tech fix or and environmental blitz?

(pretty sure this first question is talking about Johnson… but maybe I didn’t understand the articles)

Jeff Douthwaite proposes that technology is the social fix for the world and is needed to save humans from our problems (not really though, he just thinks it going to buy us time). Johnson is on this boat completely. He sees science and technology as the optimal and best solution when it come to our social problems, he starts by addressing the ground breaking work of retractable steps on trolly cars and goes on to explain how every social problem has a scientific solution. His source he uses for all this work is that of doctor Alvin Weinberg. Even though he follows the path of Weinberg through almost all his text at the end he puts in a few critiques then claims it is on the engineers to pay close attention to their fixes and see if its longevity can really hold up in this world. On the completely other side is the works of the Huesemann brothers. They completely contradict everything previously stated by claiming this world has been working for the last 2-3 billion years based on nature and its evolution. They believe that for humans to try to to tip the scale in their direction to better themselves it will always come back to bite them with the environment, this is due to the idea they have on the world living in the terms of equilibrium.

in the second paragraph we really tackle the problem that is strongly state in the brothers work. This idea of technological fixes for social and environmental are recorded as having negative repercussions. An example of this can be seen in DDT or pesticides, when unnatural means are used for a natural product they start to have negative effects, like being resistant to biodegradation and become infused with fatty tissue in animals and humans. However I don’t think that we should stop exploring technology and its way to help humans. We cannot just stop trying to improve and become better as a species or else our world would turn to chaos.

3 thoughts on “tech fix or and environmental blitz?”

  1. I really like your way of separating the authors in the texts in first paragraph. You are very clear on what author portrays what tech-fixes are in their mind and how it plays a role in society. I never thought to really think about if the authors were contradictory in any way, I like your last statement and really connect to it because I also talked about equilibrium in my post. In your second paragraph, are you more concerned with corp. screwing the world with their agenda to make money? Or do you just not like the negative effects in general when it comes to tech-fixes? Overall I really enjoyed reading your post because I could definitely see where your mind was and where your concerns were with the article.

  2. I very much like how you talk about the texts. Especially because we are in agreement with their conclusions. The authors argue their points well and you see their points and expound on them. Tech is something that is beneficial to humanity and I agree with your conclusions.

Leave a Reply