EDD 5229 Liberal Studies in Knowledge Society Lecture 7 Understanding the Curriculum Content of Liberal Studies III: Science, Technology and Environment

EDD 5229Liberal Studies in Knowledge Society

Lecture 7 Understanding the

Curriculum Content of Liberal Studies III:Science, Technology and Environment in Risk

and Reflexive-modern Society

Understanding the Structure of the Areas of Study: Science, Technology & the Environment

The formal structure outlined by the CCD and HKEAA Module 5: Public health

Theme1: Understanding of public healthTheme2: Science, technology and public health

Module 6: Energy technology and the environmentThe influence of energy technologyThe environment and sustainable development

The dialectics of scientific-technological rationality and environmental risk Omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence of the scientifi

c-technological rationality in the modernity project Uncertainty, accident and risk in scientific-technological ration

ality Anthropocentricism vs. ecocentricism

Science

as a way of obtaining reliable knowledge

Logical- positivist

foundation as normative culture of the community of

scientists

Scientific-technological enterprises

as a category of knowledge

Technology

as human artifacts & tools

Empirical- objective

foundation

Scientism

Universalism

Reliability

Technologism

Communalism Disinterestedness Organized skepticism

Positivism Objectivism Universalism Progressivism Empiricism

as techniques & crafts

as system of knowledge

as systems of machines

as social institutions

as culture

Predictability

Calculability

Manageability

ity

Controlabiliy

Anthropocentricism

Light-green ethics and sustainable anthropocentricism

Mid-green ethics and biocentricism

Dark-green ethics and ecocentricism

Environmentalism

Conceptual map for Area 3 in LS in NSS

Omniscient & omnipotentinstrumentalism

Reflexive Understanding of the Scientific-Technological Rationality of Modernity

The conception of scientism From scientific thinking to scientism

Scientific thinking can be construed as one of the ways of human inquiry, which has been exemplified by natural scientists’ inquiry of the nature. The inquiry is basically made up of the following methodological features.

First, it is empirically based. That is the inquiry is built upon data, which are carefully collected from observations of natural reality.

Second, it is positivistically organized. That is the inquiry is designed and carried out in hypothetical-deductive or nomological-inductive methods, the results of which are to verify or falsify the law-like statements of the reality under study.


The conception of scientism From scientific thinking to scientism

Third, both the inquiry methods and their results are objectively replicable by other researchers to assess the validity and reliability of the inquiry in question.

Fourth, the results of the inquiry are universally applicable. That is the verified statements of reality can be applied to “all” situations across time and space.

Fifth, it believes that collective and concerted efforts of scientists and their verified results can bring truth to human’s understanding of the nature.

Scientism can be conceived as convictions of the validity, reliability and universality of scientific inquiry. As a result has spawned numbers of convictions or even myths in human’s inquiry of reality.


The conception of scientism Empiricism: It refers to the convictions underlying that only e

mpirically observable data are valid evidences in human’s inquiry and the foundations of true knowledge.

Objectivism: It refers to convictions holding that only sensory-observable and recordable information can be qualified as valid and reliable data and only replicable and duplicable inquiry procedures are qualified to be valid method of inquiry. As a result, data and inquiry method that is unobservable, unrecordable, and unreplicable are disqualified as unreliable and unscientific.


The conception of scientism… Positivism: It refers to the convictions emphasizing tha

t all human’s inquiries must follow the rules of the hypothetical-deductive or nomological-deductive methods. Knowledge obtained by other methods of inquiry are perceived as unscientific and untrue.

Universalism: It refers to the convictions underlining that knowledge obtained from scientific inquiry must be universally applicable, i.e. to be true across time and space or at least across all specified contexts.

Progressivism: It refers to the convictions believing that scientific inquiries can obtain universally valid knowledge of nature and as a whole can progressively reveal the truth underlying natural realities.


