GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

Chapter II

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY

AND THE HUMAN CONDITION

Lesson Topic Title

1 Human Flourishing
2 Technology as Away of Revealing
3 The Good Life
4 When Technology and Humanity

Lesson 1. HUMAN FLOURISHING

Topic 1
Objectives At the end of the lesson the students should be able to
1. identify different conceptions of human flourishing;
2. determine the development of the scientific method and
validity of science; and
3. critic human flourishing vis-a-vis progress of science and
technology to be able to define for themselves the meaning
of a good life.

INTRODUCTION
Eudaimonia, literally "good spirited," is a term coined by renowned Greek
philosopher Aristotle (385-323 BC) to describe the pinnacle of happiness that is
attainable by humans. This has often been translated into "human flourishing'" in
literature, arguably likening humans to flowers achieving their full bloom.
As discussed in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle's human flourishing arises
as a result of different components such as phronesis, friendship, wealth, and power.
In the Ancient Greek society, they believe that acquiring these qualities will surely
bring the seekers happiness, which in effect allows them to partake in the greater
notion of what we call the Good.
As times change, elements that comprise human flourishing changed, which
are subject to the dynamic social history as written by humans. People found means to
live more comfortably, explore more places, develop more products, and make more
money, and then repeating the process in full circle. In the beginning, early people
relied on simple machines to make hunting and gathering easier. This development
allowed them to make grander and more sophisticated machines to aid them in their
endeavors that eventually led to space explorations, medicine innovations, and
ventures of life after death. Our concept of human flourishing today proves to be
different from what Aristotle originally perceived then- humans of today are expected
to become a "man of the world." He is supposed to situate himself in a global
neighborhood, working side by side among institutions and the government to be able
to reach a common goal. Competition as a means of survival has become passé;
coordination is the new trend.
Interestingly, there exists a discrepancy between eastern and western conception
regarding society and human flourishing. It has been observed that western
civilization tends to be more focused on the individual, while those from the east are
more community-centric. Human flourishing as an end then is primarily more of a
concern for western civilizations over eastern ones. This is not to discredit our

1
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

kinsfolk from the east; perhaps in their view, community takes the highest regard that
the individual
should sacrifice himself for the sake of the society. This is apparent in the Chinese
Confucian system or the Japanese Bushido, both of which view the whole as greater
than their components. The Chinese and the Japanese encourage studies of literature,
sciences, and art, not entirely for oneself but in service of a greater cause. The Greek
Aristotelian view, on the other hand, aims for eudaimonia as the ultimate good; there
is no indication whatsoever that Aristotle entailed it instrumental to achieve some
other goals. Perhaps, a person who has achieved such state would want to serve the
community, but that is brought upon through deliberation based on his values rather
than his belief that the state is greater than him, and thus is only appropriate that he
should recognize it as a higher entity worthy of service.
Nevertheless, such stereotypes cannot be said to be true given the current
stance of globalization. Flourishing borders allowed people full access to cultures that
as a result, very few are able to maintain their original philosophies. It is in this regard
that we would tackle human flourishing-in a global perspective and as a man of the
world.

Science, Technology, and Human Flourishing

In the previous chapters, contributions of science and technology have been

laid down thoroughly. Every discovery, innovation, and success contributes to our
pool of human knowledge. Perhaps, one of the most prevalent themes is human's
perpetual need to locate himself in the world by finding proofs to trace evolution. The
business of uncovering the secrets of the universe answers the question of our
existence and provides us something to look forward to. Having a particular role,
which is unique yours, elicits our idea of self-importance. It is in this regard that
human flourishing is deeply intertwined with goal setting relevant to science and
technology. In this case, the latter is relevant as a tool in achieving the former or
echoing Heidegger's statement, technology is a human activity that we excel in as a
result of achieving science. Suffice to say that the end goals of both science and
technology and human flourishing are related, in that the good is inherently related to
the truth. The following are two concepts about science which ventures its claim on
truth.

Science as Method and Results

For the most part, science's reputation stems from the objectivity brought upon
by an arbitrary, rigid methodology whose very character absolves it from any
accusation of prejudice. Such infamy effectively raised science in a pedestal
untouchable by other institutions-its sole claim to reason and empiricism garnering
supporters who want to defend it and its ways.

In school, the scientific method is introduced in the earlier part of discussions.

