progressed from the invention of the printing press to the development
of numerous social media platforms, has immensely influenced the lives of the people. The impact of these
innovations can be advantageous or disadvantageous depending on the use of these technologies.

Exercise 1. Documentary Film Viewing and Reflection

Instructions: Watch the 2018 documentary The Internet Revolution and Digital Future Technology on
YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9XZFZO7USA). Then, write a short essay of 300-500 words
on the topic, "What is the impact of the information revolution on my learning in school?" Provide a title for
your essay. Write you essay on letter size bond paper.

Exercise 2. Debate
Choose one among the following topics and write an argument about it.
1. People use social media to their advantage.
2. The information revolution has made the world a better place.
3. Facebook should be held accountable for the spread of 'fake news.'
4. Using social media platforms is a requisite to a person's meaningful engagement with the world.

Exercise 3. Essay
Instructions: Watch the full documentary Science, Technology, and Information on the Modern Battlefield on
YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUtfXuKQ7us). Then write a 300- to 500-word essay based on
the question "How does the Information Revolution affect local and global peace and security?
Cite specific examples to support your answer. Provide title for your essay.
Title:

Exercise 4 Interview
Based on the topic Information Revolution and Freedom of Speech, conduct informal interview (maybe via
messenger or chat) with people (2 persons ) of different backgrounds, Use the following guide questions in
conducting the informal interview.
1. Do you think that people should use social media in exercising their freedom of speech?
2. What should be the limits of freedom of speech in social media?
3. Should we hold people accountable for misuse or abuse of social media in exercising their freedom of
speech? Why or why not?

Assignment Name: 1. Metacognitive Reading Report

Instructions: Watch the TED Talk Why the World Needs WikiLeaks on YouTube
(https://youtube.com/watch?v=HNOnup5+7Do) then complete the metacognitive reading report format below
7. Difficult Concepts
g. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
h. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
i. _______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
8. Learning Insights
g. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
h. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
i. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
9. Discussion Questions
 g. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
h. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
i. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 2 Biodiversity and a Healthy Society

This section focuses on the interconnections among society, environment and health. It tackles the
value of biodiversity as a source of food, medicine, and other biological resources in relation to the
consumption of goods. The lesson specifically covers the relationship of biodiversity with (a) health and
medicine; (b) food; (c) energy; (d) water storage and flood control; and (e) air and water treatment.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. identify the importance of biodiversity as a source of different biological resources; and
2. discuss the adverse effects of resource depletion on society and the measures to mitigate them.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Visit your house backyard/garden or the nearest one outside your house. Observe the components
of biodiversity that you can find and identify some of their benefits. Use the table below.

Components of Biodiversity Benefits (e.g., food, health and medicine, energy)

Biodiversity is defined as the variety of life present in ecosystem. Biodiversity is important in how
society benefits from it. There are three different types of biodiversity: genetic, specific, and ecological
diversity. Genetic biodiversity refers to the variations among organisms of the same species. These variations
are usually passed down from parents to offspring. Species diversity refers to the variety of species within a
particular region. Species diversity is influenced by the environmental conditions in the region. Species are the
normal measure of biodiversity for these are the basic units of biological classification. Species are grouped
together in families based on shared characteristics. Lastly, ecological diversity refers to the network of
different species in an ecosystem and the interaction of these species. The variations of climatic and altitudinal
conditions along with varied ecological habitats are the reasons for the richness in biodiversity of a particular
region on earth.

Society benefits greatly from the richness of biodiversity since humans can source from nature
biological resources such as food, medicine, energy, and more. Biodiversity in natural ecosystems can also
regulate climate, food, pollination, water and air quality, water storage, decomposition of wastes, among
others. However, these numerous benefits of biodiversity are vulnerable to exploitation Humans need to be
responsible in optimizing the benefits of biodiversity through the proper utilization of science and technology

Health and Medicine

Since 2600 BC, people have been using plants to treat illnesses, hence the practice of herbal
medicine Cupressus semppervirens (Cypress) Commiphora myrrha (myrrh), for instance, have been used to
treat coughs, colds, and inflammation since the ancient times. Herbal medicines were also used in healing
rituals and in the treatment of injuries resulting from wars or accidents. Various plant-based drugs such as
gargles, pills, infusions, and ointments were used in Ancient Egypt as well as in Ancient China. Beginning 100
BC to 300 BC, the Greeks recorded the collection, storage, and use of medicinal herbs. During the Dark and
Middle Ages, monasteries in England, Ireland, France, and Germany preserved the Western knowledge of
treating illnesses using herbal medicine. As such, the use of herbal medicine in ancient civilizations was
dependent on the biodiversity present in their respective environments.
For example, Salvia apiana (California sage), was an herbal plant used by Indian tribes of Southern
California to aid in childbirth and was believed to protect the immune system from respiratory ailments.
Another example, Alhagi maurorum (camel thorn), secretes a sweet and gummy substance from its stems and
leaves called manna during hot days. Manna from the camel thorn contains melezitose, and sucrose, an invert
sugar. It is believed to have diuretic, diaphoretic, laxative, expectorant, gastroprotective, antiseptic, and anti-
diarrheal properties. Israelis were known to use the roots of the plant to treat diarrhea. The Konkani people
smoked the plant to treat asthma, and Romans used the plant to treat nasal polyps.
The plant Ligusticum scoticum (Scottish lovage) is believed to treat hysterical and uterine disorders. Its seeds
are used to relieve flatulence and to stimulate the senses.
Many medicinal products available in the market today are derived from natural substances from
plants. Salicylic acid, the active ingredient of the anti-inflammatory drug, aspirin, for example is derived from
the bark of a willow tree. Morphine, one of the most widely known painkillers which was first marketed and
used in the 1800s, is derived from Papaver somniferum commonly known as opium poppy. Digitoxin, used in
the management of congestive heart failure, is derived from Digitalis purpurea (foxglove) which has already
been used to treat heart conditions since the 1700s.
The transmission diseases due to the movement of organisms amplified the need to study the
environment in relation to human health. As time went by, information regarding different diseases and how
to treat them has been extensively documented to come up with more effective ways of treating them. After
penicillin underwent its first clinical trials in 1938 and the first indication of antibiotic resistance to penicillin
was reported in 1941, new antibiotics from microorganisms and bioactive natural products continued to be
discovered. In the 1970s, the production of bacterial strains supersensitive to B-lactams, tests for the inhibition
of B-lactamases, and specificity for sulfur-containing metabolites led to the discovery of novel antibiotic
structural classes(i.e., norcardicins, carbapenems and monobactams). Fungi and microorganisms found in
trees, grasses, algae, and herbaceous plants, and living in the intercellular spaces of plant stems, petioles, root,
and leaves have been widely used in the production of many important medicinal products today.
In 1994, an oral formulation of pilocarpine was used and approved for the treatment of dry mouth
(xerostomia). In 1998, another drug was approved to manage an autoimmune disease that damages the salivary
and lacrimal glands called Sjogren's syndrome. In 2004, the drug quinine was isolated from the bark of
Cinchona succirubra Pav. ex Klotzsch and was approved to treat malaria (Dias et al., 2012). At present, more
and more developments are being introduced in the pharmaceutical industry to produce new drugs for the
treatment of diseases.

