Trusting Technology is Perilous
Posted: Sunday, May 02, 2010
by Joel Hirschhorn
http://www.delusionaldemocracy.com
Here is the real lesson of the current horrendous and still ongoing oil spill in the : never put all your trust in technology, especially when it is in the hands of industry.
Years ago I taught university courses on technology and society. Despite a Ph.D. in engineering I was always a technological pessimistic, because I always believed that every technology has limitations that are not always fully understood and that there is always the potential for great harm depending on how it is used and who uses it.
Many, many people and businesses will suffer unimaginable pain and suffering because of this newest Gulf of Mexico oil spill that will probably go down in history as one of the greatest environmental catastrophes. All kinds of animal and other species will be greatly harmed. Cleanup could take decades.
All this comes at a time when there are historic levels of support for alternative energy sources and alternatives to petroleum-dependent technologies and products. Which is very good, because it will surely be very difficult for oil companies to get government permits for new ocean oil drilling rigs. It will surely end up costing more to fill up conventional cars with gas.
But the larger point should be better public understanding of the potential downside of absolutely all technologies. Maybe cell phones really do cause brain cancer. Maybe the many chemicals placed in our foods for all kinds of reasons really do cause all kinds of disease. Maybe all the medical and dental x-rays we receive really do cause cancer. And on and on. Giving total trust to technology is truly perilous and believing the biased hype of companies compounds the problem, as does trusting government agencies to protect us. We need far better planning for disasters that inevitably will keep coming.
This Article has been viewed 831 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (5 total)Great article. Well done.Alas, I have to agree with you. I would love to say technology could be made infallible but I can't.
Technology has become the religion that most follow now, and will be the downfall of humanity. Oil, Nuclear weapons, even expensive medical advances that will disenfranchise more people than it will help, all will eventually lead to global conflict and ruin. Better to live a simple, poor life. Much more happiness and societal security. Less aggression and competitiveness. It's called spirituality, opposed to self enrichment.
Unfortunately, our addiction to fossil fuels not only causes things such as this, but carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is causing an acid build up, according to Bill McKibbon - AOL News, "As the oceans absorb some of the carbon our factories and engines pour into the atmosphere, the "chemistry of the ocean is changing at an unprecedented rate and magnitude," the report said. "The rate of change exceeds any known to have occurred for at least the past hundreds of thousands of years."Already fishermen report that oysters aren't reproducing, and biologists are saying that coral reefs may not survive the century. "This increase in [ocean] acidity threatens to decimate entire species, including those that are at the foundation of the marine food chain," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.Lautenberg, by the way, gets serious points for presciently standing up to President Obama in late March, when the administration ended a longstanding ban on offshore drilling. "Giving Big Oil more access to our nation's waters is really a 'Kill, Baby, Kill' policy," he said at the time. "It threatens to kill jobs, kill marine life and kill coastal economies that generate billions of dollars."___________________________________________The problem is that people in general don't know how to get along happily without expensive diversions and luxuries. Look at their aspirations: more education for better jobs, more pay, bigger homes, bigger more expensive cars, etc. They have nothing inside and must rely on outside pleasures that constantly need reinforced because these pleasures are by nature fleeting and unstable. The pleasures never last. This is a spiritual problem that will eventually culminate in ruin for themselves and society. Look at the mess we are in already! Nobody can live a simple life any longer - it is too "boring." Yet the endless, senseless activity will eventually kill the earth. I know that meditators may be unfairly judged, and even scorned for not participating in society, being "lazy" and keeping to themselves, but then again, meditators can be by themselves in the countryside, all day, all year, without outside stimulation and be completely happy, even better than "completely happy." One must question which is more beneficial to society and the earth in the long run.
Mr. Hirschorn, fascinating stuff, as always! I could literally write a book responding to your articles, but will spare you the terror.
I believe it is inherent in man's psyche to explore that which is unknown to us. Technology is simply an extension of this desire and is neither good nor evil, but a tool to be used at the discretion of those that have control over these tools.
