Life should be easy, we sleep and relax surrounded by the benefits of technology, it will make it easier everything. But of course!, We will make everything easier but also make us beings stupid. Delegate all or nearly all of our personal responsibilities to a set of devices that take place automatically. The pace of life increasingly rampant achieve that we have time only to fulfill the "duty" and, this pressing duty, will turn our whole person in demanding absolute relaxation and tranquility. As each day mankind will be faster and more efficient with the help (or we help you?) Of our technology, but as people we are every day more exhausted and desensitized. This, what happened, is happening or will happen? It may never happen "?.
When criticism is heading towards the condition postmodern life is branded as a retrograde, conservative, traditionalist, obtuse, etc. However, when it intends to point out the drawbacks of an uncritical adoption of the "benefits" of the technological age, no proposal is set far back as a condition of life forms such as the quaternary horde sitting around fire, eating with your hands, covering our bodies with skins and where tradition and knowledge is transferred exclusively orally. Nor is that each of us having to become a contemplative ascetics and our main hobbies are reading The Iliad and The Odyssey in Greek or dedicate the art of cultivating bonsai. No, that's not the idea. No need to radicalize the issue, but that's what you're doing when or defend at all costs the disbanding technological or advocates a return to prehistoric life forms.
On the other hand, some say, "Is it not necessary to achieve a studio dedicated technology, ongoing research and painstaking experimentation. How can you tell us more stupid if you have achieved impressive technologies? "For two situations occur. The first is that those who study, experiment and investigate the technology are a tiny group of people compared to the millions who use them and the adopt-a-blind in their daily lives. The second thing is that technological development and other development. Both move at speeds totally outdated. The greater the advancement of technology the greater the progress of impersonality, and there is nothing to do if one has not realized before this case. And Konrad Lorenz had said in his The Eight Deadly Sins of Civilized Humanity 1973: "The jurisdiction of humanity itself which drives the technological development to our disadvantage, men obfuscate the value appraisal of all real and being robbed of time should be devoted to genuine reflection of human activity. " In an article devoted to analyze the work above Ursúa Nicanor (Ludus Vitalis, vol. XIII, no. 24, 2005, pp. 165-180) says "We have already noted the ability to reflect, now a vanishing value, human beings have and how this human capacity be developed to analyze the entire whole, as 'a being that ceases to reflect risks losing all specifically human qualities and skills' (Lorenz, 1973). Faced with brutal competition, both individually and collectively that we are witnessing, can only proceed, according to Lorenz, 'by revolutionary measures, or at least by a sobering transmutation of all values apparent that both are revered today. " Before the have must be enhance universal values \u200b\u200band education to develop the whole person. " So we are ladies and gentlemen. On the one hand, with regard to technology, that is, the set of skills that allow us to build things differently and leave the environment, we shine like the sun on the other, with regard to its relationship with itself and with Moreover, the human being remains as precarious as ten thousand years ago: Violence at its best (we have become artists in relation to the massive destruction, but from time to time and isolation go back to our primitive methods murder to avoid being bored in the monotonous action triggers and push buttons), samples of obsequiousness and frightening subject and all forms of discrimination and isolation, the latter so characteristic of the animal kingdom that craved differentiate but still belong and with honors . We could say that relate to what we eficientísimos impersonal, relationships with others are deficientísimos. In the words of N. Ursúa "If the scientific and technological development beyond the capacity of moral and ethical development, can we survive? Is it not time to act now so we can live in a more human world and spend from thought to action, an action-packed human and social values? ".
Those who have read or listened to Andres Oppenheimer know what I'm referring to. His latest book Chinese Tales is an apology to globalization. The book has a very clear writing but then you can find some flaws in the argument: the author is a strong advocate of globalization, does not mention one drawback about it (and go any) and what damage the environment? He never spoke of it. For Oppenheimer, China is the perfect prototype for growth but does every country in the world can grow, so As things stand? And yet, what to grow indefinitely? Few would argue that the author is fair, but it is certain that this was not the intention. The names of some of the chapters of his book speak for themselves: "More technical, less sociologists " or "Sobran psychologists, engineers are missing." I have engineers and technologists everywhere is not a solution. But psychologists have not bubbling. Ultimately become a country with technological growth need not be inextricably linked with the decline of professional social and human sciences. It is likely with more engineers and fewer social scientists in a country with educational level as ours, things go bad, or worse. Not a question of quantity but quality (and is annoying to say this, listen more). Could revitalize the educational system, to develop innovative research, to make young people interested in the university and academic excellence, concern for merit and not by the mob and it is likely that things will go better. That better not be because they need it and stay here again because it will be well. And finally as: Why are more students of the humanities, social sciences, law and fewer students engineering? Let's discuss about this question and we will see the conclusions ...
