Science, Technology, and Society

Outline of Topics Week 7-8 S&T and the Human Condition

For the two weeks, we will be looking into a number of important philosophical foundations that will surely
help us in evaluating the functions, roles, and impacts of Science and Technology on Society. As we
examine the dangers of science and technology, we evaluate its essence, and its value.

Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs):

1. Analyze the human condition in order to deeply reflect and express philosophical foundations that
are meaningful to the student as a part of society.
2. Critique human flourishing vis-à-vis the progress of S&T as you define the meaning of a good life
3. Examine shared concerns that make up the good life in order to come up with practical
answers/solutions to contemporary issues guided by ethical standards.

TOPICS:
1. Human Flourishing and the Good Life: Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics:
2. Human Flourishing in terms of Science and Technology
● Martin Heidegger: Technology as A way of Revealing:
● CS Lewis: The Magician’s Twin
● Jason Hickel: Forget Developing "Poor" Countries it's time to 'de-develop' "Rich" countries
● When Technology and Humanity Cross (Bill Joy); Gerd Leonhard on Technology Vs. Humanity

Learning Materials and Resources

1. The Good Life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFPBf1AZOQg
This introduces the concept of Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics. Using a philosophical lens, it helps us
examine the contemporary issues in S & T, the value of the concept of EUDAIMONIA and how these can
be used to ASSESS one’s relationship and dealings with science and Technology, as we are focused to
answer the question “ Are we living a good life?”.

2. How to live a Good Life: Aristotle on 'Flourishing': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_7deR0idvs

How to live a good life? Aristotle’s answer was to live virtuously: do what a virtuous person would do.
Learn more about Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, where he explained how to flourish.

3. CS Lewis: The Magician’s Twin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPeyJvXU68k

More than a half century ago, famed writer C.S. Lewis warned about how science (a good thing) could
be twisted in order to attack religion, undermine ethics, and limit human freedom. In this documentary
"The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case Against Scientism," leading scholars explore Lewis's
prophetic warnings about the abuse of science and how Lewis's concerns are increasingly relevant for
us today.

4. Martin Heidegger: the Question Concerning Technology:

Martin Heidegger undertakes and examines the most relevant and serious questions surrounding
technology: What is technology? What is the direct impact made on 20th century, post-industrial life?
Heidegger sets out to answer these questions, with the beginning of his essay set to explore the essence
and fundamental being of technology.

5. Jason Hickel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HckWP75yk9g&t=2

Anthropologist Jason Hickel asks if economic growth really makes our lives better. He said” Forget
Developing "Poor" Countries it's time to 'de-develop' "Rich" countries”. He is the author of The Divide: A
Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions.

6. Village of the Watermills Akira Kurosawa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrSBRuDPNtQ

This short film is the last one of the eight short films "Dream" collected by Akira Kurosawa. All eight movies
are real dreams Akira Kurosawa had at various times of life. The final dream seems to be a happy
ending, and spectators are full of hope for the future. A 103-year-old philosopher in “The Village of
Water Mills” talks about the values of simple life close to nature and, in doing so, reaffirms the values that
make human life a joy: clean air and clean water. “These,” the old man says, “are the most important
things for humans.”
7. Technology vs. Humanity by Gerd Leonhard is a last-minute wake up call to take part in the most
important conversation humanity may ever have. Will we blindly outsource and abdicate big chunks
of our lives to the global technology companies – or will we take back our autonomy and demand a
sustainable balance between technology and humanity? Watch and learn from his work.

(Note: for more of the Discussions and Guide Questions, please refer to the STS printable Module for Week
7-8)

Activities/Assessment: (30pts)
STS Activity No. 1 for Weeks 7-8 (By pair): Answer only in brief statements & may be aligned in bullet form.
(Make sure to watch the videos and read the materials provided)

1. What is your view of a good life?(5 pts)

2. What significant insight/s did you gain after studying the work of Martin Heidegger? Explain (5pts).
3. After watching the video The Magician’s Twin (by CS Lewis), what struck you the most? Did it dissuade
you? or persuade you to learn Science? Explain (5pts)
4. What personal views about development and human flourishing changed upon learning Jason Hickel’s
paradigm of de-development? Is it doable? Why? and why not?(5pts)
5. Answer this, after watching the Video the Village of the Watermills Akira Kurosawa: Compare your view
of a Good Life (your answer in item 1) with what was shown in the video. Do you aspire to this kind of
life? How will you relate this to your present condition? (5pts)
6. Write a one paragraph reflection, after watching the video by Gerd Leonhard on Technology vs
Humanity. (5pts)

Performance Innovative Task for the Mid Term: Video Project (50 pts)
This project comprises 20% of your Midterm Grade, so give your best. Details on how you will be graded are
in the Rubric found on the file attached. Everyone in the group will brainstorm and discuss how the storyline
will be about.

● Think of a shared concern/issue/problem that reveal or deeply reflect who the human person is
in the face of Modern Science and Technology
● Pick a photo or an artwork from the web that best represents this shared concern/issue/problem,
and discuss this through a 3 minute video, and provide practical answers/solutions guided by
lawful and ethical standards.
● In your video also make sure to explain and express the philosophical implications as you weave
together the ideas and thoughts of Aristotle/Heidegger/CS Lewis/Jason Hickel/Bill Joy.
● You are allowed to use pictures and clips that are not yours (but not all) just don’t forget to give
credit to owners/sources of pictures and clips that are not yours.
● Consider the Learning Outcomes (LOs) as you prepare for your storyline for the video.

Reminders: This does not mean that you will meet physically when creating this video project. There are still
restrictions that we need to observe. Please work together virtually.

