Class notes, 25/ 01/ 11

We started the class with listing the key points to define technology according to the previous class talk.

These points were:

-        Time dependent

-        Related to science

-        For/ by humanity

-        Specific goals

-        Imitating nature

Drawn on the board were a candle, a lantern and a CF Bulb. She also wrote below “laser -scalpel”, “human – robot”, “è click here”.
The students were asked to think about these questions:

-        Which order will they choose for the items?

-        If they had to choose one object, which one would it be?

-        Have all these items a specific goal? Are they imitating nature?

Abitha said that she would choose the candle and the CF bulb and that the lantern seemed out-dated to her. We then agreed that the three items had the same specific goal which was “to light” but that we used the candle when we couldn’t use the CF bulb. Nathalie added that the candle can be used to create a special atmosphere for celebrations whereas CF bulb cannot.

Then, we tried to understand why we felt that lantern was out-dated. First we noticed that we had seen lanterns in museums, in grand-parents’ house or in isolated villages. But many people were still using lanterns. We came to say that the three objects reflected different ways of life and that their use is highly linked to the user. Someone using a lantern might be living in an isolated area, whereas someone with no candle at home may be an American.
We drew an arrow from the candle to the lantern and from the lantern to the CF bulb and asked if we agreed with them. Nathalie said yes from an historical point of view, but that was not clear and we decided that we should check. One of us added that the CF bulb was the more advanced which lead us to the question “what does advanced mean?”. First we said that the CF bulb offered a greater amount of light. Then someone started to explain that it also had less side effects but then we agreed that this point was not so clear (how is electricity created? What about infrared rays produced by Cf bulb? etc.). Abitha explained that “advanced” might be linked with “complexity” as the Cf bulb is more complicated than the lantern which is more complicated than the candle. However Nathalie said that, on the contrary, CF bulb seemed easier to use than the candle. We agreed that the concept of “complexity” depended on the user and his habits. After that, we discussed about the link between “better” and “advanced”.  To conclude, we said that “advanced” was not a proper word for this problem.

During the rest of the class, we discussed about definitions of Science, Technology and Nature. Ajay and Abitha read some they had found. We were asked why these definitions made sense to us. Abitha explained that the definition was saying exactly what she was thinking but that she couldn’t formulate. The question was then: if it does not increase our knowledge, if it is only reiterating what we already know, why do we need definitions? Are there multiple truths? We couldn’t answer these questions but concluded by saying that definitions were a good start for research but shouldn’t be taken as holy Grails.

Thanks Nathalie for this summary.

18/01/2011

            The class, to begin with, started with possible definitions of Technology. The following were the four different definitions of Technology:

Abitha : Technology is the time dependent knowledge that is acquired from science, applications of science, engineering and arts, to design processes, products or systems for the betterment of the comfort of the mankind.

Ajay : Technology is a time dependent knowledge system that describes processes that apply science to best suit human aspirations.  

Nathalie : Technology is what man creates to achieve specific goals/ tasks using their knowledge.

Krupa : Technology is defined as science and its application which is implemented for the betterment of the society.

            After having defined technology as they saw it, the students were asked to come up with an example of something that they consider not to be a technology. Mathematical equations were cited as an example of something that not a technology by Nathalie.  But the mathematical equations being knowledge, was argued to be a technology as per the definition given by Ajay. While this argument went on the Prof. Anuradha cited ‘Nature’ and the ‘Natural phenomenon’ as something that is not Technology which was disagreed with by Abitha, who cited an example of a waterfall, which exists in nature but still has technology involved in it. That kindled an interesting discussion on Nature and Natural phenomena; whether these were Technology or had technology involved in them or not. Abitha continued to defend her statement saying that aeration and the other processes involved in the waterfall, which apparently leads to the treatment of water definitely had  technology involved in it which was supported by Krupa but was firmly  disagreed with by Ajay and Nathalie.  Then a series of question followed and their respective answers are as follows:

·        Is knowledge a part of technology?

-        Krupa – “Yes knowledge is definitely a part of the technology. If you acquire knowledge how can anyone possibly come with a technology?”

·        Is man the sole creator of technology?

-        Abitha – “Definitely not. Nature had its own technologies which the man tries to imitate all the time”

·        Are all the existing technologies imitated from nature and got from nature?

-        Abitha – “Yes, the idea to create every single technology comes from nature and the various processes in nature (which could be called technology)”.

-        Prof. Chanakya – “How about the steam engine? Then who could man possibly invent DDT, atom bomb etc? Where is it present in nature?” 