Food
Food is a basic need for human survival. During the Stone Age, humans relied only on hunting and foraging
to get food. They depended on what the ecosystem could readily provide them. As Earth's population grew,
the demand for food increased. Crops that can be grownnwere discovered and cultivated and animals were
domesticated. Throughout history, agriculture andncultivation evolved from picking desirable crops and
breeding animals to maintaining stable supply of food to last for long periods of time as preparation for the
changing seasons and the possibility of natural disasters. Ways to cultivate desired species of crops and animals
suitable for consumption also evolved throughout time. The increasing demand for food as the world
population grew also resulted in the development of more lands for agriculture.
Farmers and fishermen rely on healthy ecosystems for their livelihood. The benefits of biodiversity
are necessary for the growth of many important crops. About 39 of the leading 57 global crops need birds and
insects as pollinators. Agrobiodiversity is the result of careful selection and innovative developments by
farmers, fishers, and herders throughout the years. Harvested crop varieties and non- harvested species in the
environment that support ecosystems for food production fall under agrobiodiversity.
Energy
Humans rely on energy provided by ecosystems to do the necessary activities in order to survive. In
the Stone Age, heat energy from fire was used mainly for survival against harsh cold environments, for
cooking, and for communication with nearby tribes in the form smoke. In 1000 BC, coal as a source of energy
of was used by people in northeastern China for heating and cooking. It eventually became popular in other
civilizations, such as the Romans and Northern Native Americans. In 400 BC, water energy or hydro power
was used by the Ancient Greeks and Romans and for irrigation. In 347 AD, the earliest known oil wells were
developed in China. They made use of extensive bamboo pipelines with depths of 800 feet for lighting and
heating. In 500 to 900 AD, the Persians started to use wind- powered grain mills and water pumps. By 1300,
windmills, taking the modern pinwheel shape, were developed in Western Europe, and in
1390, the Dutch built larger windmills for draining lakes and marshes in the Rhine River Delta.
Wind energy was also used to navigate through bodies of water. During the 1700s to 1800s, at the
time of the Industrial Revolution, biomass as a primary source of energy was replaced with coal and the British
discovered that by burning, coal is transformed into hot- burning coke, a fuel with a high carbon content and
few impurities. With this, the use of coal became widespread all over the world.
In 1820s, natural gas was used as a source of light although the lack of pipeline infrastructure made
its distribution challenging. In1830s, the electric generator was developed based on Michael Faraday's
discovery of electromagnetism. In 1850s, commercial oil was drilled which led to the distillation of kerosene
from petroleum. In 1860s, Augustine Mouchot developed the first solar powered system for industrial
machinery. In 1892, geothermal energy was first used. In 1942, the first nuclear fission reactor was designed
and built. In the 19th century and 20th century, the utilization of coal energy shaped the industrialization of
the United States, United Kingdom, and other European countries.
From the development of the use of energy sources throughout history, it can be seen that there was
no direct nor indirect exhaustion of biodiversity in the utilization of energy resources. However, as early as
1973, the effects on the environment and the risk of potential accidents when using energy alarmed many
environmental organizations. In 1979, a nuclear reactor accident at Three Mile Island near Middletown,
Pennsylvania happened. At the end of 1980, the biggest oil spill in the US waters, the Exxon Valdez oil spill
in Alaska occured. In the 2000s, a number of catastrophic events transpired e.g. the coal ash spill in Tennessee,
oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and the Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan (Battaglia, 2013).
A study conducted by Jones, Pejchar, and Kiesecker (2015) reported the repercussions of society's
demand for clean and abundant energy on biodiversity and human well-being. The energy created a positive
impact on unconventional demands for ways of producing energy but, in turn, have resulted in adverse effects
in biodiversity on terms of wildlife mortality, habitat loss, fragmentation, noise and light pollution, invasive
species, and changes in carbon stock and water resources.

Water Storage and Flood Control

The earliest recorded civilizations were situated near rivers or lakes which made their livelihoods
dependent on water. With increasing demand for potable and drinkable water along with the discovery of
groundwater 2,000 years ago, wells began to be used in the Middle East. Water from rivers and lakes was also
used for irrigation. To cope with the adverse effects of the changing tides, floodways were utilized to prevent
flooding in nearby communities that usually result in damaged crops. Aqueducts were invented and built by
the Romans and the Greeks, to maintain stable water supplies to communities that were far from bodies of
water. Then, in the late 19th century, with the increasing demand for potable water and irrigation of crops,
dams were built to maintain water supply in communities.

Biodiversity in forests plays an unquestionably crucial role in water resources. Forests provide natural
filtration and storage systems to provide freshwater. The roots and leaves of trees create conditions to that
promote the infiltration of rainwater into the soil to fill up the aquifer system with ground water, while
percolation occurs allowing the movement of surface water into rivers and lakes. Forests also play a major
role in the water cycle by affecting rates of transpiration and evaporation and water storage in watersheds.
There seems to be synchrony between indigenous forests and biodiversity so that, in various ways, they
contribute and regulate the quantity and quality of freshwater (Blumenfeld, Lu, Christophersen, & Coates,
2009).
Flooding is mostly known for its adverse effects but it also has some benefits. In the context of
agriculture, flooding can help farmers for it distributes nutrients that particular patches of soil lacked. This can
make the soil healthier and more fertile for the cultivation of crops. Further, floods can also add nutrients to
rivers and lakes thus improving the ecosystem. However, these benefits are not always achieved because most
of the time, flooding causes long term damages. It is also observed that recent floodings caused by typhoons
have been extremely damaging which may be one of the effects of climate change. In the Philippines, for
instance, flooding causes extreme damage in both urban and rural areas. In urban areas, floods damage homes,
roads, and other infrastructures because of the lack of proper drainage systems and waste management systems.
In rural areas, on the other hand, floods easily destroy crops and farmlands and may even be deadly especially
for low-lying areas near rivers and lakes.