See Deadline in USTeP

Reminders: This does not mean that you will meet physically when creating this video project. There are still
restrictions that we need to observe. Please work together virtually.

Rubrics for the Video Project and Group Leader’s Individual Rating for the members

Mid Term EXAMINATION (see the Approved Academic Calendar)

Rubric used for grading the Video Project:(50 pts)
CATEGORY 5 3
Sources Source information collected for all
graphics, facts and quotes. All
documented in desired format.
Attractiveness Makes excellent use of font, color,
graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the
presentation.
Mechanics No misspellings or grammatical errors.
Content(x2) Covers the topic in-depth with details
and examples. Subject knowledge is
excellent.
Organization Content is well organized using
headings or bulleted lists to group
related material.
Originality Product shows a large amount of
original thought. Ideas are creative.
Requirements All requirements are met and
(x2) exceeded. Expressed the philosophical
ramifications/implications and the
elements of Aristotle/Heidegger/CS
Lewis/Jason Hickel are weaved
together
Videography Video did not rock/shake and the
focus was excellent throughout.
Total 50 pts
Date Created: Feb 1, 2021 10:32 pm (CST)
Source information collected for all
graphics, facts and quotes. Most
documented in desired format.
Makes good use of font, color,
graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the
presentation.
Three or fewer misspellings and/or
mechanical errors.
Includes essential knowledge about
the topic. Subject knowledge
appears to be good.
Uses headings or bulleted lists to
organize, but the overall organization
of topics appears flawed.
Product shows some original
thought. Work shows new ideas and
insights.
All requirements are met. Expressed
the philosophical
ramifications/implications and the
elements of Heidegger/CS
Lewis/Jason Hickel are weaved
together
Video did not rock/shake and the
focus was excellent for the majority
of the video.
Created using Rubistar: http://rubistar.4teachers.org/
1 0
Source information collected for
graphics, facts and quotes, but not
documented in desired format.
Makes use of font, color, graphics,
effects, etc. but occasionally these
detract from the presentation content.
Four misspellings and/or grammatical
errors.
Includes essential information about
the topic but there are 1-2 factual
errors.
Content is logically organized for the
most part.
Uses other people's ideas (giving them
credit), but there is little evidence of
original thinking.
One requirement was not completely
met. Expressed the philosophical
ramifications/implications and the
elements of CS Lewis/Jason Hickel are
weaved together
Video had a little rocking/shaking, but
the focus was excellent throughout .
Very little or no source information was
collected.
Use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. but
these often distract from the presentaion
content.
More than 4 errors in spelling or grammar.
Content is minimal OR there are several
factual errors.
There was no clear or logical
organizational structure, just lots of facts.
Uses other people's ideas, but does not
give them credit.
More than one requirement was not
completely met. Expressed the
philosophical ramifications/implications
and the elements of Jason Hickel.
Problems with rocking/shaking AND focus.
Rubric to be used by the Group Leader’s in Rating the Members (30pts)

CATEGORY 5 4
Contributions Routinely provides useful ideas
when participating in the group
and in classroom discussion. A
definite leader/member who
contributes a lot of effort.
Quality of Work Provides work of the highest
quality.
Time-management Routinely uses time well
throughout the project to ensure
things get done on time. Group
does not have to adjust
deadlines or work responsibilities
because of this person\'s
procrastination.
Attitude Never is publicly critical of the
project or the work of others.
Always has a positive attitude
about the task(s).
Working with Almost always listens to, shares
Others with, and supports the efforts of
others. Tries to keep people
working well together.
Focus on the task Consistently stays focused on the
task and what needs to be done.
Very self-directed.
Date Created: Feb 1, 2021 10:32 pm (CST)
Other References:
Science, Technology, and Society by Daniel Joseph McNamara, S.J., Vida Mia Valverde, Ramon Beleno III
Science, Technology and Society by Edaward Mansarate Quinto and Aileen Domondon Nieva
Usually provides useful ideas when
participating in the group and in
classroom discussion. A strong
group leader/member who tries
hard!
Provides high quality work.
Usually uses time well throughout
the project, but may have
procrastinated on one thing.
Group does not have to adjust
deadlines or work responsibilities
because of this person\'s
procrastination.
Rarely is publicly critical of the
project or the work of others. Often
has a positive attitude about the
task(s).
Usually listens to, shares, with, and
supports the efforts of others. Does
not cause \"waves\" in the group.
Focuses on the task and what
needs to be done most of the time.
Other group members can count
on this person.
Created using Rubistar: http://rubistar.4teachers.org/
3 1
Sometimes provides useful ideas when
participating in the group and in classroom
discussion. A satisfactory group
leader/member who does what is required.
Provides work that occasionally needs to be
checked/redone by other group members
to ensure quality.
Tends to procrastinate, but always gets
things done by the deadlines. Group does
not have to adjust deadlines or work
responsibilities because of this person\'s
procrastination.
Occasionally is publicly critical of the project
or the work of other members of the group.
Usually has a positive attitude about the
task(s).
Often listens to, shares with, and supports the
efforts of others, but sometimes is not a good
team member.
Focuses on the task and what needs to be
done some of the time. Other group
members must sometimes nag, prod, and
remind to keep this person on-task.
Rarely provides useful ideas
when participating in the
group and in classroom
discussion. May refuse to
participate.
Provides work that usually
needs to be checked/redone
by others to ensure quality.
Rarely gets things done by the
deadlines and group has to
adjust deadlines or work
responsibilities because of this
person\'s inadequate time
management.
Often is publicly critical of the
project or the work of other
members of the group. Often
has a negative attitude about
the task(s).
Rarely listens to, shares with,
and supports the efforts of
others. Often is not a good
team player.
Rarely focuses on the task and
what needs to be done. Lets
others do the work.