M O R N I N G E V ER Y ON E

GOOD
GROUP 1
 PRESENTED BY

Sheila May Bunglay

Jane Olga Adelaide Jovelene
Cuaresma Tranquilan
Lea Ann Jadman Claudine
Gantalao Jay Anne Durias
INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES

• AT THE END OF THIS SECTION THE STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO:

• 1. DIFFERENTIATE THE ESSENCES OF TECHNOLOGY AND MODERN TECHNOLOGY;
• 2. DISCUSS AND ILLUSTRATE THE DANGERS OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY; &
• 3. EXPLAIN WHY ART IS THE SAVING POWER OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY.
DIAGNOSTICS

• INSTRUCTIONS;
• RATE THE EXTENT OF YOUR AGREEMENT TO THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS USING OSGOOD SCALE YOU ARE
ALSO GIVEN SPACE TO WRITE ANY COMMENT TO FURTHER CLARIFY YOUR RESPONSE.
 STATEMENTS AGREE/DISAGREE COMMENTS ( IF ANY)
1. TECHNOLOGY IS A MEANS TO AN END

2. TECHNOLOGY IS A HUMAN ACTIVITY

3. POETRY IS TECHNOLOGY

4. NATURE IS A STANDING RESERVE

5. MAN IS AN INSTRUMENT OF THE

EXPLOITATION OF NATURE

6. MAN IS IN DANGER OF BEING SWALLOWED

BY TECHNOLOGY
7.THERE IS A SAVING POWER OR
A WAY OUT OF THE DANGER
TECHNOLOGY
8.ART MAY BE THE SAVING
POWER
A T A G L A NC E: W H O IS
M A R T IN HE I D E G G E R
Y N O M EA N S AN Y TH IN G
SSE NC E OF TE CHNO L OGY IS B
“THE E E R (19 77 )
R T IN HE ID E GG
TECHNOLOGICAL” –MA
MARTIN HEIDEGGER (1889-1976) IS WIDELY
ACKNOWLEDGE AS ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT PHILOSOPHERS OF THE 20TH
CENTURY. HE WAS A GERMAN PHILOSOPHERS
WHO WAS PART OF THE CONTINENTAL
TRADITION OF PHILOSOPHY. HIS STERN
OPPOSITION TO POSITIVISM AND
TECHNOGICAL WORLD DOMINATION
RECIEIVED UNEQUIVOCAL SUPPORT FROM
LEADING POSTMODERNISTS AND POST
STRUCTURALISTICS OF THE TIME, INCLUDING
JACUES 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 2. THIS RESULTED IN HIS
DISMISSAL FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG IN 1949. HE WAS ONLY ABLE TO
RESUME TEACHING IN 1951. HEIDEGGER MEMBERSHIP TO THE NAZI PARTY MADE HIM
CONTROVERSIAL HIS PHILOSOPHICAL WORK WAS OFTEN ECLIPSED BY HIS POLITIC
AFFILIATION, WITH CRITICS SAYING THAT HIS PHILOSOPHY WOULD ALWAYS BE
ROOTED IN HIS POLITICAN CONSCIOUSNESS
• HEIDEGGER WORKS 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 “SEINSUERGESSENHEIT
(FORGETFULNESS OF BEING), BODENSTANDIGKEIT (ROOTEDNESS-IN-SOIL),
WESENSUERFASSUNG (ESSENTIAL CONSTITUTION)
THE ESSENCE OF TECHNOLOGY
• IT CANNOT BE DENIED THAT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
WAY SOCIETY IS CONTINUOUSLY BEING MODERNIZED. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
CONTINUOUSLY SEEP INTO THE WAY PEOPLE GO ABOUT THEIR LIVES, HOWEVER, THE
OMNIPRESENCE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MUST NOT ECLIPSE THE BASIC TENETS
OF ETHICS AND MORALITY. INSTEAD, IT SHOULD ALLOW THE HUMAN 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 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
• 2.ANTHROPOLOGIC
INSTRUMENTAL DEFINITION: TECHNOLOGY IS A MEANS
TO AN END

