Technology - Anais, Emmeline, Dioane, Chen

1a. Technology is always positive.
b. We live in a society where technology advances our lives and enriches our every day activities; without it we would be an entirely different people.
c. 1. What happens if technology enables us in negative ways? (war, bombs, disease) (Emmeline)
2. There are societies that have less technology than we do; are their lives automatically less happy or fulfilled than ours? (Anais)
3. Technology serves to advance us and make our lives easier, but what if our lives get too easy? Then they wouldn't be worth living anymore. (Chen)

2a. Technology creates controversy.
b. There are many instances of technology causing problems with certain religious groups and other traditionalists, who don't appreciate the forward thinking that technology fosters.
c. 1. Isn't stem cell research similar to playing God, in that we are trying to master and change concepts in life that have always been the same and that we have no control over? (Emmeline)
2. Can't we all benefit from stem cell research, in terms of lengthening our lives and making us all more healthy? (Dioane)
3. Isn't it possible for controversy in society to be healthy, because it means that two factions with radically different opinions are conflicting on an issue and then working together to find solutions? (Chen)

3a. Technology takes away from human interaction.
b. We can remember times when people used to meet up in person or talk on the phone instead of texting, emailing, instant messaging, etc. Also, people do things like use conference calls and video chat instead of going out to meet people in person.
c. 1. Instead of making it more difficult, hasn't technology has in fact "made the world smaller" and made it easier for us to talk to more people at one time instead of limiting our interaction? (Anais)
2. What will we be like as humans if we don't even leave our houses to talk to eachother? (Chen)
3. Do we need to reach a middle ground for technology in human interaction? For example, will it be helpful for us to use technology somewhat to talk to our friends and family, but not too much, at the risk of becoming solitary and lazy? (Dioane)

2. Bishop writes that science has been rejected because of the conservative Christian religion, the postmodernist movement which dismisses science as "politics of another means," and the ignorance (and therefore fear) from the general public. We agree with all three of these points, but want to say that all three of them are probably based (on some level) on ignorance, because i doubt that any section of these groups of people know and understand science as well as they should to be able to make an informed decision about it. Science today hasn't yet gone too far. I believe that when it starts interacting FOR us, and getting in the way of humans living their REAL lives, then it goes too far. But as of now, with all the health, communication and travel benefits it offers, science is our ally rather than an enemy.

3. After doing this exercise, our viewpoints on technology have expanded, but not really changed. We still believe that technology, like everything else, is probably better in moderation. While we have come lightyears from the place we were even just 50-100 years ago, (and probably will be lightyears away in another century or so) it is always about moderation. Technology and science do not affect us adversely unless it begins to control us, whether by means of artificial brains (shown in technology doomsday movies such as Terminator and Eagle Eye) or simply by our lack of willpower to not use it all the time. However, at the current time, technology helps us more than hurts us.