Morality and Technology Week 5

This weeks topic concerning morality and technology posed a lot of important discussion very relevant to the current issues in the world.  In Latour’s article we read about the example of the hammer and how the actions of the hammer are controlled by a person.  Just like the hammer we control technology therefore making us socially and morally responsible for how we use the hammer.  The hammer can be a tool used for construction ,hanging a picture, or it can be used as a weapon.   Just like the hammer we have technology concerning weapons .  The most controversial weapon that we have created is the atomic bomb.  This bomb can be harmless if not activated.  Once activated it becomes a moral issue of whomever gave permission to use it.  Some argue that if  nuclear technology had never been created then level of war the world operates now would be less severe.  Others argue that it was necessary in order to prevent a world war.  No matter what side is arguably correct the fact is the atomic bomb hurt many innocent individuals and created a world fear that was never present before.

   Technology can be good or bad depending on what the purpose  it is used for.  Our discussion in class concerning the technology or bringing someone back to life is an excellet example of moral responsibilities.  This technology may appear great to some and unthinkable to others.  It is all dependant upon how one views it.  As a society we have a moral responsibilty to make sure that the technology of stem cells, or cloning is used in a way that is socially responsible.   Technological advances will never please everyone but they must be respectful of socieities views.

outline

Outline Jus 494-  Inexpensive Lap Tops for Third World Countries:

            There is a large debate currently concerning the one lap top per child movement. As we all know technology poses great inequalities for third world countries and less developed nations that cannot economically keep up with the technology global movement.  The lap top’s price range is said to be anywhere from $100-150 which is relatively low compared to average $900 lap top cost.  A formal Intel employ is responsible for developing these lap tops.  Companies such as Intel and Microsoft are debating the efficacy of this new idea.   These companies have created a more expensive lap top ranging around $400 compared to the $100.  Intel debates whether a poor country even wants this technology or is it interference to their way of life.  In my personal opinion I find this as a great research topic because it appears that Big Business is once again politically trying to stifle the development of third world countries solely because they will not profit.  This issue is about educating the world’s youth and allowing them to have the same resources as more economically advantaged children.   It is not fair that the social constructivism of technology has robbed some of learning and furthering their opportunities from technology.  In my research paper I plan on depicting the great global impact that providing children in underprivileged environments could have on their future.

    In reference to this course I believe this issue greatly concerns the politics of technology and social constructivism.  Computers and the lap top have become a technologically that is politically controlled and reserved for those who can afford it.  As per our in class discussion certain technologies are socially constructed to not include those who do not have access or cannot afford them. 

References:

1.      http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/30/technology/30laptop.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

2.      http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6049

 

3.      http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9RAnJzaiqvMC&oi=fnd&pg=RA1-PA283&dq=inexpensive+computers+for+third+world+countries&ots=uZLmKzmJGB&sig=3kOu020bHL6zEt5noZAs3TTMBGQ

 

4.      http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/114198342/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

 

 

 

Post 4: Technological Momentum:

   According to this week’s discussion we have defined technological momentum as a more progressive concept then technological determinism or social constructivism alone. Technological momentum as stated by Hughes is that social construction , technological momentum infers that social development shapes and is shaped by technology .   In my own words I can relate this to the technology attributed to the production of cars. In the beginning technology determined how many cars were produced ,at what speed and how many people got to drive them.   With time technology got much faster and soon anyone who wanted the opportunity to own a car could if they had the monetary means.  As the speed of production of cars factored into its marketability in success great technological advances with cars came about due to its massive demand.  Time went on and the world changed .   Time brought social needs for cars that are smaller and use less gas and other environmental products.  Along with the need for more environmentally safe cars, our economy has become less stable and the need for new cars has haulted as liquidty is not as present. Now the technology the pace that cars are produced is irrelevant because the social need is not there.   An industry that was once dependant upon technological determinism has now switched to technolical momentum combining determinism and social constructivism.   With time technology may gain the upper hand in the car industry and then time will only tell if momentum will pick up again and social factors will rise above technology.  Hughes model is a bit more complicated but I think that it far better then basing your views on technology solely on determinism or social constructivism as time is a very pertinent factor concerning technology.

Post 1

This week’s readings and discussion were very personal for me as Ibelieve that my generation is extremely lucky to have technologyincorporated in our daily lives. Inequality concerning technologiessparks many issues within race, gender, class etc… The group that new technologies affect the most is my parent’s generation, for a lot ofolder adults are handicapped by their inexperience and apprehensiontowards change. In my parents experience I can say that they hold a fear of new technology because they feel as if they have never been exposedto it as I have at such an early age. It has taken them many years tobreak their fears and finally learn how to operate computers at a simple level that most new college students and other younger generations take for gr anted. I am not making excuses for them as there are plenty ofadults their age that are very computer savvy. Those whom areassimilated to technology around their age and compute have chosen to move with the new technology revolution and not become victim to change.
    Much like the Industrial revolution the technology revolution hascreated new opportunities and changed the way in which business and manythings interact at a global level. Although the massive change intechnology has affected business,education,productions etc.. I believe that the inequalities it has created among people will eventually changeif people choose to immerse themselves in this new revolution. The world will always have inequalities and technology is not the only reason that
some are better off than others. Technology can bring good and bad upon individuals depending upon how they choose to accept it.

Blog #3 Social Constructivism

 Technology and Social Construction go hand in hand as one is the fuel feeding the other.  For example the technology of apple’s i pod is fueled by how as a society we adapt to it and accept it.  Then we must ask who has the capabilities to access this technology and are these select individuals responsible for its success.   As we all know the I pod is expensive and a lot of people in the United States and around the world cannot afford to own their own.  When an item of technology is not affordable to everyone it creates a certain prestige around the item therefore increasing the popularity ,driving the price and forbidding some from having it.  Socially we as a society create a need for this item and a demand for apple to make more and profit from their invention.

   The I pod is not a technology that is imperative for us to live or function better in our daily lives.   When we think about a technology like a hybrid car we realize that this is an item that may help out a lot of individuals with rising gas costs.  The problem lies that as a society we have increased the demand for this item and consequently made it unaffordable to those who possibly need it the most. Technology is a double edged sword since it is beneficial to most but as a society our increased interest and demand for it makes in unattainable for the majority at times.  Inequalities are present with technologies in society because many of them have been made specifically for certain income brackets or groups of individuals.

Blog Post 2 :Technology and Politics

  This week’s discussion of technology and politics is very pertinent in today’s world especially during election time. Technology affects the way that the election is covered whether it be from online polls, live broadcast of the conventions,debates, online blogs etc..   Technology has changed the way in which we hold our election processes. Information that we receive at rapid rates has the capability to affect the outcome of the election within seconds. People are more technologically linked to up to date media coverage then in past election times. Up to date to the minute information on every aspect of the compaign has the potential sway votes and alter decisions  .  Americans have now come to expect this way of covering the elections as we lived in a fast paced technological world that has no room for slow paced delivery of information.

Technology and poitics had a large effect on the global level. With the introduction of nuclear proliferation we have changed the way in which war conflicts are held. Technology has brought war to a higher more dangerous level.   No longer are countries threatening each other with simple bombs ,nuclear technologies have taken presidence.   Nuclear technologies are very political and raise much debate over whether we should have them and be able to use them.  In my opinion the world would be much better off if we never had created nuclea weapons and weapons of mass destruction. Our world is not politcially stable enough for one nation state or another to have the power to decide whether or not they want to bring about nuclear war.  Technology has helped society and politics in many ways but with nuclear technoligies it has posed some very major threats to world safety.