Even though the number of steps varies, it presents a general idea of how to do
science:
1. Observe and determine if there are unexplained occurrences unfolding.
2. Determine the problem and identify factors involved.
3. Through past knowledge of similar instance, formulate hypothesis that could
explain the said phenomenon. Ideally, the goal is to reject the null hypothesis and

2
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

accept the alternative hypothesis for the study "to count as significant" (can also be
separated into additional steps such as "to generate prediction" or "to infer from past
experiments").
4. Conduct experiment by setting up dependent and independent variables, and trying
to see how independent ones affect dependent ones.
5. Gather and analyze results throughout and upon culmination of the experiment.
Examine if the data gathered are significant enough to conclude results.
6. Formulate conclusion and provide recommendation in case others would want to
broaden the study.
At least in the students' formative years, the above routine is basic methodology
when introducing them to experimentation and empiricism-- two distinct features that
give science edge over other schools of thought. Throughout the course of history,
however, there exists heavy objections on the scientific procedure; the line separating
science and the so-called pseudoscience becomes more muddled.

Verification Theory
The earliest criterion that distinguishes philosophy and science is verification
theory. The idea proposes that a discipline is science if it can be confirmed or
interpreted in the event of an alternative hypothesis being accepted. In that regard,
said theory gives premium to empiricism and only takes into account those results
which are measurable and experiments which are repeatable. This was espoused by a
movement in the early twentieth century called the Vienna Circle, by a group of
scholar who believed that only those which can be observed should be regarded as
meaningful and reject those which cannot be directly accessed meaningless. Initially,
this proved be attractive due to general consensus from people, which happened to see
for themselves support how the experiment occurred, solidifying its validity and
garnering supporters from esteemed figures. Its shortcomings, however, proved to be
a somewhat too risk-
several budding theories that lack empirical results might be shot down prematurely,
causing slower innovation and punishing ingenuity are of initially theory of newer,
novel thoughts. Celebrated discoveries in physics, for instance, are initially theorized
without proper acknowledgment of their being. Einstein's theory on the existence of
gravitational waves would, following his thought, be dismissed due to lack of
evidence almost a hundred years this ago. Quantum mechanics would not have
prospered if the scientific society during the time of Edwin Schrödinger did not
entertain his outrageous thought that one cat in the box is both dead and alive, which
can only be determined once you look in the box yourself.
Aside from above critique, this theory completely fails to weed out bogus
arguments that explain things coincidentally. A classic example is astrology, whose
followers are able to employ the verification method in ascertaining its reliability. The
idea is that since one already has some sort of expectations on what to find, they will
interpret events in line with said expectations. American philosopher Thomas Kuhn
warned us against bridging the gap between evidence and theory by attempting to
interpret the former according to our own biases, that is, whether or not we subscribe
to the theory.
Below is a short story illustrating this point:
Suppose, for instance, this girl, Lea has a (not-so- scientific) theory that her
classmate lan likes her. Good, she thought, I like him too. But how do I know that he
likes me?

3
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

She began by observing him and his interactions with her. Several gestures she
noted include his always exchanging pleasantries with her whenever they bump into
each other, his big smile when he sees her, and him going out of his way to greet her
even when riding a jeepney. Through these observations, she was then able to
conclude that lan does like her because, she thought, why would anyone do something
like that for a person he does not like?
As it turns out, however. lan is just generally happy to meet people he knew. He had
known Lea since they were in first year and regards her as a generally okay person. It
is no surprise then that upon learning that lan basically does this to everyone, Lea was
crushed. She vowed to herself that she would never assume again.
Based from above story, is it justified for Lea to think that lan does not like
her? Not quite. The next criterion also warns us about the danger of this view.