-        Krupa – “Man would definitely have observed some phenomenon in nature which inspired him to come up with such inventions”.

·        Does technology already exist in nature, even before man came into existence?

-        Abitha – “ Yes, technology did exist even before man did”

-        Ajay – “Waterfall can never be called a technology. Technology comes from man”

-        Nathalie – “Technology is what man creates. Nature can never have technology in it”

-        Krupa – “ Nature cannot be a technology by itself, but  it does have technology involved in it”

-        Nathalie – “Then do you say that human body by itself is a technology?’

-        Abitha – “Yes. The human body does have technology involved in it. Digestion could be an example. It involves processes which could be called a technology”

·        What is an artificial technology? Is there something called a natural technology?

Abitha – “Artificial technology is something that is created by man and Natural is what already exists in nature”

Prof. Asha – “Then, do you call a robot as an artificial technology?”

Abitha – “Yes I do”

Prof. Anuradha – “Do you think that all the materials used in it come from nature?”

Krupa – “Yes every single component used in making it comes from nature”

·        Is a bird, actually creating a technology by building nests?

Ajay and Abitha said that it could be called a technology but Nathalie and Krupa didn’t.

·        Is waterfall a technological phenomenon?

-        No comments

·        Can nature be called a technology?

-        The question still remains unanswered.

Each one of them was trying to figure out the distinction between science, technology and nature which would possibly be done in the coming classes. To help solve this puzzle, the students are asked to look into the definitions of technology, technique, knowledge, science and nature.

            Lastly, each of the students were asked to come up with a ‘Dream Technology’ which they intend to create and it was made a note of by Prof. Chanakya. The class ended with a question which will be answered by the students in the coming classes:

‘Which part of your dream is science, knowledge, technology and understanding? And what inspired to dream one such technology? ‘

thanks Abitha for this summary. The others in class, do add/ comment to this. You can also start uploading your readings of the various definitions you have been asked to look for.

Reporting on our first course meeting

We sought to ask the question: What is technology? What came up as answers were
a) Technology can be a process.
b) Technology can be a product.
c) Technology can be a concept.
d) Technology can be a framework of thinking, or an attitude.
The point is also what we mean by each of these ... what is a product? Is it the same as commodity?What is a process?
There seemed to be a lot of arguments about the above. Some thought of technology as tangible products like a cell phone, clothes and automobiles. Some thought of it as the very idea of networks of communication. Someone proposed the idea that technology is a meeting of science and engineering. But in that case one would have to define what science and engineering are as well. And once defined one can further ask if engineering is closer to human reality than science is. A further question was can we consider an artisan’s work as technology? A potter for example uses clay and a wheel as well as his knowledge of making a pot to create the final product. Then, is the pot technology? Is the process of making the pot technology? Is the technical knowledge required to make the pot technology?
 A very interesting relationship between science and technology was proposed by one student where technology is the present process that produces something, and this becomes knowledge, i.e. science, when it becomes established, accepted.

Why should one study all of the above? Answers included
a) If I propose to create new technology I must know how to “sell” it.
b) Everyone seems to be excited about technology but how many of them understand it? Should they?
c) I feel it is imperative that in an age when you are obsolete within a day and new technologies are emerging so rapidly that it is almost imperative that one understands how societies at large process technological advances.
Further questions included a) Does our understanding of what is deemed as technology change with time? Something as mundane as clothing/shoes although a product of technology or technology itself does not resonate with the idea of being technology in an age where electronic goods seem to carry more market value.
b) However is a new shoe that Reebok sells to you to perhaps improve your posture new technology?
c) Does technology precede science? One respondent claimed that early technologies became scientific knowledge and thus humans have been creating technologies ever since they have existed.
d) Is technology something I do not understand but I use?
e) If the above is true why is the understanding of technology and its interaction with society important to our discussions?

The course will look at technology from three aspects -
a) From the perspective of tradition, society and history
b) From the perspective of economics, politics and markets
c) As technology itself.

In the next meeting, scheduled for 3 pm, Tuesday, 18th January, we will discuss what happens when these products/ processes 'enter' society. Are they products/ processes that enter society, or are they a part of society? Where are the separations/ connections between technology and its users?
                                                                                                           thanks Ajay for this report

Course ST209 Society and Technology first meeting

Dear All,
 

The first meeting of the course ST209 Society and Technology will be held in the CST seminar room on Tuesday Jan 11 1500 hrs.  Hoping to see you there to fix class
timings.

HN Chanakya, Anuradha NS and Asha Achuthan
(course instructors)