Nature of Science & Technology Education
Find the latest research, reviews and news about Science, technology and society from across all of the Nature journals. Science and technology studies, or science, technology and society studies (both abbreviated . More recently, there has been an associated turn to ecology, nature, and materiality in general, whereby the socio-technical and natural/ material. One might think that this is a defensible, and sufficiently emancipatory claim about the relation between scientific and technological knowledge. Yet many.
Already, by-products of industrialization in the atmosphere may be depleting the ozone layer, which screens the planet's surface from harmful ultraviolet rays, and may be creating a buildup of carbon dioxide, which traps heat and could raise the planet's average temperatures significantly.
Chapter 3: The Nature of Technology
The environmental consequences of a nuclear war, among its other disasters, could alter crucial aspects of all life on earth. From the standpoint of other species, the human presence has reduced the amount of the earth's surface available to them by clearing large areas of vegetation; has interfered with their food sources; has changed their habitats by changing the temperature and chemical composition of large parts of the world environment; has destabilized their ecosystems by introducing foreign species, deliberately or accidentally; has reduced the number of living species; and in some instances has actually altered the characteristics of certain plants and animals by selective breeding and more recently by genetic engineering.
- The Convergence of Science, Technology, and Nature
- There was a problem providing the content you requested
- Science and technology studies
What the future holds for life on earth, barring some immense natural catastrophe, will be determined largely by the human species. Technological and Social Systems Interact Strongly Individual inventiveness is essential to technological innovation.
Nonetheless, social and economic forces strongly influence what technologies will be undertaken, paid attention to, invested in, and used. Such decisions occur directly as a matter of government policy and indirectly as a consequence of the circumstances and values of a society at any particular time. In the United States, decisions about which technological options will prevail are influenced by many factors, such as consumer acceptance, patent laws, the availability of risk capital, the federal budget process, local and national regulations, media attention, economic competition, tax incentives, and scientific discoveries.
The balance of such incentives and regulations usually bears differently on different technological systems, encouraging some and discouraging others.
Technology has strongly influenced the course of history and the nature of human society, and it continues to do so. The great revolutions in agricultural technology, for example, have probably had more influence on how people live than political revolutions; changes in sanitation and preventive medicine have contributed to the population explosion and to its control ; bows and arrows, gunpowder, and nuclear explosives have in their turn changed how war is waged; and the microprocessor is changing how people write, compute, bank, operate businesses, conduct research, and communicate with one another.
Technology is largely responsible for such large-scale changes as the increased urbanization of society and the dramatically growing economic interdependence of communities worldwide. Historically, some social theorists have believed that technological change such as industrialization and mass production causes social change, whereas others have believed that social change such as political or religious changes leads to technological change.
However, it is clear that because of the web of connections between technological and other social systems, many influences act in both directions.
The Social System Imposes Some Restrictions on Openness in Technology For the most part, the professional values of engineering are very similar to those of science, including the advantages seen in the open sharing of knowledge. Because of the economic value of technology, however, there are often constraints on the openness of science and engineering that are relevant to technological innovation. A large investment of time and money and considerable commercial risk are often required to develop a new technology and bring it to market.
That investment might well be jeopardized if competitors had access to the new technology without making a similar investment, and hence companies are often reluctant to share technological knowledge. But no scientific or technological knowledge is likely to remain secret for very long. Patent laws encourage openness by giving individuals and companies control over the use of any new technology they develop; however, to promote technological competition, such control is only for a limited period of time.
Commercial advantage is not the only motivation for secrecy and control. Much technological development occurs in settings, such as government agencies, in which commercial concerns are minimal but national security concerns may lead to secrecy.
Because the connections between science and technology are so close in some fields, secrecy inevitably begins to restrict some of the free flow of information in science as well. Some scientists and engineers are very uncomfortable with what they perceive as a compromise of the scientific ideal, and some refuse to work on projects that impose secrecy.
Others, however, view the restrictions as appropriate. Occasionally, however, the use of some technology becomes an issue subject to public debate and possibly formal regulation. Due to reduced error and reaction times flights on average, using autopilot, have been shown to be safer.