Falsification Theory
Perhaps the current prevalent methodology in science, falsification theory
asserts that as long as an ideology is not proven to be false and can best explain a
phenomenon over alternative theories, we should accept the said ideology. Due to its
hospitable character, the shift to this theory allowed emergence of theories otherwise
rejected by verification theory. It does not promote ultimate adoption of one theory
but instead encourages research in order to determine which among the theories can
stand the test of falsification. The strongest one is that which is able to remain upheld
amidst various tests, while being able to make particularly risky predictions about the
world. Karl Popper is the known proponent of this view. He was notorious for stating
that up-and-coming theories of the time, such as Marx's Theory of Social History and
Sigmund Freud's Psychoanalysis, are not testable and thus not falsifiable, and
subsequently questioning their status as scientific. Albeit majority of scientists
nowadays are more inclined to be Popperian in their beliefs, this theory. similar to the
theory above, presents certain dangers by interpreting an otherwise independent
evidence in light of their pet theory.
To illustrate, previous story is restated:
Ian is generally every body's friend. He likes to be around with people and
generally aspires to become everybody's friend. However, there is this one girl, Lea,
who seemed to not like him when he is around, Every time he waves at her, she turns
away, and when they are in the same room, she avoids his glances. Through this, he
concluded that Lea does not like him and does his best to show her that he is not a
threat. He began greeting her whenever they pass by each other at the corridor, even
going so far as calling her attention when he was in the jeepney and saw her walking
fast. When they are able to talk to each other, he found out that Lea is just really shy
and is not accustomed to people greeting her. He. then was able to conclude that his
initial impression of her not liking him (as a person) is wrong and thus said
proposition is rejected.
Although there is no happy ending yet for Lea and lan, we can thus see how in
this case, falsification method is prone to the same generalizations committed by the
verification method. There is no known rule as to the number of instance that a theory
is rejected or falsified in order for it to be set aside. Similarly, there is no assurance
that observable event or "evidences" are indeed manifestations of a certain concept or
theories." Thus, even though, theoretically, falsification method is more accepted,
scientists are still not convinced that it should be regarded as what makes a discipline
scientific.

4
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

Science as a Social Endeavor

Due to inconclusiveness of the methodologies previously cited, a new school
of thought on the proper demarcation criterion of science emerged. Several
philosophers such as Paul Thagard, Imre Lakatos, Helen Longino, David Bloor, and
Richard Rorty, among others, presented an alternative demarcation that explores the
social dimension of science and effectively, technology. Sciences cease to belong
solely to gown- wearing, bespectacled scientists at laboratories. The new view
perpetuates dimension which generally benefits the society. For instance, far-off
places in South America where many of the tribes remain uncontacted, do not regard
western science as their science. Whatever their science is, it can be ascertained that it
is in no way inferior to that of globalized peoples' science. Thus, it presents an
alternative notion that goes beyond the boundaries of cold, hard facts of science and
instead projects it in a different light, such as a manifestation of shared experience
forging solidarity over communities.

Science and Results

For the most part, people who do not understand science are won over when
the discipline is able to produce results. Similar to when Jesus performed miracles and
garnered followers, people are sold over the capacity of science to do stuff they
cannot fully comprehend. In this particular argument, however, science is not the only
discipline which is able to produce results-religion, luck, and human randomness are
some of its contemporaries in the field. For some communities without access to
science, they can turn to divination and superstition and still get the same results.
Science is not entirely foolproof, such that it is correct 100% of the time. Weather
reports, for one, illustrate fallibility and limitations of their scope, as well as their
inability to predict disasters. The best that can be done during an upcoming disaster is
to reinforce materials to be more calamity proof and restore the area upon impact. It
can be then concluded that science does not monopolize the claim for definite results.

Science as Education

Aforementioned discussion notes that there is no such thing as a singular

scientific method, offering instead a variety of procedures that scientists can
experiment with to get results and call them science. Discoveries in physics,
specifically in quantum mechanics, appeared to have debunked the idea of objectivity
in reality, subscribing instead to alternative idea called intersubjectivity. With
objectivity gone, it has lost its
number one credence. Nevertheless, there still exists a repressing concept that comes
about as a result of unjustified irreverence of science-our preference of science-
inclined students over those which are less adept.
There are distinct portions in entrance exams in the secondary and tertiary
levels that are dedicated to science and mathematics. In the Philippines, a large
distribution of science high schools can be found all over the country, forging
competition for aspiring students to secure a slot and undergo rigorous science and
mathematics training based on specialized curricula. Although arguable as these
schools also take great consideration in providing holistic education by assuring that
other non-science courses
are covered, adeptness in science and mathematics are the primary condition to be
admitted. This preference is also reflected on the amount of STEM (Science,