Air and Water Treatment

Some of the gases considered as criteria pollutants like NOx and O3, in moderate amounts, contribute
to a healthy ecosystem and balanced biodiversity. However, due to excessive concentrations of these gases,
the capacity of the environment to clean itself and to be resilient is diminished.
Excessive nitrogen stimulates the growth of nitrogen-loving plant species but reduces the occurrence
of plant species adapted to low- nitrogen environment. Nitrogen reduces the resilience of forests to other
environmental stresses such as drought, frost, pests, and diseases. The concentration limit of nitrate in drinking
water is too high to protect natural ecosystems particularly the plant species. Widespread exceedance of
nitrogen critical concentrations will adversely affect the structure and function of ecosystems.
The effects of excessive nitrogen in the environment may not be felt at once. It may take decades
but this will definitely weaken the resilience of soil and plants. From 1990 to 2006, there was an extensive
vegetation damage around the world due to ozone. Ozone can be good or bad, depending on where it is found
-the earth's upper atmosphere or at ground level. Ozone found at ground level is known as the bad ozone. It
is created by chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC)
under the presence of sunlight. High levels of ground level ozone promote early flowering, affecting the
synchronization of pollinators and flowers. Ground level ozone also damages the leaves of salad crops,
consequently reducing their market value. In 2000, ozone pollution reduced wheat yield by 14 percent and the
tomato yield by 9 percent which created a domino effect in the overall production and consumption of goods.
Negative impacts on vegetation reduce the sink capacity for carbon dioxide and ozone, enhancing
their atmospheric concentrations and affecting the global water cycle. The effects of global warming are
harmful to the environment and its inhabitants. Soils store air pollutants temporarily that affect water
purification. Stored pollutants have adverse effects on soil functioning (e.g., microbes and invertebrates) and
create problems when the retention capacity of soil is reached or disturbed. Worldwide efforts are being made
to decrease nitrogen deposition to the biosphere to enhance plant species diversity and relative species richness
in grasslands.

Protocols on Biodiversity
There is a need to enhance the implementation of regulations Kyoto and worldwide protocols, such
as the Montreal Protocol and Protocol. The Cartagena Protocol among ten Pacific countries, namely, Fiji,
Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New the Guinea, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, and
Tonga, aims to ensure the safe transport, handling, and use of living modified organisms LMOs) resulting from
modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on biodiversity. It was adopted in January 29, 2000 and
was enforced in September 11, 2003. It is linked to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which helps to
protect Pacific communities and biodiversity from consequences of living modified organisms. It requires
having facilities in place through proper legislative frameworks, laboratory facilities, technology, and
technical capabilities to enable countries to detect, measure, and monitor LMOs that come into the country
(Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, 2016).
Locally, strict implementation of environmental laws among industries and communities alike must
be ensured to prevent further damage of biodiversity from air pollution and water pollution. There should also
be efforts to ensure that whatever treatment is employed, it should not promote mass pollution transfer from
one matrix of the environment to another.

Exercise 1. Film Viewing

Instructions: watch the movie Medicine Man (1992). Then, write a 300- 500-word reaction paper focused on
the questions below. Cite scenes and instances in the movie to support your answers.
1. How does biodiversity provide for people's medical needs?
2. How do researches that utilize biodiversity affect the community?
3. Why are the cultural traditions of the community important in consuming or using the goods sourced
from biodiversity?
4. How do business and development affect biodiversity?
5. What is your take on the value of biodiversity for health and medicine? What are the parameters to
distinguish the good and bad ways of utilizing biodiversity in this context?

Exercise 2. Documentary Video Production

Instructions: In groups with up to seven members each, prepare a 10-minute documentary video that highlights
the biodiversity in the ecosystem, its benefits to the community, and the efforts carried out by the community
to manage, protect, and preserve it.

Assignment 2. Metacognitive Reading Report

Instruction: Read T.C.H. Sunderland’s' article entitled Food security: Why is biodiversity important?
Retrieved from http://www.legato-project.net/NPDOCS/13-3-IFR-copy.pdf (The instructor may send a copy
thru email)
Then, accomplish the metacognitive reading report format below.
1. Difficult Concepts
a. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
b. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
c. _______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
b. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
c. Before Reading the article I thought that
 _________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Discussion Questions
a. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
b. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
c. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 3 Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and Gene Therapy

This lesson discusses the moral and ethical issues concerning GMOs and their impacts on society.
It also sheds light on the various forms and applications of gene therapy.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. identify the uses and effects of GMOs and gene therapy on society, particularly in the context of health
and economy; and
2. discuss the moral and bioethical questions concerning genetic engineering.

Diagnostics
Instructions: List down what you currently know about gene therapy and GMOs, and think about possible
problems that may arise as a result of these innovations.