The conception of Technologism From technological development to technolo

gism According to Ron Westrum’s conception of technolo

gy• Technology can be defined as any human artifacts an

d things, which are made to facilitate human activities. • From epistemological perspective, technology can be

conceived as something more than human artifacts but also as the techniques and crafts that make use of those artifacts.

• Furthermore, technology in its advanced stages can be conceived the systems of knowledge underlying those artifacts and techniques in use.


The conception of Technologism From technological development to technologi

sm Thomas P. Hughes’s conception of technology

• Technology at its most concrete level is conceived by Hughes as machine. The definition is basically in congruent with that of Westrum.

• From practical point of view, technology can be conceived not just as the operation of a single machine but as a configuration of machines work concertedly as a system.

• Furthermore, as technological systems develop they will constitute continuous and regular human practices at organizational level. These enduring practices and routines can be called social institutions.

• Finally, as technology has been accepted by members of society as useful, meaningful and even ways of life, technology then become part of the culture of a given society.

Artifact

Technique

Knowledge

Machine System Institution Culture

From technological development to technologism


The conception of Technologism Technologism emerges as members of a society have

got so used to the modern technological way of life that they hold strong conviction or even cult to the creditability of technology. As a result they will conduct other part of their human activities in engine-like manners. One of the most salient areas of contentions has been invoked around the project of social engineering that emerged and became popularized in public administration and policy after WWII. The debate focuses mainly on whether personal lives, interpersonal relationship, and/or socio-cultural activities can be engineered in instrumental and mechanical manners. The belief or ideology of technologism can be understood in numbers of sub-theses.


The conception of Technologism Reliability: One of the primary beliefs in techologism is the c

ommon conviction among modern men/women that scientific knowledge and its application to technology are reliable in organizing or even engineering conducting our lives that we are too ready to entrust of our lives and future to technology.

Predictability: Another belief in technologism is the human’s conviction that with the aid scientific knowledge and its application to technology, human kind can understand and organized our environment as well as our lives in a predictable manner. Accordingly, we can plan our lives and even future to the last detail in technological ways.


The conception of Technologism: … Instrumentality: It refers to a way of thinking or a kind of mindset, whi

ch follows the “a-means-to-an end” structure, or commonly known as purposive-instrumental rationality. Based on the belief in the predictability provided by scientific knowledge and technology, human kind believes that we can always design the most appropriate, if not the best, instruments to solve any problem derived from the natural and social environments. On other words, it is a belief that human kind can engineer their natural and social environments instrumentally to suit their own purposes.

Calculability: The fourth component of technologism is the human’s conviction that scientific knowledge and its application in technology can help human kind to calculate and contain the uncertainties and risks encountered in lives. Accordingly, many aspects of human lives have become quantifiable, computable and therefore insurable.


The conception of Technologism: … Manageability: Building on the predictability and calculability of tech

nology, human beings come to believe that we can manipulate technology as well as our lives in managerial fashion.

Controllablility: Finally, with the help of all these capacities of technology, modern men/women have come to believe that technology as well as the human lives and future are under all under control.

Ecocentrism and Ecological Ethics

Understanding of environmentalism Environmentalism can be understood either as an ideational

and movement or as a social movement. As an ideational movement, environmentalism can be

construed as a system of thinking which questions the omniscience and omnipotence of the enterprise of scientific-technology, emphasizes the damaging effects of scientific-technological development on the environment, and advocates environmental conservation and improvement.

As a social movement, environmentalism refers to social actions taken either by civil voluntary groups, such as the Friends of the Earth, or Greenpeace; or by governmental agencies such as the Environmental Protection Department of the HKSAR Government. These social movements may either take the forms of social movements or governmental policies.


Environmentalism as an ideational movement, can be understood from the debate between anthropocentrism and ecocentrism Anthropocentricism: It literally means human-centeredness. It

refers to the value system, which places human values as the predominant consideration. Accordingly, “anthropocentricism refers to the … privileging human beings, as such, at the expense of other forms of life.” (Curry, 2006, p. 43) As a dominant mindset of the modern man, it treats “all creation into categories of utility to humans, whereby there is literally nothing in the natural world which can not be transformed into a resource.” (Curry, 2006, p. 43-44) It represents an orientation towards environment, which takes environment and nature as resources and utilities under the disposal of human progress.


