Goals:

• Initiate thinking about the underlying principles that lead us to evaluating and making decisions about science, technology, and our lives as they are currently embedded in these two societal components/shaping forces.
• Understand several different (historical, normative, risk assessment, cost/benefit) models used in or affecting technology decisions/discussions.

The focus of this section of the course is on how we might evaluate science & technology, either that we already use or new S & T that might move into our lives. We have already considered worldviews, which are also models by which we evaluate and interpret what we see in the world around us. So we might list the "models" or criterion by which we might evaluate technology.

• Figure 1. Space/Time Models

  Economic - A major societal model of our current times that determines almost everything
• Moral - A model that has persisted through all times
• Risk - We focused on these models in the readings
• Cost/Benefit - a combination of economic, moral, risk, etc, but with mainly a $ basis
• Utilitarian
• Cornucopian
• Christian (or other faith based models)
• Growth
• Sustainability
• Ecological/Scientific
• Selfish
• Anthropocentric (human centered models)
• Ecocentric (ecological centered models)
• Theocentric (God centered)
• Temporal - Historical/Present/Future. An example of the models that lie behind much of our thinking about technology is depicted in Figure 1 at right. Click on the image for a larger version of this space/time relationship.
  
  
• Major Categories into which we might group these Models (? but does this help us at all?)
  • Historical Models
  • Developmental Models
  • Advancement Models
  • Economic Models
  • Societal Models
  • Environmental Models

Science, Technology, & Our Embedded Lives (ST&OEL)

Class Derived Models of how we analyze the science and technology in which our modern lives are embedded

(Click for more detailed views - or get a magnifying glass - you choose your technology)

While, we have not used history as an analytical model, history helps us understand how our current models and structures might have developed. Thus a review of the past model "revolutions" or paradigm shifts is useful.

Because of humans curiosity, we are always wondering about the past as well as the future and so we could evaluate technology using a historical model, from a historical perspective. In this way, we look at the history of technology, not just of recent technology in the way that Richard Rhodes does in Visions of Technology, but in a more long term way as well. From this perspective we see three or four "epochs" of technology. Then we are left with the feeling that if history is just carrying us along, then we really have no say in what the next "revolution" of human society will be.

Human based technology was typical of our hunter/gatherer ancestors.The technology centered on functionality, but also had some real strong aesthetic components.
Agricultural based technology became the focus as cultures decided they wanted to settle down and stay in one place for a while. Growing food thus allowed these cultures to stay in one place and this opened the door for a whole host of new technologies.
The industrial revolution of course modified our ways of looking at the world and technology in ways that we never envisioned, both good and bad.
Some would say that we are now in the technological revolution and the images at right depict how far reaching those themes are for our lives. The Information and Service Sector revolution might also be possibilities for the terminology of the next major societal revolution or paradigm.

Perhaps you could list some other models that you might think lie behind our evaluation and acceptance of technology, as the list above is actually not at all complete. However, the point is that we do need some way to critically evaluate technology and some "norms" by which to do so. Risk of course is just one "norm" by which we can do this, but the main reason that it has been so widely used is that it purports to a "balance" of risks vs benefits of the technology to society. The risk model can be summarized as below (one version).

• Step I. Risk assessment:

• Involves hazard identification and evaluating associated risks (and benefits)- the recognition of present risks and the art of predicting future dangers
  case reports from field workers (physicians)
• laboratory investigations (organismal research)
• epidemiology, the study of different populations with different exposures
• linear dose-response relationships (emf (radiation) from light bulbs or living next to a coal-fired power plant) Graph of dose (x) vs effect (y) at right)
• threshold dose-response relationships
• acute vs chronic exposures and effects
  
  
• Step II Risk analysis
  • Is a comparative approach that examines whether or not the estimated short/long term benefits outweigh the estimated short/long term risks
    • Probability of risk or event or exposure
    • Immediacy
    • Severity of exposure (how much damage, how many people, geographic area, reversibility)
    • low probability high severity events vs high probability low severity events
      
      
• Step III Risk managment is a process that determines the "acceptibility" of risk
  • Cost/benefit - ignore risk if benefits outweigh the risks (often times costs hard to account)
  • Acceptible if people accept the risks regardless of cost
  • Revealed benefits - accept if risk is not greater than those currently tolerated
  • natural standards - accept if risk is not greater than those in "nature" created by natural hazards
  • Perceived benefits - accept if people perceive that the benefit is high
  • Temporal - accept if it does not accept me now or the cost is in the future
    
    
• Step IV: Risk Communication
  • The Human Factor is very important in the impact and perception of risk. Consumers need to be able to distinguish these concepts.

 

• Of course, any technology has a human "operator" component and thus we could define an overal system reliability of a technology and its use in practice.
  • SYSTEM RELIABILITY = TECHNOLOGY RELIABILITY X HUMAN RELIABILITY

 

• Finally Risk Prevention is the other main idea that needs to be communicated to users of technology. The best solution is not to clean up after a problem, but to prevent the problem in the first place. This is a major communication problem because behavioral change may be necessary at individual and corporate levels if a technology is to be used successfully at low risk.

$$$Economic Models$$$$$$

Our current cultural models are often based upon economic models that we again claim, like science are "value-free" and "equitable.  Wendell Berry, however disagrees and points out the underlying "assumptions" of such models on which much of our current world order is based - a model by which we evaluate, science, technology, and truth?

