It is nearly impossible to do anything today that has not been influenced by technology. From the water we drink to the books we read, the development of good technologies assisted mankind into an easier and richer lifestyle. In parallel, thousands of years ago man used his intellect to ease living. Technology’s presence in human existence creates an enormous scope to its meaning, making the hunting spear just as revolutionary as the Internet. To truly understand the benefits and relationships of technology to human life, I think it is important to investigate its definition. To start, I assume that technology is the product of thought that improves the quality of life.
Upon a second viewing, I notice that there are unanswered questions with this definition. What is a product and is it only a technology when it becomes a product? What is an improvement to quality of life, and it is the same for everyone? Does a technology even have to have the goal of improvement of quality of life?
In an attempt to answer my questions, I do in fact think that a technology must be a product, but it must also hold some kind of permanence. In other words, a technology must have the quality of being able to be reused. For instance, it would be very difficult to prove that a cure to cancer, but that no one remembers, is a technology. Technologies must be understandable and present. Additionally, I think that technologies do not have to be physical. If even an idea is understandable and present, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, it is also a technology. Revising my definition, I now have technology as an understandable and present product of thought that improves the quality of life.
It would be wrong to say that what men consider an improvement to quality of life also holds true for women. Therefore, I guess a technology can only be so for the people that intend to use it. Men, at least most, have no use for push-up bras and lipstick, just as most women have no need for facial hair razors. Technologies only benefit the people who will use them. My definition is now technology as an understandable and present product of thought that improves the quality of life for a specific group of people.
In response to my last question of my first definition, I now think that technology must have the goal of improving human life. You could argue that while abortion and nuclear bombs (both which contain deeper personal issues that are outside the scope of this narrative) are technologies, they also do not improve life, but in fact, terminate it. However, all technologies are created with the purpose of solving a problem. Guns in war are effective tools at ending the life of a particular opponent, for example. Even though they do not improve the life of the opponent, the shooter could claim that his actions with the gun are justifiable because he is improving the lives of those he is defending. In this instance, no revision to my definition is needed. My definition as it stands has technology as an understandable and present product of thought that improves the quality of life for a specific group of people.
No comments:
Post a Comment