Environmentalism as an ideational movement, can be understood from the debate between anthropocentrism and ecocentrism Ecocentrisim: It refers to the value system, which places the

wellbeing of the ecosystem of the earth as the predominant concerns over the concerns of the utility of human. Ontologically, it advocates that human life is but one form of life in the ecosystem. It does not possess any privilege over another life forms or non-organic components in the ecosystem. Ethically, it advocates that one’s moral obligations do not confine to other fellow humans but should extend to all life forms and all components in the ecosystem as a whole.


The concept of ecological ethnics: Ethics as a branch of philosophy studies “the question of

how one should live and act …how to treat other human beings.” (Curry, 2006, p. 1) In Western philosophy, ethics has traditionally been studies in human-centered perspective. In this perspective, the question of ethically or morally good lives and acts will only be addressed to human being himself or his relationship with other fellow human beings. In other words, it is human beings themselves, which is the ultimate concern in the studies of ethics and morality.


The concept of ecological ethnics: Ecological ethics as an emerging perspective in ethics advoc

ates that ethics should be extended “from human beings through other animals …to trees and ultimately to the nature or ecosystem as a whole.” As Curry underlines, ecological ethics “start(s) from the belief, or perception, that nature — which certainly includes humanity — is the ultimately source of all value.” (Curry, 2006. p. 2) In other words, a morally or ethically good live or act should not be good to the actor himself or his fellow human being but should be good to the ecosystem as a whole.

In recent years, ecological ethics has been differentiated into several perspectives, for examples


The concept of ecological ethnics: Light green ethics and sustainable anthropocentrism: It refers

to the orientation towards utilization of environment which takes into consideration of sustainability. As an ethic system, it consists of “a very strong precautionary principle — that is, acting

cautiously. On the assumption that our knowledge of the effects of our action is always exceed by our ignorance;

a definition of ‘sustainability’ that rules out all practices except those that are indefinitely sustainable; and similarly,

a conviction that as much rather as little as possible of nature should be preserved intact.” (Curry, 2006, p. 48)


The concept of ecological ethnics: Mid-green ethnic and biocentrism: It refers to the value

system, which take “life itself as value.” (Curry, 2006, p. 44) It represents “’an attitude of respect for nature’, To have this attitude …’is to regard the wild plants and animals of the Earth’s natural ecosystems as possessing inherent worth. That such creatures have inherent worth may be considered the fundamental value presupposition of the attitude of respect.” (Taylor, 1986, p. 71)” (Curry, 2006, 60-61)


The concept of ecological ethnics: Mid-green ethnic and biocentrism: …

Biocentrism can be characterized with the following believes. “Human are members of the community of life in the same sense,

and on the same terms as, other living things. That community, of which humans are a part, consists of a syste

m of interdependence comprising not only physical conditions, but also relations with other members.

Every such organism is a teleological centre of life, i.e., an individual pursuing its own kind of good (Greek telos=goal or end).

Human are not inherently superior to other organism.” (Taylor, 1986, quoted in Curry, 2006, p. 61)


The concept of ecological ethnics: Dark green ethics and ecocentrism: It refers to the value syst

em which takes the holistic entities of the ecological system, both animate and nonliving element, as the principal concern. As an ecocentric ethics, it “must be able to satisfy at least these criteria: It must be able to recognize the value and therefore support the

ethical defense, of the integrity of species and of ecosystemic places, as well as human and non-human organism. So it is holistic, although not in the sense of necessarily excluding considerations of individual values.

Within nature-as-value, it must (a) allow for conflicts between the interests of human and non-human nature; (b) allow human interest, on occasion, to lose ( It is hardly a level playing-field otherwise). (Curry, 2006, p. 63)

The Risk Society and Reflexive Modernization

From industrial society to risk society The passing of the problem of scarcity in modern industrial

society: As human society move from feudal and agrarian society to modern industrial society in the nineteenth century, one of the core social problems of human society, namely problem of scarcity, has gradually been contained if not resolved.