Thus the technology has a direct impact on people by increasing their safety, and society affects the technology because people want to be safer so they are constantly trying to improve the autopilot systems. Cell phones  — Cell phone technology emerged in the early s after advancements were made in radio technology.
The discovery by Bell Labs revolutionized the capabilities and outcomes of cellular technology. Technology only improved once mobile phone users could communicate outside of a designated area.
First generation mobile phones were first created and sold by Motorola. Their phone was only intended for use in cars. Second generation mobile phone capabilities continued to improve because of the switch to digital. Phones were faster which enhanced communication capabilities of customers.
They were also sleeker and weighed less than bulky first generation technology. Technologically advances boosted customer satisfaction and broadened cell phone companies customer base.
Third generation technology changed the way people interact with other. Now customers had access to wifi, texting and other applications. Mobile phones are now entering into the fourth generations. Cellular and mobile phones revolutionized the way people socialize and communicate in order to establish modern social structure. People have affected the development of this technology by demanding features such as larger screens, touch capabilities, and internet accessibility.
Scientist theorized a network of computers connected to each other. Computing capabilities contributed to developments and the creation of the modern day computer or laptop.
The internet has become a normal part of life and business, to such a degree that the United Nations views it as a basic human right.
The internet is becoming larger, one way is that more things are being moved into the digital world due to demand, for example online banking.
It has drastically changed the way most people go about daily habits. Deliberative democracy[ edit ] Deliberative democracy is a reform of representative or direct democracies which mandates discussion and debate of popular topics which affect society. Deliberative Democracy is a tool for making decisions. More recently, the term was coined by Joseph Bessette in his work Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government, where he uses the idea in opposition to the elitist interpretations of the United States Constitution with emphasis on public discussion.
Deliberative Democracy allows for "a wider range of public knowledge," and it has been argued that this can lead to "more socially intelligent and robust" science. One major shortcoming of deliberative democracy is that many models insufficiently ensure critical interaction. Rules of equality, civility, and inclusivity may prompt deliberation even when our first impulse is to avoid it.
Stories anchor reality by organizing experience and instilling a normative commitment to civic identities and values, and function as a medium for framing discussions.The Effect of Technology on Environment & Life style - (HD) Documentary
Leadership provides important cues to individuals in deliberative settings, and can keep groups on a deliberative track when their members slip into routine and habit. Individuals are more likely to sustain deliberative reasoning when they have a stake in the outcomes.
Apprenticeship teaches citizens to deliberate well. We might do well to imagine education as a form of apprenticeship learning, in which individuals learn to deliberate by doing it in concert with others more skilled in the activity. Jasanoff comes to the conclusion that there is no longer a question of if there needs to be increased public participation in making decisions about science and technology, but now there needs to be ways to make a more meaningful conversation between the public and those developing the technology.
However, things similar to this have been implemented in small, local, governments like New England towns and villages. New England town hall meetings are a good example of deliberative democracy in a realistic setting. While the main aim is to reach consensus, a deliberative democracy should encourage the voices of those with opposing viewpoints, concerns due to uncertainties, and questions about assumptions made by other participants.
Relationship between religion and science
It should take its time and ensure that those participating understand the topics on which they debate. Independent managers of debates should also have substantial grasp of the concepts discussed, but must "[remain] independent and impartial as to the outcomes of the process.
Tragedy of the commons InGarrett Hardin popularised the phrase "tragedy of the commons. Since then, the tragedy of the commons has been used to symbolize the degradation of the environment whenever many individuals use a common resource.
Although Garrett Hardin was not an STS scholar, the concept of tragedy of the commons still applies to science, technology and society. Data and internet passwords can be stolen much more easily than physical documents. Virtual spying is almost free compared to the costs of physical spying. The movement for net neutrality argues that the Internet should not be a resource that is dominated by one particular group, specifically those with more money to spend on Internet access.
A counterexample to the tragedy of the commons is offered by Andrew Kahrl. Privatization can be a way to deal with the tragedy of the commons. However, Kahrl suggests that the privatization of beaches on Long Islandin an attempt to combat overuse of Long Island beaches, made the residents of Long Island more susceptible to flood damage from Hurricane Sandy. The privatization of these beaches took away from the protection offered by the natural landscape.
