In The Future
of Technological Civilization, Woodhouse mentions engineering
commentator Edward Wenk's opinion on the rate of technological innovation:
"The swift pace of technological change no longer matches the response
time of human affairs; technical prowess may exceed the pace of social skills,
especially our ability to anticipate second-order consequences and take
crisis-avoidance measures". It would appear that technological innovation
has become a runaway train - sometimes racing past social and political issues
and rarely slowing down enough to address them. Tracing my steps back to
literature covered earlier in the semester, it would appear that society has
fallen prey to legacy thinking with the concept of technocratic progress at its
heart. Progress for the sake of progress has been adopted as both the
motivation and the goal propelling the rate of technological innovation. Speedy
innovation can positively effect society, like in the case of developing
medicine for complex diseases, however the repercussions to ignorant and
premature advancements in technology seem to significantly outweigh the benefits,
like in the case of developments in nuclear technology. Methods to monitor the
rates at which technology develops seem feasible yet complicated to organize
and assemble.
In some aspects a fast rate of innovation
is helpful, such as the significant developments made in the effectiveness of
AIDS medication. According to the FDA, the first drug to treat AIDS was
released in 1981. "By the end of 2012, some 9.7 million people in poorer
and middle-income countries had access to such AIDS drugs, an increase of
nearly 20 percent in a year" (Kelland). This is an excellent example of
rapid technological innovation supporting global issues where human lives are
at stake. However, a significant contender to the positive aspects of fast
development would be the world-wide race to develop nuclear technologies. The
United States was in such a hurry to order large-scale reactors that they were
designed without attaining significant knowledge from experimenting with small
reactors first (Woodhouse). This nation is still suffering from the ignorant
rush into producing nuclear wastes, as is detailed in an article by Ron Meador.
In fact, this example sheds some perspective on how technological development
can move too fast and too slow at the same time: Government officials during
the US/USSR nuclear debacle poured tens of thousands of dollars within two
decades to develop the technology, however fifty years later, the country is
still trying to formulate effective methods to dispose of the waste created.
What's particularly alarming about Meador's article is the suggestion that the
complexity of disposal technology is proving to be too much of an investment
for both government and private corporations, therefore stunting progress in
this effort.
In an effort to monitor the rate at which
certain technologies are developed, Woodhouse suggests a number of possible
solutions such as imposing tax penalties for especially destructive or
anti-social innovations. This seems like a feasible yet difficult option as
this would necessitate the development of some kind of advisory
board/association to review and analyze each innovation for destructive
qualities. There exists such an expansive range of expertise for various
technologies that the council would also have to be broken down into technology
type (biological, nanotechnology, environmental). Additionally the members of
this council would have to prove that they are significantly concerned with the
interests of the society they are governing. Another complication in this board
would be determining the anti-social consequences of a technology. Trends in
social declines or hindrances can only be seen over a period of time, which
could be costly and cause sponsors of the development to lose interest. An
educated conjecture could be used to predict the social impact of a technology,
however one doesn't really know how something could effect the people until it
is implemented.
Though there are certainly benefits to
rapid technological innovation, as evidenced by the speedy development of
significant AIDS medication, there can also be detrimental aftereffects when
technology progresses beyond the control/capability of mankind's knowledge.
This is illustrated in the difficulties our nation is facing in regards to
proper nuclear waste disposal. Though there are options to mitigate or regulate
the rate at which technology advances, they require a significant range and
depth of knowledge and can result in expensive and/or vague decisions based on
conjecture. It would appear that the people will simply have to trust those
that have the power and resources to advance their innovations so quickly to
also think far enough ahead to consider detrimental and dangerous consequences.
Works Cited
Kelland, Kate. "Global Rate of HIV
Infection, AIDS-Related Deaths Dramatically Reduced: UN."
Huffington Post. 23 Sept. 2013. Web. 11 February 2014
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/23/global-rate-of-hiv-infection_n_3974248.html>
Meador, Ron. "Two
nuclear-waste-disposal reports raise doubts this problem can be solved." MinnPost. 03 Dec. 2013. Web. 10
February 2014
<http://www.minnpost.com/earth-journal/2013/12/two-nuclear-waste-disposal-reports-raise-doubts-problem-can-be-solved>
No comments:
Post a Comment