Description/Function Problems
GMOs

Gene
Therapy

Genetically Modified Organisms

 Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) products of are artificial manipulations and alterations of
species’ genetic material in a laboratory using genetic engineering. Plant , animal bacteria, and virus genes
may be combined or may be crossbred to produce another kind of species that do not naturally occur in the
environment.
One of the most controversial issues in science and technology is the introduction of genetically
modified seeds in the agriculture sector that resulted in increased crop yield. New technologies are used to
artificially develop traits in plants, such as resistance to browning and pests. With the aim to improve harvest
and the agriculture sector as a whole, humans seem to be disinterested in preserving genetic diversity the
natural way.
Increased crop yield, pest resistance, and other benefits of GMOs are indeed advantageous, yet there
are also disadvantages that need to be studied comprehensively. In addition, the growing concern with how
GMOs may affect consumers' health and the environment needs to be addressed.
Genetic engineering, usually associated with recombinant DNA technology, is founded on the work
of many scientists over the years. In 1953, the discovery of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick opened
the gates for the countless possibilities of genetic engineering
In 1973, Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen were the first scientists to genetically modify an organism by
combining genes from two different E. coli.
In 1982, the US Supreme Court ruled to allow the patenting of GMOs, This ruling allowed the Exxon
Oil company to start using a microorganism that can consume oil.
In 1982, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first GMO -Humulin, a type of
insulin produced using genetically engineered E. coli bacteria to be available in the market.
In 1993, FDA approved bovine somatotropin (Bst) a metabolic approved protein hormone used to
increase milk production in dairy cows for commercial use.
In 1994, FDA approved the Flavr Savr tomato for sale on grocery stores. This kind of tomato has a
delayed-ripening effect that gives a longer shelf life compared with natural tomatoes.
In 1995, Bt Potatoes and Corn, and Roundup Ready Soybeans were approved safe by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In 1996, weeds resistant to glyphosate, the herbicide used for many GMO crops, were detected in
Australia. Research shows that the super weeds are 7 to 11 times more resistant to glyphosate than the standard
susceptible population. In the same year, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was born.
In 1997, the European Union ruled in favor of mandatory labeling on all GMO food products,
including animal feed.
In 1998, a genetically modified papaya in Hawaii was found to be resistant to the Ring spot virus and
produced the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin, an insecticide that is not harmful to humans.
Starting 1999, over 100 million acres worldwide are planted with genetically engineered seeds.
In 2000, golden rice was developed in the Philippines to address vitamin A deficiency, which is a
public health issue in Asian countries where rice is a staple food crop. Golden rice is a variety (Oryza sativa)
genetically modified to biosynthesize beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible parts of rice.
Additional three beta-carotene-synthesized genes differentiate the golden rice from its parental strain.
The introduction of golden rice was opposed by environmental and anti-globalization advocates because this
GMO was thought to compromise food production, nutrition, and financial security.
In 2003, a Bt-toxin-resistant caterpillar-cum-moth, Helicoverpa zea, was found feasting on GMO Bt
cotton crops in the southern United States.
2006, Yorkshire pigs were genetically modified to produce enzyme phytase in their saliva to digest
plant phosphorus, unlike that of normal pigs.
In 2011, a research in eastern Quebec found Bt toxins in the blood of pregnant women and showed
evidence that the toxin could be passed on to the babies.
In 2012, French farmer Paul Francois sued Monsanto for chemical poisoning that he claimed was
caused by the pesticide Lasso, which was part of the Roundup Ready line of products. He won the case.
As early as 2013, corn and poplars were genetically modified and used to produce biofuel, which is
regarded as an efficient substitute for petroleum products.
In 2014, the patent on the Roundup Ready line of genetically engineered seeds ended.
 Numerous GMOs are produced all over the world. Those mentioned here involve mutation. Science
agrees that the majority of mutations attempted on a species have the probability to fail miserably, and the
individual plant/animal would not survive (Mayr, 2007).
To date, the production and consumption of GMOs are being argued upon due to their safety
alongside the right of humans to modify naturally occurring organisms. New organisms created using genetic
engineering can pose ecological issues because the long-term effects of genetic engineering to the environment
are uncertain. GMOs may cause imbalance in the ecology of a region just as what exotic species do. An
accident in genetically engineering a virus or bacteria, for example, could result in super bacteria that display
antimicrobial resistance, which may cause a serious epidemic when released.

Gene Therapy
Gene therapy is the method of inserting genes or nucleic acid into cells as drug to treat genetic
diseases. In 1972, Theodore Friedman and Richard Roblin proposed that people with genetic disorders can
be treated by replacing defective DNA with good DNA.
In 1985, Dr. W. French Anderson and Dr. Michael Blasse worked together to show that cells of
patients with Adenosine deaminase (ADA) deficiency can be corrected in tissue culture. In 1900, the first
approved gene therapy clinical research took place at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under the team
of Dr. Anderson. It was conducted on a four-year-old girl who had ADA deficiency. In 1993, the first somatic
treatment that produced a permanent genetic change was performed.
The first commercial gene therapy product Gendicine was approved in China in 2003 for the
treatment of certain cancers. Due to some clinical successes since 2006, gene therapy gained greater attention
from researchers but was still considered as an experimental technique.
In 2016, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines
Agency (EMA) endorsed the gene therapy treatment called Strimvelis that was approved by the European
Commission in June 2018.
Some studies transplanted genes to speed up the destruction of cancer cells. Gene or cell therapies
have emerged as realistic prospects for the treatment of cancer, and involve the delivery of genetic information
to a tumor to facilitate the production of therapeutic proteins. This area of gene therapy still needs further
studies before an efficient and safe gene therapy procedure is adopted (Gene Revolution:
Issues and Impacts, n.d., Wirth et al., 2013).

Ethical Issues in Genetic Engineering

Various concerns on genetic engineering arise, making gene therapy and GMOs very controversial
innovations in technology. Others support that it is unethical for science humans to have a hand in genetically
altering and engineering organisms. There are instances when genetic engineering have caused sevens
repercussion to public health. Until today, cloning is still unacceptable to many for it violates the belief that
only a higher being should be responsible for the existence of organisms on earth. There are also ethical and
moral issues on stem cell therapy as it makes use of stem cells sourced from human embryos and thus destroys
them These concerns regarding genetic engineering and gene therapy are rootdin the question of whether or
not humans are playing gods in alteration of genes og organism.
Genetic engineering also poses problems in agriculture. Hence, there is a need to study the ecological
processes applied to agricultural production systems. Agroecology is a field of study that presents novel
management approaches on farming systems that may help address concerns regarding the effect of GMOs on
biodiversity and the health consumers. Further researches as well as clinical experiments to of the outline
functional mechanisms, predictive approaches, patient-related studies, and upcoming challenges should be
done to address existing problems in the development of and to acquire future perspectives in
gene therapy.

Exercise 1. Conceptualize a GMO

:
Instructions: On the box provided, draw a possible GMO. In conceptualizing a GMO, think of the features or
characteristics that you imagine it possesses and its potential impacts on society. Answer the questions that
follow.
Questions:
1. What is your GMO, its modified characteristics and features?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
2. In what ways do you think this GMO can positively impact society?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
3. What ethical issues or concerns may arise as a result of this GMO?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2. GMOs in Food

Instructions: search the internet for edible products that make use of GMOs as GMOs as ingredients. Choose
a particular GMO and research on it. Paste a photo of your chosen GMO and answer the question: How does
the use of a GMO ingredient in the product reduce the drawbacks of the same product that use non-GMO
ingredient?