1. That stable and preserving relationships among people, places, and things do not matter and are of no worth.

2. That cultures and religions have no legitimate practical or economic concerns.

3. That there is no conflict between the "free market" and political freedom and no connection between political democracy and economic democracy.

4. That there can be no conflict between economic advantage and economic justice.

5. That there is no conflict between greed and ecological or bodily health.

6. That there is no conflict between self-interest and public service.

7. That the loss or destruction of the capacity anywhere to produce necessary goods does not matter and involves no cost.

8. That it is all right for a country's or a region's subsistence to be foreign- based, dependent on long-distance transport, and entirely controlled by corporations.

9. That, therefore, wars over commodities-the Persian Gulf War, for example-are legitimate and permanent economic functions.

10. That this sort of sanctioned violence is justified also by the predominance of centralized systems of production, supply, communications, and trans- portation, which are extremely vulnerable not only to acts of war between nations but also to sabotage and terrorism.

11. That there is no danger and no cost in the proliferation of exotic pests, ver- min, weeds, and diseases that accompany international trade and, of course, increase with the volume of trade.

12. That an economy is a machine of which people are merely the interchangeable parts. One has no choice but to do the work (if any) that the economy prescribes and to accept the prescribed wage.

13. That, therefore, vocation is a dead issue. One does not do the work one chooses to do because one is called to it by Heaven or by one's natural orGod-given abilities, but does instead the work that is determined and imposed by the economy.  Any work is all right as long as one gets paid for it.

However, I like to think that humanity has some role in the determination of our future. Again if I return to Genesis, scripture entails a human responsibility for the future that seems to be an integral component of our relationship both with our Creator and with the Creation. Then in Romans 8:19, Paul goes further and says "For the whole Creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God". So I think that we have to look for what I would call "responsible" models for evaluating technology in our society. Thus Monsma in Chapter 5 develops the concept of the normative model or living based upon "biblically based normative principles". Normative models are based upon societal norms. Of course the concept of norm is related to our word normal, or one might say as the dictionary does, a standard, model, or pattern regarded as typical for a specific group. However, the concept of normative models goes beyond this into the ethics of "where we should be" as well, going beyond just accepting that we are where we are historically from a result of fate, but also because of the decisions that we have made (and are going to make).

I would take what Monsma has said and add to it to develop the following Normative Model.

• We need to listen to God. Our awe of God should be greater than our awe of technology
  • If technology allows us to do more at the same time, what do we do with the time we gain, or do we just gain more "stuff"?
• God has a unity
  • is one, integral….
    
• The Created order has a unity
  • a functional, built-in integrity that must be respected and preserved
  • What are the implicationsfor the environment for our “technological wantonness”?
• Human knowledge, understanding, and motives are incomplete and imperfect
  • What are the implications of this "norm" ?
• We should look for knowledge and understanding (norms) in the two main sources of God’s revelation to humankind
  • God’s Word - the scriptures
  • Gods’ Works - the created world in its entirety and not just the human components or useful components
• Diversity is a hallmark of Creation and so we should model diversity with technology
  • avoiding the “eggs in a basket” mentality of the “assembly line”
  • avoiding technicism
  • avoiding “economicsism”
  • avoiding “progressivism”
• Redemption is a reality of God given to all humanity and all creation (John 3:16)
  • Although as with all norms, we can refuse to accept the Grace of God
  • Our failure to accept redemption and to live as redeemed persons can impact the world in which we live and our evaluation and use of technology
• Love should be the center of all human activity
  • the Lord God
  • my neighbor
  • myself
  • What are the implications of making this norm the center of technology and technological change?
    • what is the current core of human activity?
    • how can we change the core?
    • can we change the core?

I feel that the basis above is what leads Monsma to the development of his components of a model for examing technology, however "idealistic" or "normative" the ideas might be.

• Models of technology must be adequate in scope (Thus maybe to just focus on risk, or cost/benefit might not be enough).
• Models of technology must make necessary distinctions (What this entails of course is understanding the possiblities and implications of what we do/make and of course this is where science can come into play. Of course, often times science gets "perverted" by other norms.
• Models of technology must integrate the diversity found in both society and in creation.
  • the principle of integration
    • diversity in human society and within the entire creation becomes integrated to avoid conflict
    • “We must learn to balance the material wonders of technology with the spiritual demands of our human nature”.
• Models of technology should seek the principle of balance.
  • This might entail the modalities of the Dutch philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd or beyond.

• mathematical	spatial	physical	biotic	emotional
  kenematic	logical	lingual	historical	economic
  social	aesthetic	justice	moral	belief

  
  
• Or might lead to Monsma's Normative Principles
  • Cultural appropriateness
  • Open communication
  • Stewardship
  • Delightful harmony
  • Justice
  • Caring
  • Trust

Now what if we all looked at technology; that we used, that we are developing, that we seek to develop... and applied such normative principles. Is this just "idealistic" and naive or something that we should seek to see brought about in human society. Now that is something to think about!