PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Thomas Seay <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 20 Aug 1999 20:14:00 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (80 lines)
I'll admit that technology presents some diificulties,
however I think that it is incorrect to argue that technology is
inherently BAD.  First of all, which technology are we talking about?
The spear is a form
of technology.

Before technology, man was dependent upon the whims of nature,
droughts, floods, and any number of natural phenomena could wipe him
out.  Man developed technologies as a survival mechanism.

However, I am assuming that you are primarily opposed
to technologies that are expensive, concentrated into a few hands and
are being used to damage the environment.
I agree with you this is a problem...a problem that threatens to
destroy the planet.

The question is, is the problem technology or does the fault lie with
social systems and ultimately with the humans that form the various
social systems.  The goal of a corporation - as it exists presently- is
to increase its profit margin...its goal is not to increase the
spiritual well being of humanity or to preserve the ecological sanity
of our environment.  In this context, corporations use technology to
capture
the market and to dupe the public into believing that they need to
consume more of the corporations products.
This is the logic of the market, and any corporation
that does not follow this logic will perish at the hands of the
competition.

Dont you see though that the problem isn't technology but how it is
used?  One can at least imagine a society
in which technology was wisely used, in order to free up mankind to
pursue pure science.  It could do this without destroying nature or
alienating humans.

By the way, I am currently teaching Computer Science courses at San
Francisco State University.  Many of my students are PhDs in other
sciences, like biology.  However, because they cannot make a good
enough living
in these fields (evidently because pure science is
not profitable and so less money is devoted in this direction) they are
forced to study Computer Science
to change careers.  This does not bode well.

-Thomas

--- Jane <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> <<If their is one thing that this century SHOULD
> have
> taught us it is this:  that reductionsim and all its
> ensuant ideologies and all-embracing systems lead to
> slavery.  Give it up!>>
> Of course, it the same can be said for all the
> technological discoveries.  The more that technology
> takes over our lives, we beomce less self-sufficient
> and more dependent on those technologies to survive.
> Evidence of this is seen in our dependence on power
> companies for heat/air conditioning.  People die,
> food
> spoils, work cannot be conducted - life comes to a
> screeching halt and people don't know how to deal
> with
> it.
> Just my opinion, but it is mine and I like it!!
> Jane
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
>

===
Thomas Morgan Seay
984 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
tel. (415) 643-7045
email: [log in to unmask]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2