• TECHNOLOGY IS NOT AN END ITSELF, IT IS 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 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 MEANS TO AN END. IN THIS SENSE, TECHNOLOGY IS AN
INSTRUMENT AIMED AT GETTING THINGS TO DONE
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 INVENTION, AND THE PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS THEY
SERVE ARE WHAT DEFINE TECHNOLOGY.
•BOTH DEFINITIONS INSTRUMENTAL AND ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARE
CORRECT. 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 CORRECT LEADS TO WHAT IS TRUE. IN
THIS SENSE, HEIDEGGER ENVISIONED TECHNOLOGY AS A WAY OF
REVEALING A MODE OF “BRINGING FORTH” CAN BE UNDERSTOOD THROUGH
THE ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT, POIESIS, WHICH REFERS
TO THE ACT OF BRINGING SOMETHING OUT OF CONCEALMENT
TECHNOLOGY AS A POIESIS: DOES MODERN TECHNOLOGY
BRING FORTH OR CHALLENGE FORTH

• HEIDEGGER, IN THE QUESTION CONCERNING TECHNOLOGY, POSITED THAT BOTH

PRIMITIVE CRAFTS AND 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 CRITICISM OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY MIGHT APPEAR COUNTERINTUITIVE
TO THE PURPOSE OF NATURE TO HUMAN EXISTENCE . HOWEVER , BY DIGGING DEEPER INTO HEIDEGGER
QUESTIONS, IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT THE ESSENCE OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY IS NOT TO BRING FORTH IN
THE SENSE OF POIESIS. INSTEAD , HEIDEGGER CONSIDERS MODERN TECHNOLOGY 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 THE LESS EFFORT. IT PROMPTS PEOPLE
INTO DOMINATING AND ENFRAMING THE EARTHS NATURAL RESOURCES.
• 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 FLAVOURINGS, 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 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 IS A PROCESS OF “
ENFRAMING” HUMANKINDS DESIRE TO CONTROL EVERYTHING, INCLUDING NATURE, IS
CAPTURED IN THE PROCESS. BY PUTTING THINGS, IN THE CASE NATURE, IN A FRAME, IT
BECOMES MUCH EASIER FOR HUMANS TO CONTROL IT ACCORDING TO THEIR DESIRES
• ENFRAMING, ACCORDING TO HEIDEGGER IS A SKIN TO TWO WAYS OF LOOKING AT THE
WORLD: CALCULATIVE THINKING AND MEDITATIVE THINKING. IN CALCULATIVE
THINKING, HUMANS DESIRE TO PUT AN ORDER TO NATURE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND
AND CONTROL IT. MEDITIATIVE THINKING, HUMANS ALLOW NATURE TO REVEAL ITSELF
TO THEM WITHOUT THE USE OF FORCE OF VIOLENCE. ONE THINKING IS NOT
NECESSARILY BETTER THAN OTHER. INFACT, HUMANS ARE CAPABLE OF
• USING BOTH AND WILL 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 IRREGULARLY
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 RESPONSIBLE TO
RECOGNIZE HOW THEY BECOME INSTRUMENTS OF TECHNOLOGY
The brazilian
novelist, Paulo
Coelho
• 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 EARTH SHOULD CONCERN PEOPLE MORE
POTENTLY THAN THE FEAR OF THE EARTH DISAPPEARING . AS A MERE TENANTS ON
EARTH,
• PEOPLE MUST NOT ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE CONSUMED BY TECHNOLOGY LET THEY
LOSE THE ESSENCE OF WHO THEY ARE AS HUMAN BEINGS IN THE SENSE, HUMANS ARE
IN DANGER OF BECOMING MERELY PART OF THE STANDING RESERVE OR
ALTERNATIVELY, MAY FIND THEMSELVES IN NATURE
• RECOGNIZING ITS DANGER 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 IN
ADVERTENTLY GAVE RISE TO ISSUES SUCH AS INVASIONS 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 A DANGEROUS
ONE. AS EXEMPLIFIED, SOCIAL MEDIA COMES WITH BOTH BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
ART AS THE SAVING POWER