The emergence of the dominance of the scientific-technological rationality: The containment or even resolution to the problem of scarcity is mainly caused by the constitution of scientific rationality and the techno-economic development of the modern industrial society.


From industrial society to risk society “Risk may be defined as a systematic way of dealing with

hazards and insecurities induced and introduced by modernization itself.” (Beck, 1992, p. 21) According to the conventional wisdom of scientific-technological rationality, these risks are supposed to be predictable, calculable and manageable. However, as atomic accidents and environmental catastrophes frequent in ever growing scales in recent decades, the enterprise of calculation of risk, which bases on the scientific-technological rationality and modern legal institutions, has practically collapsed. (Beck, 1992, p. 22)


The five theses of risk society (Beck, 1992, p.22-24) To understand the nature of risk society, Ulrich Beck

has formulated it around five theses, which signify the salient features of risk and risk society in contrast to industrial or wealth society.


The five theses of risk society (Beck, 1992, p.22-24) 1. Risks differ essentially from wealth in the following

aspects Risks are irreversible harms to natural and/or social

environments and human bodies and/or minds. As for wealth, it is transferable and entails socially desirable consequences.

Risks “generally remain invisible, are based on causal interpretations and thus initially only exist in terms of the (scientific or anti-scientific) knowledge about them.” (p. 23)

Risks “are particularly open to social definition and construction.” (p. 23)


The five theses of risk society 2. Distribution of wealth constitutes class positions and class s

ociety. It spawns the culture of perceptible or even visible inequality. Distribution of risk constitute risk positions (some social positions or localities are more exposable and thus vulnerable environmental harms). Hence, risk society espouses culture of inperceptible and indefinitive inequality of risk distribution.

Nevertheless, risks “contain a boomerang effect, which breaks up pattern of class and national society.” It is because “ecological disasters and atomic fallout ignore the borders of nations. Even the rich and powerful are not safe from them.” Hence, “risk society in this sense is a world risk society.” (p. 23)


The five theses of risk society 3. Risk society has one feature in common with wealth soc

iety, that is both are conform to “the logic of capitalism.” Both wealth accumulation and risk proliferation are “insatiable demands”. It is because human greed, which is the driving force of wealth accumulation, and convenience and comfort of modernized lives, which is the motor of risk proliferation, are “a bottomless barrel of demands, unsatisfiable, infinite, self producible.” (p. 23)


The five theses of risk society 4. “One can possess wealth, but one can only be afflicted

by risks.” Furthermore risks are generally invisible and can only be causally interpreted. Therefore, risks are ascribed by our knowledge and more specifically level of environmental awareness and consciousness. As Beck bluntly but aptly put it “in class and stratification positions being determines consciousness, while in risk position consciousness determines being.” (p.23)


The five theses of risk society 5. In risk society, “socially recognized risks … contain a particular p

olitical explosive: what was until now considered unpolitical becomes political ─the elimination of the causes in the industrialization process itself.” (p.24) One of the local example is the once unpolitical or even socially unrecognized factor, that is collective memories or common spaces have suddenly risen to prominence in policy of land use, such as the reclamation project of Wan Chai or more specifically the demolishment of the Queen’s Pier. Furthermore, the once most dominant theme in public policy discourse of HK, i.e. “economic development”, has been challenged by some seeming “illegitimate” discursive theme. “What thus emerges in risk society is the political potential of catastrophes. Averting and managing these can include a reorganization of power and authority. Risk society is a catastrophic society.” (p. 24)

Lecture 6Understanding the Curriculum Content of Liberal Studies I:

Science, Technology and Environment in Risk and Reflexive-modern Society

End

Documents

EDD 5229 Liberal Studies in Knowledge Society Lecture 7 Understanding the Curriculum Content of Liberal Studies III: Science, Technology and Environment