Exercise 3 Bioethical Dilemma using GMOs

Instructions: Read the article SC reverses ruling on Bt 'talong' tests below.
Then answer the questions that follow.
SC reverses ruling on Bt talong' tests
By Estrella Torres and Ronnel W. Domingo
The Supreme Court on Tuesday reversed its decision rendered in December last year that stopped the
field testing of the controversial genetically modified eggplants and issuance of new permits on genetically
modified organisms (GMOs).
The high court, in an en banc ruling, granted the petitions for nine motions for reconsideration filed
by Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) "talong" (eggplant) proponents that earlier asked the high court to set aside its
ruling on the ground of mootness [situation in which there is no longer any actual controversy].
The petitions were filed by International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications
Inc., Environmental Management Bureau, Crop Life Philippines, University of the Philippines Los Baños
Foundation, and University of the Philippines.
The Supreme Court spokesperson, Theodore Te, explained in media briefer that "these cases, which
stemmed from respondents' petition for writ of kalikasan, were mooted by the expiration of the Biosafety
Permits issued by the Bureau of Plant Industry and the termination of Bt talong field trials subject of the
permits.
A writ of kalikasan is a legal remedy under Philippine law which provides for the protection of one's
right to "a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature, as provided for in
the Constitution. It may be sought to deal with environmental damage of such magnitude that it threatens life,
health, or property of inhabitant in two or more cities or provinces.
The high court agreed that the case should have been dismissed "for mootness" in view of the
completion and termination of the Bt talong field trials and expiration of the biosafety permits.
Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe penned the new decision which replaced the one written
by now-retired Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama Jr.
In the decision, the high court said Bt talong proponents neither went beyond the field testing phase
nor distributed the product commercially.
The lack of commercial propagation meant there was no guaranteed aftereffect that needed to be
adjudicated.
"Any future threat to the right of herein respondents or the public in general to a healthful and
balanced ecology is therefore more imagined than real," said a portion of the new high court ruling.
The court decision added that it should not have ruled that the Department of Agriculture's
Administrative Order No. 08-2002 was invalid.
Te explained that the question of the order's constitutionality should not have been acted upon
because "this matter was only collaterally raised" by Greenpeace in its bid to halt the Bt talong trials.
Farmers and processors of corn in the country "welcome[d] with great relief" the new Supreme Court
decision.
Philippine Maize Federation Inc. (PhilMaize) said the December decision had threatened corn
farmers' welfare and disrupted the domestic supply chain.
"Kudos to [the high court] for upholding the tangible benefits that biotechnology brings to the Filipino
people and our country's economy," said PhilMaize president Roger Navarro.
Following the December ruling, along with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Science
and Technology, Department of Health, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Department
of the Interior and Local and department circular to replace the DAO Government issued joint No. 8 issued in
2002.
In the Philippines, corn is the only GM crop that is so far allowed for commercial production. Filipino
farmers varieties-one that is resistant to the grow two GM corn Asian corn borer and another pest that is tolerant
of herbicides.
The bulk of the country's corn output is intended for animal feed production. About 70 percent of
locally produced corns for feeds are genetically modified, according to the agriculture department.
Citing data from the Philippine Statistics Authority, PhilMaize said around 70 percent of the country's
corn output-pegged at 7.5 million tons in 2015-was genetically modified. Source: Torres, E. & Domingo, R. (2016 Jul 28). SC reverses ruling on
BT 'talong' tests. Inguirer.net. Retrieved from https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/8002621sc-reverses-ruling-on-bt-talong-tests

Questions:
1. What are the relevant facts of this case?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. What are some ethical questions or concerns raised in this case?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3. Who are the stakeholders in this situation? Who are affected by the decisions made?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
4. What values influence the decision of each group of stakeholders?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
5. What are some possible actions and their consequences?
 _________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
6. What do you consider to be the best action and why?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 4. Bioethical Dilemma of Gene Therapy

Instructions: Read the article “Bubble kid" track success puts gene therapy back on track and answer the
questions that follow.
Questions:
1. What are the relevant facts of this case?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2. What are some ethical questions or concerns raised in this case?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Who are the stakeholders in this situation? Who are affected by the decisions made?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
4. What values influence the decision of each group of stakeholders?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
5. What are some possible actions and their consequences?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
6. What do you consider to be the best action and why?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

Metacognitive Reading Report

Course/Section:
Instructions: Read Robert Steinbrook', The Gelsinger Case on https:// www.uab.edu/ccts/images/steinbrook
Gelsinger_-_Oxford_Textbook-08-3.pdf).
Then, accomplish the metacognitive reading report format below.
1. Difficult Concepts
a. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
b. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
c. _______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
b. Before Reading the article I thought that
 _________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
c. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Discussion Questions
a. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
b. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
c. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 4 Nanotechnology
This section discusses nanotechnology and how the manipulation of matter on a nanoscale impacts the
society. It focuses on both the advantages and disadvantages of nanotechnology,

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. discuss the antecedents of nanotechnology and its importance to society;
2. enumerate the positive and negative impacts of nanotechnology on the environment and society; and
3. identify the moral and ethical questions and concerns surrounding nanotechnology.

Diagnostics
Instructions: What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of the ability to manipulate the building
blocks of the world (i.e., individual atoms and molecules) at dimensions and tolerances of less than one-
billionth of a meter? List down your ideas.

Manipulation of Atoms and Molecules

Advantages Disadvantages
 Nanotechnology is the branch of technology that deals with the manipulation and study of matter at the
nanoscale. It covers all types of research and technologies that deal with the special properties of matter on an
atomic molecular and supramolecular scale.
Scientists in the field of chemistry, biology, physics, materials science, and engineering are all involved
in studying matter on the nanoscale. Nanotechnology is “convergent” because it brings together various fields
of science through its innovations, e.g., DNA silicon chips, converging between semiconductor science
(inorganic chemistry) and biology, with applications in the medical industry. It also involves design,
characterization, production, and application of structures, devices, and systems by controlling shapes and sizes
at the nanometer scale. This technology is “enabling” in the sense that it provides the platform and the tools to
produce innovations.
To decipher how nanotechnology works, three dimensions must be considered. The first dimension
involves tangible objects which include materials, devices, and systems. The second dimension deals with the
passive and static objects i.e., nanoparticles that have properties different bulk objects, even if they have the
same composition; the active devices, i.e., those that can store information, induce energy, or change their
state, and the nanofacture, which refers to atomically precise manufacturing (APM) i.e., collection of
instruments and procedures. The third dimension is direct nanotechnology which refers to materials structured
at nanoscale components. This also extends to indirect nanotechnology, which starts with ano articles but can
be used in huge applications i.e,, hugely powerful information processors with individual nanoscale
components (Ramsden, 2009).