Now it is my belief that the evolution of man has been given to those that have greed and power at the root of their souls. The reasons for this are many and convoluted, not least of which is that these are the people that seek this control, and use fear to control those that do not share this distinction.
The ultimate annihilation of this planet is eminent, if for no other reason than even the Earth itself will grow old and die. I do not think we have the capacity to allow this maturation to occur because our ability to bring the planet to it's demise through technological advance is much more rapid than the actual life span of the planet itself.
Our alternative is to sit like rocks in the sand and wait for our ultimate demise, but this would be contrary to our will to survive, which is dependent on our exploration of the cosmos and ability to move freely within it.
So I for one prefer that we move forward with creativity and invention while placing more concern for whom we allow to control these devices, for the sake of our future residents, our children, while recognizing that fear and our innate desire to recoil from same is simply a natural part of the process and must be dealt with as such.
Your admiring fan,
David LevittVery astute comments. My point is that we the people have little power to choose those who control technologies; in fact, there is no reason to trust business or government to safely and wisely use technologies which inevitably have potential harmful impacts that never can be completely known, anticipated or controlled. Which means in our world where technologies are rapidly exploited for financial gain we have a lot to fear. The public always pays the highest price for technological optimism and exploitation while relatively few make big money. And far too many consumers seemed addicted to new technologies without fully appreciating the many unknowns that using them creates. I have always resisted new technologies for there is little evidence that they actually improve quality of life. I am proud to say I have never used an ATM.Absolutely, sir! Point taken!The essence of capitalism, the continuation of expanding profit over all other considerations may very well be the undoing of humanity as it breeds greed and power. However, it does not have to be that way as is with a democracy demands discipline, so too does capitalism, and without this discipline all things are doomed to fail.If we intend to outlive our ability to destroy ourselves, this discipline must become a part of our nature, easier said than done, as the forces against this occurrence are strong and powerful, as is witnessed with our attempts to reform our current greed stricken health care reform policies, but is the key to our continuing evolution.You see how easy it is to pump millions of dollars into making people believe that they are better off without an affordable accessible system, all the while knowing that this will only be advantageous to a very small portion of our population.
This is what we must overcome, and yes I have my doubts that it can be done, but all we have to rely upon at this point is the continued enlightenment of people, by good intended people such as yourself sir!
Thank you so much for your attempts, and may whatever forces of goodness in this universe be with you, as I am afraid that our religions have fallen prey to the darkside!
David Levitt
Here's the real kicker: this current calamity, as well as coal mining accidents and every other disaster related to the petro-chemical and nuclear energy generating industries is unnecessary and totally avoidable.A virtually unlimited, pollution-free source of energy called zero point energy has been known for decades, but has been locked away and militarized for the sake of preserving the current profitable staus quo for the tiny number of elitists who control the world.Those who reject such claims without investigating all the corroborating evidence to support it are fools. They are the equivalent of those who, hundreds of years ago, could not bring themselves to accept that the world was round, or that it revolved around the sun.There are many voices crying out to be heard about this exotic technology who have the means of showing that it is real, but no one wants to listen, lest they be accused of conspiracy theorizing.We are in a death spiral, and short of massive external interference, there will be nothing of worth left of civilization in a very short time.Your view of zero point energy is nonsense; I urge others to read, for example, the material at wikipedia.What is nonsense is condemnation without investigation (a quote by Einstein, remember him?) Since when did Wikipedia become the source of all truth?
All very good comments. But suppose it's not an engineering problem. Suppose that big oil lobbyists were able to get a 'buy' on installing a proper auto-shut off capability. My grapevine was heard saying that US rigs don't install auto=shutoff equipment as is done in the EU. Could it be just a matter of cutting 'cost' corners?Latest reported information is that oil industry definitely used its political muscle to avoid government requirements for best fail-safe technology.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.