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.