A Band-Aid On A Bullet Wound

The depth and complexity of societal issues span far beyond scientific solutions. Where science quantifies, human values such as compassion, fear, and hope are qualitative and thus fall within their own realm of the humanities. Although according to Douthwaite, technological advancements are necessary to solving human problems, he also makes a point that these advancements are not capable of ever truly resolving issues rooted in human nature. The Huesemanns would argue that if anything, science itself, namely quantum mechanics show the innate inability of technology to truly outperform nature. This implies that science does more harm than we can truly justify. Middle ground is found in the commentary of Sean Johnson, he presents the idea that technological fixes are merely a way to temporarily mitigate societal problems as society endeavors to more successfully manage itself and shift behavior.
I think that the Huesemanns make valid points that everything is connected. As various schools of thought and study grow and propagate expansion of understanding, inevitably there occurs the amalgam among concepts. That is to say math inevitably ties to biology and biology ties to nature and nature ties to humanity, etc. Therefore technological fixes, being as singular as they are in solving problems, are destined to have unforeseen repercussions particularly due to the rapid rate at which we implement them. I certainly don’t believe we should completely stop improving technology, but I do believe we need to take more time to understand the ethics and implications of the forward steps we take. Additionally, I think more mind and money ought to be paid towards the humanities and social sciences, as at the end of the day the root of the world’s problems are based within human actions and inactions. If we cannot innovate ourselves to be better, what chance do we have to refrain from destroying the world?

2 thoughts on “A Band-Aid On A Bullet Wound”

  1. I like your stance on putting more resources towards education in the humanities and social sciences fields. Scientists oftentimes are so focused on their experiments that nothing else gets thought through. Spending more time and resources on learning how our actions affect those around us would not only improve interpersonal relationships but our world ecosystem as a whole, potentially. But would we actually ever be able to foreshadow all negative repercussions with increased education/attention? One of the many miracles of our planet is the fact that every action has an equal reaction, it’s what keeps equilibrium. How can we predict which actions will result in which reactions? Should the possibility of potential harm really hinder technological advances that could save lives? Solve global climate change?

  2. I found the part where you talk about how all the different field are connected very interesting. Especially how you were able to bring it back around to the unforeseen repercussions. However, in saying that I am not sure your idea for slower appliance of tech is something we could do in a smooth rational way. If someone was to try and hold others back from moving forward in tech then it can be guessed that there would those who would be upset by such actions, creating another social issue for people to disagree on. It is in human nature to move as fast as we can and to only really lock back when something horrible occurs so the idea that there would even be cautious people may not be true.

Comments are closed.