Johann
Christian
Friedrich
Hölderlin
• 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 AND
THE WAY OUT OF ENFRAMING “ AND ART WAS SIMPLY CALLED TECHNE. IT WAS THE
SINGLE, MANIFOLD REVEALING” (1977,P.18) HEIDEGGER SAW ART AS AN ACT OF THE
MIND
• TECHNE , THAT PROTECTED AND HAD A 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 OF FROM 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
• 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, THE ESSENCE OF TECHNOLOGY AND, ON
THE OTHER, FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM IT . SYCH A REALM IS ART. BUT
CERTAINLY ONLY IF REFLECTION ON ART, FOR ITS PART, DOES NOT SHUT ITS EYES TO
THE CONSTELLATIONS 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 SAVING POWER BEGIN TO SHINE AND THE MORE 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 ROUND THEM. HUMANS
ARE CONSUMED BY TECHNOLOGY WHEN THEY ARE CAUGHT UP IN ENFRAMING AND FA
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
•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.
EXERCISE 1. BRING FORTH OR CHALLENGE FORTH

• INSTRUCTIONS: DO THE PHOTOS BRING FORTH OR CHALLENGE FORTH?

ENCIRLCLE THE LETTER OF YOUR ANSWER BELOW EACH PHOTO AND BE
READY TO EXPLAIN YOUR CHOICE TO THE CLASS.
EXERCISE 2. REFLECTION

• INSTRUCTIONS :
• AFTER STUDYING THE FULL TEXT OF MARTIN HEIDEGGER THE QUESTIONS COMCERNING TECHNOLOGY
PDF. ANSWER THE FOLLOWING
1. WHAT ARE THE THREE CONCEPTS REMAIN UNCLEAR OR DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

2. WHAT ARE THE THREE SIGNIFICANT INSIGHTS DID YOU GAIN IN STUDYING THIS TEXTS?

3. WHAT ARE THE THREE QUESTIONS DO YOU WANT TO ASK ABOUT THE TEXTS?
EXERCISE 3. ART SAVING POWER
INSTRUCTIONS:
HEIDEGGER EXPLAINED THAT ART HOLDS POWER THAT COULD SAVE HUMANS FROM THE DANGER OF BEING
CONSUMED BY TECHNOLOGY IN HIS WORDS. IN THIS ACTIVITY, FOCUS ON ART AS THE SAVING POWER OF
TECHNOLOGY. FORM OF GROUPS WITH 4 MEMBERS EACH AND LOOK FOR AN ARTWORK THAT REVEALS THE
HUMAN PERSONS IN THE MIDST OF TECHNOLOGY. DISCUSS THE ARTWORK IN RELATION TO THE GENERAL
CONCEPTS DISCUSSED IN MARTIN HEIDEGGER THE QUESTION CONCERNING TECHNOLOGY, AND PRESENT
YOUR CHOSEN ARTWORK AND THE SUMMARY OF YOUR DISCUSSION IN FRONT OF THE CLASS
ASSIGNMENT 5. THE DANGERS OF TECHNOLOGY

• INSTRUCTIONS: READ THE ARTICLE BELOW. AFTER READING, WORK WITH A PARTNER AND ANSWER THE
QUESTIONS THAT FOLLOW. WRITE YOUR ANSWER ON A SEPARATE PAPER

• PLEASE SEARCH : FACEBOOK SAYS 87MILLION MAY BE AFFECTED BY DATA PRIVACY SCANDAL
• BY. AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
QUESTIONS
1. WHAT IS THIS DATA PRIVACY SCANDAL ALL ABOUT?
2. HOW DOES THIS FACEBOOK PRIVACY SCANDAL RELATE TO HEIDEGGER NOTION OF REVEALING OF
MODERN TECHNOLOGY AS CHALLENGING FORTH?
3. HOW 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 HEIDEGGERS
IDEA OF POIESIS OR A BRINGING FORTH OF TCHNOLOGY?
• 5. HOW CAN THE HEIDEGGERIAN NOTION OF QUESTIONING GUIDE FACEBOOK USERS TOWARD A
BENEFICIAL USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA?
•THAT’S ALL THANK YOU
FOR LISTENING ❤️