-
The Fate Of Man In A Scientist-technological Era
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 5]
Page 5 of 5
-
-
-
The hope of
our filling and ruling the earth is turning sour as it is realized, and
the prospective future seems nightmarish. Another effect of the new
human situation is that our environment, and the forces which shape our
lives, become more and more man-made. Even our basic thoughts about our
situation and ourselves are continuously geared towards
anthropocentricism. Looking at those countries of the world where
science and technology already developed, one notices a total feeling of
disillusionment. What can we say is the cause?
The obvious reason is
that the glorified science and technology with the peripheral standard
of living has not curbed the evil that is rampant in our society.
Alexander, in giving credence to the views of M. L. Smith, avows that
“collectively we are much more like two-year-olds in a petrol store with
a box of matches than we are like gods or even responsible adultsâ€15.
We really call it a new world. But how brave is the new world? One can
admit the fact that the acutest social and technical problems facing
mankind today come not from the so-called under-development’ but from
‘over-development’16. This is why the various applications of modern
science will continue to constitute mayhem to peace and human life.
In
the face of all these, some proponents of science would still hold it
as being neutral. For them, man’s discoveries are neutral, what varies
is their application, which involves moral choice. Such views maintained
that “when a man discovered fire, he could either warm himself with it
or go out to burn the surrounding villages with it. Iron when
discovered, could either be used to make cooking-pots or be beaten into
spears for killing people. At the same time, drugs may be used to heal
the sick minds or to break it. Nuclear power as well may be used to warm
a house or set a nation ablazeâ€17
However, if we should take it in
another sense, one can prove it that science is never neutral.
Scientific research is only empirical and cannot be said to be wholly
rational or objective. Every human activity involves value judgment.
Since science is a human activity, it should not be left out. In other
words, decisions have to be made concerning projects that are worth
undertaking and hypotheses must be evaluated as well.
The paradox of
modern science is such that while it gives man a god-like power, it also
appears to reduce man to a rather confusing animal in a confusing
world. Is man just a mere Heideggerian Dasein who is thrown into
existence? Can man be only a bundle of conditioned reflexes
predetermined by his genes, chemistry and environment? But science as a
god seemed to have reduced its (man) worshippers to nothing.
Obviously,
the value of man surpasses whatever science and technology can offer.
Therefore, mechanisms, which underlie the application of science, should
not be completely upheld at the expense of meaning through which human
life excels.
1 D. Alexander, Beyond Science, (Britain: Lion Pub., 1972) , p.11.
2 J. Ekennia, Bio-Medical Ethics, (Owerri: Barloz Publishers Inc., 2003), p.112.
3 Denis Alexander defined mutation as the mistakes which arise in the genes of the body.
4 D.Alexander, Op. Cit. p.18.
5 Ibid
6 R.F. Biehler, Child Development: An Introduction, (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1976), p.79.
7 J.Ellul, The Technological Society, (Britain: Random House Inc., 1971), p.208.
8 D.Alexander,Op. Cit., p.25.
9 Ibid. p.31.
10 M. Jeeves, From Cells to Souls- and Beyond,(U.K. :Ww.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. 2004), p.26.
11 D.Alexander, Op. Cit. p.35.
12 Ibid. p.37.
13 Ibid. p.41.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid. P.43.
16 S.H.Nasr, Man and nature, (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. 1968), p.13.
17 D.Alexander, Op. Cit. p.43.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 5]
Page 5 of 5
-