Applications of Nanotechnology
With scientists and engineers continuously finding ways to make materials at the nanoscale, more and
more uses of nanotechnology arise.
In medicine, nanotechnology has numerous applications in the development of more effective drugs.
Assisted by the view of molecules afforded by X-ray lasers, biological mechanisms can be simulated to destroy
a cancer cell while it is treated by drug-bearing nanoparticles. Nanobots, or molecular- scale workers can
employ molecular processes within cells, which can deliver drugs to specific molecular sites or even carry out
surgery (Biercuk, 2011). It is now possible to diagnose prevalent contagious diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria,
tuberculosis, among others, with screening devices using nanotechnology (Maclurcan, 2005).
Water purification systems containing nanomaterials and utilizing new membrane technologies
containing variable pore-sized filters the forward-osmosis membrane technology of Hydration Technologies}
are now available (Jadhawar, 2004). Nanoparticles are also used to prepare heat-resistant and self-cleaning
surfaces, such as floors and bench tops. Nanoparticles of silicon dioxide or titanium dioxide can also make a
surface repel water, thus preventing stains. Detergent molecules self-assemble into a sphere to form a micelle
that allows the detergent to trap oils and fats within the cavity of the sphere that aids in washing surfaces.
Zeolites are silicon oxides and aluminum oxides that have specific nanoporous cage-like structures that are
used as molecular sieves.
In agriculture novel technique of nanotechnology applications are applied to breed crops with higher
levels of micronutrients to detect pests and to control food processing (Heckman, 2005). Ultra-small probes on
earth surfaces for agricultural applications and control of soil, air, and water contamination are also developed
using nanotechnology (Zhang et al., 2011).
A simple, cheap, and effective way of removing arsenic in soil and water is through the use of TiO2,
nanoparticles. (Pena et al., 2005), A nanotechnology-inspired detector from Washington, which can sense the
smallest amount of radiation, located a nuclear leak faster and more accurately at the Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Plant (Zhang et al., 2011). Chlorinated compounds (i.e., chlorinated solvents and pesticides,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and brominated compounds) are major environmental contaminants that
can be reduced using nanoscale metal particles, such as FeO and Fe-Ni in conjunction with iron filings [Fe(0)]
(Dayrit et al., 2008). Silver (Ag) has long been known to exhibit strong antimicrobial properties. Its activity
has been enhanced with the discovery that the bactericidal properties of Ag nanoparticles (1- 100 nm) are
dependent on both their size and shape.
Bionanotechnology can support cleaner production methods and provide alternative and renewable
energy sources to enhance the sustainability of factories (Colvin, 2003). Nanotechnology helps in energy
consumption like in the use of graphene into a coating material resulting in the need for only one layer, which
does not require a multifunctional film coating. Nanoscale chemical reagents or catalysts are smaller yet they
increase the rate of chemical reactions, thus lessening the input of raw materials (Zhang et al., 2011).
In the Philippines, nanotechnology: can be applied in making sources of renewable energy accessible
many, developing medicine that would address serious diseases, improving the state of agriculture, and more.
There are also existing and ongoing research studies funded by the Department of Science and Technology
(DOST) on the possible application of technology, as well as on Nano-Metrology and Education and Public
Awareness.

Challenges of Nanotechnology
The advantages brought by innovations in nanotechnology come with a price. With rapid developments
in nanotechnology, it’s adverse effects become more visible.
The environmental effect of mineral-based nanoparticles found in cosmetics, paints, clothing, and other
products are questioned as they go through sewerage treatment plants untreated due to their undetectable size.
They can be carried down by fine silts or microplastics with both inorganic and organic pollutants. Thus, these
may affect water source Biercuk, 2011). For instance, in the 1980s, a semiconductor plant contaminated the
ground water in Silicon Valley, California (Zhang etal. 2011). 4 a
Carbon nanotubes used in the manufacture of memory Storage, electronics, batteries, etc. were found
to have unknown impacts to the human body by inhalation into lungs comparable to asbestos fiber 11. A
pulmonary toxicological evaluation of carbon nanotubes indicated that it is more toxic than carbon black and
quartz.
Due to its size, a nanoparticle is not easy to analyze. Lack of information and methods of characterizing
nano materials makes it a challenge to detect its concentration in air or in any matrix of the environment.
Predicting the toxicity of a nanomaterial relies heavily on information about its chemical structure since minor
changes in its chemical function group could drastically change its properties. Point- to-point risk assessment
at all stages of nanotechnology should then be conducted to ensure the safety to human health and environment.
Risk assessment should include the exposure risk and its probability of exposure, toxicological analysis,
transport risk, persistence risk, transformation risk, and ability to recycle (Zhang et al., 2011). This is which is
quite expensive due to the difficulty of detecting nanoparticles.

Ethical Dilemmas of Nanotechnology

With the identified potential hazards that nanoparticles can bring to human health and the environment,
should people disregard the benefits that nanotechnology provide them?
Issues raised regarding nanotechnology should be further studied, and nanotechnology methods should
be modified. For example, altering the composition of known to be one of the most advanced materials for
structural improvement, replacing silicon in electronic devices, and thermal transferring nanomaterials can be
done to diminish the environmental hazards of nanotechnology. Some studies also found microorganisms that
can decompose graphene to make it less toxic for the environment (Zhang et al., 2011)
It is imperative, therefore that experts and governments support themselves with enough knowledge on how
nanomaterials work for the benefit of society.

Exercise 1. Flash Card Making

Instructions: Research on a nano product available in the market today. Draw or paste a picture of the product
on a paper. At the back, write a 50-words description about the product, particularly explaining how it was
produced using nanotechnology.

Exercise 2. Our Share to a Nano Safe World

Instructions: In a group of 3 member. Review the potential hazards of nanotechnology that you learned in this
section. Then, propose a policy that addresses the potential hazards you identified. Use the template below for
your policy proposal.
1. Name of the Policy Proposal:
2. Proponents
i. Names:
ii. Email:
 iii. Telephone:
iv. Organization:
3. Date:
4. Problem statement (100-200 words):
5. Policy statement (200-300 words):
6. Additional Information
i. Timetable for implementation::

Metacognitive Reading Report

Instructions: Read Colvin’s (2003) The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials.
(citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc.download?doi=10.1.1423.7263&rep=rep1&type=pdf).
Then, accomplish the metacognitive reading report format below.
1. Difficult Concepts
a. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
b. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
c. _______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
b. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
c. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Discussion Questions
a. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
b. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
 c. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Lesson 5 Climate Change and Environmental Awareness

This section reviews key concepts on climate change and its impacts on society, and weighs in on the
local, regional, and global efforts to address it. It primarily aims to inculcate environmental awareness among
students.
Intended Learning Outcomes
At the end of this section, the students should be able to:
1. explain climate change and its adverse effects on the environment and society;
2. promote the significance of disaster preparedness in the face of natural disasters, and
3. discuss the value of conserving and preserving the environment to address the impacts of climate
change on society.

Diagnostics
Instructions: Examine the picture below. It was taken during the aftermath of Ondoy, the devastating tropical
storm that hit the Philippines in 2009. Discuss how climate change is connected to environmental destruction.
You may share your memories of typhoon Ondoy in order to enrich your discussion. Alternatively, you may
share your own experiences or observations about the impacts of climate change on the environment.