5
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)-offering Schools accommodating Grades 11

and 12. Among all the clusters being offered, STEM trumps the remaining clusters in
terms of popularity and distribution, with Accounting and Business coming in as a
close second. One might infer that there are more demand in this field as students are
preconditioned that the field would latter land them high-paying jobs and a lucrative
career after graduation.
How is science perceived by those who graduated from this field? A couple of
years ago, a student entered a class all curious and excited. When he was made to
report on Paul Feyerabend's work How to Defend Society against Science one day. he
looked dissident, staunchly refusing to consider the author's ideas on science and
critiquing him instead. When asked why, he reasoned out that he had come from a
science high school and was trained to regard science in a distinct accord. As isolated
a case as it
may seem, it somewhat suggests that the aforementioned kind of academic
environment has made students unwelcoming of objections against science.
Reminiscent of Paul Feyerabend's sentiment above, he muses how the educational
system can hone and preserve students' capacity to entertain other options and decide
for themselves the best among all presented. It will thus reinforce their imagination
and allow some level of unorthodoxy, bringing forth novel discoveries that otherwise
would not be considered
had they stuck to the default methodology. Innovations are brought forth by the
visionaries, not the prude legalists, and several notable figures in science even
consider themselves as outsiders.
If one is really in pursuit of human flourishing, it would make sense for them
to pursue it holistically. Simply mastering science and technology would be
inadequate if we are to, say, socialize with people or ruminate on our inner self.
Aristotle's eudaimonic person is required to be knowledgeable about science, among
other things of equal importance. They are supposed to possess intellectual virtues
that will enable them to determine truth from falsehood or good reasoning from poor
reasoning. A
true eudaimon recognizes that flourishing requires one to excel in various dimensions,
such as linguistic, kinetic, artistic, and socio-civic. Thus, he understands that he
should not focus on one aspect alone.

How Much Is Too Much?

In 2000, world leaders signed the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) that
targets eight concerns, one of which states that they should be able to forge a global
partnership for development. Inasmuch as the institutes imposing them' do so in good
faith, the primary goal to achieve growth for all might prove to be fatal in the long
run.
Economists believe that growth is the primary indicator of development, as both go
hand in hand, and has put forth their resources in trying to achieve such. Technology
has been a primary instrument in enabling them to pursue said goal, utilizing
resources, machineries, and labor. What is missing in this equation is that growth
presents an
illusory notion of sustainability the world's resources can only provide so much, it
cannot be expected to stretch out for everybody's consumption over a long period of
time. Moreover, growth is not infinite-there is no preordained ceiling once the ball
starts rolling. If the MDG convention's intent was to get everyone in the growth ship,
that ship will surely sink before leaving the port. The same analogy applies to the

6
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

capacity of nature to accommodate us, which Joseph Hickel contemplated on,

suggesting that developed countries should not push forth more growth but instead
adopt "de-development" policies or else, everybody loses. The rapid pace of
technological growth allows no room for nature to recuperate, resulting in exploitation
and irreversible damages to nature. Right now, we are experiencing repercussions of
said exploits in the hands of man-made climate change, which would snowball and
affect majority of flora and fauna, driving half of the latter extinct in less than a
hundred year from now. If this continues in its currently alarming rate, we might bring
about our own extinction.

SUMMARY
Human flourishing is defined as being "good spirited" in the classical
Aristotelian notion. Humans generally have a notion on what it means to flourish;
albeit in the advent of science and technology, they chose to hinge their ends
alongside the latter's results. While it is true that science equips its knowcrs some
details about the world, its main claim to objectivity and systematic methodology is at
the very least flawed. However, that does not stop institutions to favor those who
excel in said discipline. Finally, the economic perception of enrichment, otherwise
known as growth, is heavily fueled by technology and should be impeded. We have to
rethink of our perception of a good life apart from one presented in this regard.

TEAM WRITTEN OUTPUT #6

Chapter 2. Lesson 1 Human Flourishing

Significant Points to Remember:

7
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

1. The same rubrics and reminders will be applied based from the previous lessons

Group Number Assigned Task

Leaders 1
Member 2
Member 3
Member 4
Member 5
Section
Deadline of One week after the topics was
Submission discussed completely
Date Complied
8
 GE 108-Science, Technology and Society | msdsimon

Honest Good points:

Feedback/
comments from
the Leader and
or members Things to Improve:
about the
completion of
the written
output
performance

Critical Thinking
Points
1 a. What is Eudaimonia?Describe it. 10
b. Identify at least three (3) different conceptions of human 10
flourishing.
2 a.Who is the proponent of verification theory? How do you 10
understand verification theory? Cite realistic or true to life experience
as an example.
b.Who is the proponent of falsification theory? How do you 10
understand falsification theory? Cite realistic or true to life experience
as an example.
3 a.What is MDG? Cite at least two major concepts that we have to 20
consider to sustain good life in the coming century?
Total 60