The class began with a discussion of a you-tube video on the shift from scalpel laser in eyelid surgery that had been shown as an example of ‘evolution’ of technology. The video
describes the laser technique as “advanced” and better than the scalpel procedure. It is
faster, more precise and prettier!
describes the laser technique as “advanced” and better than the scalpel procedure. It is
faster, more precise and prettier!
We used the example to tackle once again the question of what is meant by “advanced”, and therefore what are rationales for newer technologies to come in.
In contrast to the argument of precision, one might take the example of the art of writing on a grain of rice. This certainly requires precision; it is an age old technique; and it does not use the same kind of precision-instruments we are talking about.
The association between advanced and precise thus becomes less clear.
If we are talking about the laser replacing human skills, it might be noted that any use of lasers for surgery etc. need to be acquired, practiced and developed over time. Speed too can only come in when this exercise is in place. So we might then ask the question: Why is it that we do not question the fact that the so called “advanced” technologies need not be more precise or faster.
Eye camps employ surgeons who perform eighty cataract operations in a day which is
much faster than the laser!
Eye camps employ surgeons who perform eighty cataract operations in a day which is
much faster than the laser!
What emerges from the above question are two other significant questions
a) Who communicates the notion of advanced?
b) Who is the listener?
a) Who communicates the notion of advanced?
b) Who is the listener?
In order to answer these questions we felt it necessary to define and distinguish science, engineering and technology yet another time.
The OED defines science as the reasoned investigation or study of phenomena aimed at discovering enduring principles among elements of the phenomenal world by employing formal techniques such as the scientific method. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypothesis.
Technology is the usage of tools, techniques, crafts, systems or methods of organization in order to solve a problem. Technologies have to satisfy requirements like utility and usability.
Engineering is the goal-oriented process of designing and making tools and systems to exploit natural phenomena for practical human means, often but not always using results and techniques from science.
Science may precede technology as in the case of biotechnology but this is not a necessary prerequisite. Ajay pointed out that science does not exist in the phenomena itself but the observer describing the phenomena may be defined as science.
A film ‘The Gods must be Crazy’ was watched on Monday the 31st of January 2011 at
3:30 pm in the CCS lecture hall. The movie was discussed in class.
The first task was to identify the societies or ways of life represented in the movie. We identified the following
The Bushmen
The Researcher
The tour operator/ teacher
The field assistant
The people of the village
The guerrillas
Thus there is no monolithic society and multiple societies coexist.
We sought to ask various questions.
1) How did the bushmen view the bottle? They thought god has sent it. They did not know what it was nor did they have any idea about its utility and hence they used it for a variety of tasks. It appeared de novo.
2) Does the bottle satisfy our definition of technology? Yes, it does. The bottle was used as a tool. However, the bottle was not available in multiple copies (unlike technologies that we are aware of) and thus became evil (note that the concept of evil never existed in bushman society prior to the introduction of the bottle). If the bushmen were to write a treatise titled “the multifaceted god-sent hard oblong object and its uses” (they would have probably given it a name) would this amount to science?
3) Is this use of the bottle for various means saying something about how different societies (ways of life) view the products of technology? Yes, different societies have different notions of utility and even within a society different individuals may have different needs and thus differing world views!
Some interesting observations about the movie:
a) The bushman asked the animal that he was to kill for forgiveness. This ides is also reflected in South East Asian Buddhist practices.
b) The white woman was described as ugly, pale and old by the bushman but nevertheless a god!
Conflicts to Technology apparent in the movie
The use of a stone placed under the tyre of the jeep used to stop it. The researcher could
have put the stone on the break or parked parallel to the gate.
Further, how did the bottle not break when dropped from the aircraft? Further how did it
not break when being used to pound the tuber?
How do the bushmen live without water?
have put the stone on the break or parked parallel to the gate.
Further, how did the bottle not break when dropped from the aircraft? Further how did it
not break when being used to pound the tuber?
How do the bushmen live without water?
We sought to ask two further questions
1) What is the inspiration for new technology? 2) Is technology always rational?
thanks Ajay for this summary
thanks Ajay for this summary
No comments:
Post a Comment