Climate Change
Climate change is the range of global phenomena caused by burning fossil fuels that add heat-trapping
gases to the Earth’s atmosphere. Global warming, used interchangeably with climate changes specifically refer
to Earth’s upward trend of temperature since the 20th century. It is generally defined as the general warming
effect caused by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The greenhouse gases absorb infrared radiation that
enters the atmosphere and radiate it to the Earth's surface as heat, thereby warming the Earth. Some common
greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming include naturally occurring gases such as carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxides (NOX) and man-made gases such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
Global warming keeps the planet warm and prevents warm air from leaving the planet. The global
warming potential (GWP) of natural greenhouse gases are small as compared with that of other anthropogenic
gases from the burning of fossil fuels, power plants, transportation vehicles, and other industrial processes.
Man-made gases and the increase in concentration of natural greenhouse gases cause adverse global warming.
Deforestation is also pointed at as a culprit to this adverse phenomenon. When forest land is destroyed,
CO2, is released into the, air, thus increasing the levels of long-wave radiation and trapped heat. Deforestation
also affects biodiversity because damage in the forest results in the destruction of wildlife habitats.
Several effects of climate change are already felt and observed. One example is the melting of ice caps
in the polar regions of the Earth that causes dilution of salt in the ocean and disruption of natural ocean currents.
Ocean currents control temperatures by bringing warmer currents into cooler areas and cooler currents into
warmer areas. Disruption of this activity can result in extreme changes in temperature that may affect global
or regional climate patterns. The melting ice caps also affect albedo, the ratio of the light reflected by any part
of the Earth’s atmosphere. Snow, with the highest albedo level, reflects sunlight back into space making the
Earth cooler. When snow melts, the Earth’s temperature rises resulting in climate change.
Changing wildlife adaptations and cycles is another effect of global warming. For instance, spruce bark
beetles in Alaska only appear on warmer months, but since there is a rise in global temperatures, they started
to appear all year-round, chewing on spruce trees and thus leaving the forest damaged. Polar bears are also
decreasing in number because the melting of the polar ice caps has caused them tocstarve and lose habitats.
Melting of ice caps can also cause sea levels to rise which may greatly affect low-lying coastal areas where
large populations dwell.
Diseases have also spread due to climate change. Migration distances for many migratory species
greatly increased which can possibly displace disease-carrying insects, crucial pollinators, and crop pests into
new areas. Greater distances also mean greater lengths to go order for animals to survive,
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
A thin layer of ozone (O3) is maintained at the stratosphere as protection from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet
rays. Only a thin layer is needed because when there is higher O3 concentration, meteorological parameters,
i.e., temperature and wind, brings down O3 in the troposphere and causes respiratory problems in humans. In
this case, O3 becomes a criteria pollutant, Ozone depletion occurring in the stratosphere therefore is a normal
photolytic process as well as O3 formation. The following reactions occur to maintain a thin layer
of O3.
O2 + UV (<242nm)------O + O (Equation 1)
O +O2 + M ---O3 + M (Equation 2)
O3 + UV or visible ----O+ O2 (Equation 3)

Due to the presence of substance X, which are free radical catalysts such as chlorine radical and bromine
radical (Br) coming from substances made of chloroforms or bromine-based substances used as aerosols,
refrigerants, fire retardants, and the like, and nitric oxide radical and hydroxyl radical which are naturally
occurring, the ozone formation and destruction is now represented as follows:
X + O3------XO + O2, (Equation 4)
XO + O2------X + O2 (Equation 5)
O3 + O ----- O2 + O2 (Equation 6)
As an intermediate product, say X is Cl, CIONO2, will be produced. This substance is inert and is
deposited on both the northern and polar regions due to winds as the Earth rotates. The problem occurs when
the CIONO2, reservoirs are exposed to direct sunlight when a part of the polar region experiences six straight
months of daytime, 24/7. The following reactions produce the obnoxious Cl radical which is very reactive to
the point of destroying 100, 000 molecules of O3 in thestratosphere:
HOCl + hv-------Cl + OH (Equation 7)
Cl+ O3-----ClO +O (Equation 8)
OH+ O3---- H2O + O2 (Equation 9)
2O ------- 3O2 (Equation 10)
ClO + HO2 -------HOCl + O2 (Equation 11)
HOCI+ hv -----Cl+ OH (Equation 12)
The worst case will occur if the available X is Br, which is 100 times more reactive than Cl (Rowland,
2006).
Although a direct relationship exists between global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion, the correlation
on the greenhouse gases as they contribute to creating the cooling conditions in the atmosphere may lead to
ozone depletion.

Acid Deposition
When SO2x react with NO2x particulate matters (dry) or with water vapor (wet), acid deposition occurs
which causes surface water acidification and affects soil chemistry. At pH levels lower than 5, acid deposition
may affect the fertilization of fish eggs and can kill adult fishes. As lake and rivers become highly acidic,
biodiversity is reduced. Many soil organisms cannot survive if the pH level of soil is below 6. Death of
microorganisms because of acid deposition can inhibit decomposition and recycling because the enzymes of
these microbes are denatured by the acid or are changed in shape so they no longer function. Deposition of
sulfur and nitrogen oxides affects the ability of leaves to retain water under stress. The low pH in the soil, i.e.,
Pb2+, Cu2+, and Al3+, and thus, contaminates growing plants which may then bioaccumulate the heavy metal
concentration as it is passed from a higher trophic level to another. As these impacts affect aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems, it is also imperative to examine the connection between acid deposition and climate
change (Mihelcis, 2014).