The worsening of the human condition is something patent. If we do not accept it because we want, we take land and go to sleep. Think of where we want to, think that sometimes science fiction is no longer just think about one another why we get along so badly and why with stones, metals or inorganic anything we have a wonderful relationship. Nietzsche, in his Human, All Too Human , said who we are as much at home in nature is that it has no opinion about us. Hopefully not the explanation why this is happening, if so would not only resign.
When criticism is heading towards the condition postmodern life is branded as a retrograde, conservative, traditionalist, obtuse, etc. However, when it intends to point out the drawbacks of an uncritical adoption of the "benefits" of the technological age, no proposal is set far back as a condition of life forms such as the quaternary horde sitting around fire, eating with your hands, covering our bodies with skins and where tradition and knowledge is transferred exclusively orally. Nor is that each of us having to become a contemplative ascetics and our main hobbies are reading The Iliad and The Odyssey in Greek or dedicate the art of cultivating bonsai. No, that's not the idea. No need to radicalize the issue, but that's what you're doing when or defend at all costs the disbanding technological or advocates a return to prehistoric life forms.
On the other hand, some say, "Is it not necessary to achieve a studio dedicated technology, ongoing research and painstaking experimentation. How can you tell us more stupid if you have achieved impressive technologies? "For two situations occur. The first is that those who study, experiment and investigate the technology are a tiny group of people compared to the millions who use them and the adopt-a-blind in their daily lives. The second thing is that technological development and other development. Both move at speeds totally outdated. The greater the advancement of technology the greater the progress of impersonality, and there is nothing to do if one has not realized before this case. And Konrad Lorenz had said in his The Eight Deadly Sins of Civilized Humanity 1973: "The jurisdiction of humanity itself which drives the technological development to our disadvantage, men obfuscate the value appraisal of all real and being robbed of time should be devoted to genuine reflection of human activity. " In an article devoted to analyze the work above Ursúa Nicanor (Ludus Vitalis, vol. XIII, no. 24, 2005, pp. 165-180) says "We have already noted the ability to reflect, now a vanishing value, human beings have and how this human capacity be developed to analyze the entire whole, as 'a being that ceases to reflect risks losing all specifically human qualities and skills' (Lorenz, 1973). Faced with brutal competition, both individually and collectively that we are witnessing, can only proceed, according to Lorenz, 'by revolutionary measures, or at least by a sobering transmutation of all values apparent that both are revered today. " Before the have must be enhance universal values \u200b\u200band education to develop the whole person. " So we are ladies and gentlemen. On the one hand, with regard to technology, that is, the set of skills that allow us to build things differently and leave the environment, we shine like the sun on the other, with regard to its relationship with itself and with Moreover, the human being remains as precarious as ten thousand years ago: Violence at its best (we have become artists in relation to the massive destruction, but from time to time and isolation go back to our primitive methods murder to avoid being bored in the monotonous action triggers and push buttons), samples of obsequiousness and frightening subject and all forms of discrimination and isolation, the latter so characteristic of the animal kingdom that craved differentiate but still belong and with honors . We could say that relate to what we eficientísimos impersonal, relationships with others are deficientísimos. In the words of N. Ursúa "If the scientific and technological development beyond the capacity of moral and ethical development, can we survive? Is it not time to act now so we can live in a more human world and spend from thought to action, an action-packed human and social values? ".
Those who have read or listened to Andres Oppenheimer know what I'm referring to. His latest book Chinese Tales is an apology to globalization. The book has a very clear writing but then you can find some flaws in the argument: the author is a strong advocate of globalization, does not mention one drawback about it (and go any) and what damage the environment? He never spoke of it. For Oppenheimer, China is the perfect prototype for growth but does every country in the world can grow, so As things stand? And yet, what to grow indefinitely? Few would argue that the author is fair, but it is certain that this was not the intention. The names of some of the chapters of his book speak for themselves: "More technical, less sociologists " or "Sobran psychologists, engineers are missing." I have engineers and technologists everywhere is not a solution. But psychologists have not bubbling. Ultimately become a country with technological growth need not be inextricably linked with the decline of professional social and human sciences. It is likely with more engineers and fewer social scientists in a country with educational level as ours, things go bad, or worse. Not a question of quantity but quality (and is annoying to say this, listen more). Could revitalize the educational system, to develop innovative research, to make young people interested in the university and academic excellence, concern for merit and not by the mob and it is likely that things will go better. That better not be because they need it and stay here again because it will be well. And finally as: Why are more students of the humanities, social sciences, law and fewer students engineering? Let's discuss about this question and we will see the conclusions ...
The worsening of the human condition is something patent. If we do not accept it because we want, we take land and go to sleep. Think of where we want to, think that sometimes science fiction is no longer just think about one another why we get along so badly and why with stones, metals or inorganic anything we have a wonderful relationship. Nietzsche, in his Human, All Too Human , said who we are as much at home in nature is that it has no opinion about us. Hopefully not the explanation why this is happening, if so would not only resign.
0 comments:
Post a Comment