In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to put science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist. He views science as descriptive and religion as prescriptive. He stated that if science and mathematics concentrate on what the world ought to be, in the way that religion does, it may lead to improperly ascribing properties to the natural world as happened among the followers of Pythagoras in the sixth century B.
Habgood also stated that he believed that the reverse situation, where religion attempts to be descriptive, can also lead to inappropriately assigning properties to the natural world. A notable example is the now defunct belief in the Ptolemaic geocentric planetary model that held sway until changes in scientific and religious thinking were brought about by Galileo and proponents of his views.
Kuhn asserted that science is made up of paradigms that arise from cultural traditions, which is similar to the secular perspective on religion. Polanyi further asserted that all knowledge is personal and therefore the scientist must be performing a very personal if not necessarily subjective role when doing science.
Coulson and Harold K. Schillingboth claimed that "the methods of science and religion have much in common. Dialogue[ edit ] Clerks studying astronomy and geometry France, early 15th century.
The religion and science community consists of those scholars who involve themselves with what has been called the "religion-and-science dialogue" or the "religion-and-science field. Journals addressing the relationship between science and religion include Theology and Science and Zygon. Eugenie Scott has written that the "science and religion" movement is, overall, composed mainly of theists who have a healthy respect for science and may be beneficial to the public understanding of science.
She contends that the "Christian scholarship" movement is not a problem for science, but that the "Theistic science" movement, which proposes abandoning methodological materialism, does cause problems in understanding of the nature of science. This annual series continues and has included William JamesJohn DeweyCarl Sagan, and many other professors from various fields.
Science, Religion, and Naturalism, heavily contests the linkage of naturalism with science, as conceived by Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and like-minded thinkers; while Daniel Dennett thinks that Plantinga stretches science to an unacceptable extent.
Barrettby contrast, reviews the same book and writes that "those most needing to hear Plantinga's message may fail to give it a fair hearing for rhetorical rather than analytical reasons.
Scientific and theological perspectives often coexist peacefully. Christians and some non-Christian religions have historically integrated well with scientific ideas, as in the ancient Egyptian technological mastery applied to monotheistic ends, the flourishing of logic and mathematics under Hinduism and Buddhismand the scientific advances made by Muslim scholars during the Ottoman empire.
Even many 19th-century Christian communities welcomed scientists who claimed that science was not at all concerned with discovering the ultimate nature of reality. Principethe Johns Hopkins University Drew Professor of the Humanities, from a historical perspective this points out that much of the current-day clashes occur between limited extremists—both religious and scientistic fundamentalists—over a very few topics, and that the movement of ideas back and forth between scientific and theological thought has been more usual.
He also admonished that true religion must conform to the conclusions of science. Buddhism and science Buddhism and science have been regarded as compatible by numerous authors. For example, Buddhism encourages the impartial investigation of nature an activity referred to as Dhamma-Vicaya in the Pali Canon —the principal object of study being oneself.
Buddhism and science both show a strong emphasis on causality. However, Buddhism doesn't focus on materialism. In his book The Universe in a Single Atom he wrote, "My confidence in venturing into science lies in my basic belief that as in science, so in Buddhism, understanding the nature of reality is pursued by means of critical investigation. Christianity and science Science and Religion are portrayed to be in harmony in the Tiffany window Education Francis Collins, a scientist who happens to be a Christian, is the current director of the National Institutes of Health.
Among early Christian teachers, Tertullian c. These ideas were significantly countered by later findings of universal patterns of biological cooperation.
According to John Habgoodall man really knows here is that the universe seems to be a mix of good and evilbeauty and painand that suffering may somehow be part of the process of creation.
Habgood holds that Christians should not be surprised that suffering may be used creatively by Godgiven their faith in the symbol of the Cross. The "Handmaiden" tradition, which saw secular studies of the universe as a very important and helpful part of arriving at a better understanding of scripture, was adopted throughout Christian history from early on.
Heilbron Alistair Cameron CrombieDavid Lindberg Edward GrantThomas Goldstein,  and Ted Davis have reviewed the popular notion that medieval Christianity was a negative influence in the development of civilization and science.