Thermal Inversion
The major component of photochemical smog, peroxylacetyl nitrate (PAN), is a combination of
different criteria pollutants. PAN,is a transporter of NOx into rural regions and causes ozone formation in the
global troposphere, which can decrease visibility especially in elevated places. The pollutants that come from
sources (i.e., industrial chimney or stack) mix with air. The mixed air normally rises to the atmosphere. In a
normal cycle of thermal inversion, an unstable air mass and air constantly flow between warm and cool areas.
This allows fumigation of the mixed air on a higher elevation. Due to increased concentrations of pollutants
during an inversion episode, is also affected by weather conditions, or it may also occur in some coastal areas
beacause of the upwelling of cold water that lowers surface air temperature. Topography or man-made barriers
like high-rise buildings can also create a temperature inversion. The cold air may be blocked by these barriers
and then pushed under the warmer air rising from the source, thus creating the inversion. Freezing rain or ice
storms develop in some areas with a temperature inversion in a cold area because snow melts as it moves
through the warm inversion layer. The rain continues to fall and passes through the cold layer of air near the
ground. As it moves through this final cold air mass, it becomes “super-cooled drops, cooled below freezing
point without becoming solid. Intense thunderstorms and tornadoes are also associated with inversions because
of the intense energy released after an inversion blocks the normal convection patterns of a region,
(ThoughtCo.). Thermal inversion profiles lead sea surface temperature to decrease on the seasonal time scale
via heat exchange at the bottom of the mixed layer, which balances climatological atmospheric cooling in fall
and winter (Nagura et al., 2015).
El Niño is a normal climate pattern that describes the unusual warming of surface waters in the eastern
tropical Pacific Ocean also known as the “warm phase.” The opposite of it is La Niña, the “cool phase” which
is a pattern that describes the unusual cooling of the surface waters of the region. These phenomena are
supposed to occur perennial and globally, on one end of the equator and on the other. However, abnormalities
in the occurrences of these phenomena cause widespread and severe changes in the climate. Rainfall increases
drastically in Ecuador and Northern Peru, contributing to coastal flooding and erosion due to the convection
above warm surface waters. Increased rains bring floods that may destroy properties. On the other side of the
world, El Niño brings droughts that threaten the supply of water and destruction of crops affecting agriculture.
Stronger El Niño and La Niña events also disrupt global atmospheric circulation bringing colder winters,
unusually heavy rains and flooding in desert areas, and other weather abnormalities (News/Floods, 2016).
Aside from the physical damages caused by disasters, they also come with mental and emotional
damage. Victims of disasters may suffer from trauma, depression, or anxiety because of experiencing loss
caused by disasters. This is why climate change should not be perceived as an isolated issue—it affects many
aspects of human life.

Environmental Awareness

One of the main culprits of the climate change is increasing CO 2 presence in the atmosphere, coming from
industriasl and mobile sources. Shifting from fossil fuels as ssources of energy to renewable energy resources
(e.g., solar, wind, or hydropower) is one way to decrease the generation of CO2. Spaces that need air
conditioning or heating should be sealed to ensure adequate insulation and energy efficiency. When buying
appliances, such as refrigerators, washing machines and the like, it is recommended to buy those that are tagged
as energy efficient. Water consumption should also be lessened since pumping and heating water also uses up
energy. Light Emitting Diode (LED) bulbs are ideal to use because they lessen up to 80% of energy
consumption compared with incandescent bulbs. Using fuel-efficient vehicles with higher fuel economy
performance is another way to lessen fossil fuel consumption (Denchak, 9017). There are many ways to
minimize the effects of climate change. Environmental efforts to address climate change should be done
individually collectively. Since the environment is contiguous, the responsibility to care for it should also be
shared not only locally but also regionally and globally. Countries should come together to adopt protocols and
agreements so to help each other solve climate change.
The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that extends the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in which the Philippines is one of the signatories. This Protocol
commits each signatory of member by setting internationally binding emission reduction targets. This was
adopted in 1997, but the frst commitment period started in 9008 and ended in 2012. In order to be sustainable
without jeopardizing the need for energy for economic developed countries committed to cut their CO2,
emissions 2% up until 2050 to help address the problem of climate change. It is estimated that by 2050, the
world will have an approximate 80% reduction on CO2 emissions (Pacala, 2009)-
 The Montreal Protocol is another global agreement set to protect the stratospheric ozone layer by
phasing out the production of ozone depleting substances (ODS). The protocol aim to help the ozone layer
recuperate from the hole it has attained due to increasing presence of ODS in atmosphere. It is signed by 197
countries including the Philippines (USEPA, 2017).

Disaster Risk Management

When the Philippines was struck by typhoon Haiyan (locally called typhoon Yolanda) in November
2013, the death toll reached 6,340. Many blamed the lack of disaster risk reduction efforts for the extreme
damages the typhoon brought to the country, especially in the regions where the typhoon made a landfall. The
government was also blamed for the lack of or weak evacuation plans in different localities. In Tacloban,
Leyte, government aid was slow. Many resorted to looting shops, and cadavers were strewn all over the city.
Because of the extent of the damage, the city was not easily reachable which made the distribution of relief
goods difficult. However, with a proper disaster risk reduction management plan, the destructive effects of the
typhoon could have been reduced, if not avoided.
What happened to Tacloban during typhoon Haiyan is an example of why disaster risk management
plans should be established? With the coming of more intense typhoons because of climate change and with
the geographical vulnerability of the Philippines to a number of typhoons every year, it is important for the
country to establish measures to mitigate the effects of natural disasters for the benefit of the citizens. In the
aftermath of typhoon Haiyan, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP)of the
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) of the Philippines for 2011-2018 was
revisited and prioritized. This is a plan that guides the country on how sustainable development be achieved
through inclusive growth while building the adaptive capacities of communities, increasing the resilience of
vulnerable sectors, and optimizing disaster mitigation opportunities with the end in view of promoting people’s
welfare and security. It aims to strengthen the capacity of the national and the local government units (LGU),
together with partner stakeholders, to build the disaster resilience communities and to institutionalize
arrangements and measures for reducing disaster risks, including projected climate risks and enhancing
disaster preparedness and and response capabilities

Exercise 1.
Instructions: Watch Al Gore’s documentary film, An Inconvenient Truth (2006). Take down notes while
watching the documentary film. Does climate change really exist? Consider arguments and evidence presented
by scientists who are not convinced and those who argue for the existence of climate change. What is your
stand regarding the arguments?

Exercise 2. Pair Essay

Instructions: Watch the video Typhoon Haiyan: Eye of the Storm on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/
watch? v=-BnahLg_LG_DmQ). Then, with a partner, write a reaction essay on the documentary using the
following questions. Limit your essay to 300-500 words.
1. What are the impacts of climate change on meteorological patterns?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. What pieces of evidence are presented that proves or reinforces the connection between climate change
and the changing meteorological patterns?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3. How did the documentary affect your personal beliefs and actions toward protecting the environment?
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

Metacognitive Reading Report

Instructions: Read Alastair Woodward’s How climate changes affects the building blocks for health
(conversation.com/how-climate-change-affects-the-building-locks-for-health-862020).
Then, accomplish the metacognitive reading report format below.
 1. Difficult Concepts
a. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
b. ______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
c. _______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. Learning Insights
a. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
b. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
c. Before Reading the article I thought that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
However, after reading the article, I now think/learned that
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3. Discussion Questions
a. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
b. ________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________