Republic of the Philippines

COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

Module 2
Science, Technology, and Society and the Human Condition

The man of science has learned to believe in justification not by faith, but by verification

-Thomas Huxley

OVERVIEW
This module introduces students to a number of relevant and timely philosophical foundations that
will aid in examining the functions, roles, and impacts of science and technology on society. The module is
divided into five sections. These sections aim to provide students with cogent and comprehensive knowledge
on the concept of human flourishing in the face of rapid scientific progress and technological development.

LESSON 1

Technology as Way of Revealing

This lesson tackles the essence of technology based on Martin Heidegger’s work, The Question
Concerning Technology. The section shall engage in the process of questioning concerning technology. It
discusses the key concepts related to Heidegger’s work and how these concepts relate to an understanding of
the essence of technology.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this section, the student should be able to:

1. differentiate the essences of technology and modern technology;
2. discuss and illustrate the dangers of modern technology; and
3. explain why art is the saving power of modern technology.

Introduction

Every living creature is meant to become what it is meant to be. The caterpillar is meant to become a
beautiful butterfly; a small seed into a full-grown herb, bush or tree; and a human baby into a mature person, the
person “who is fully alive, the glory of God” in the words of St. Irenaeus (Corpuz, 2015).

As we grow and develop there are different factors that affect us, there are different questions that need to
be answered and there are steps and actions that need to be undertaken. Flourishing is the highest good od human
attempt to achieve his/her goal. It is a success as a human being when he/she achieved it for the betterment of his/her
life. The best life is one of excellent human activity. “Eudaimonia”, literally “good spirited” is a term connected by
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

renowned Greek Philosopher Aristotle (385-323 B.C.) to describe the peak of human’s happiness that can be
attained. The big question is “How?”. How will you achieve your flourishing?

Diagnostics
Instructions: Rate the extent of your agreement to the following statements using the Osgood scale. You are
also given space to write any comment to further clarify your response.
Statements Agree Comments (if any)
Disagree
Technology is a means to an end. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Technology is a human activity. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Poetry is technology. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Nature is a standing-reserve. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Man is an instrument of the exploitation of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
nature.
Man is in danger of being swallowed by 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
technology.
There is a saving power or a ‘way out’ of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
the danger of technology.
Art may be the saving power. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

At A Glance: Who is Martin Heidegger?

“The essence of technology is by no means anything technological”

-Martin Heidegger (1977)

Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) is widely acknowledged as one of the most important philosophers in
the 20th century. He was a German philosopher who was part of the continental tradition of philosophy. His
stern opposition to positivism and technological world domination received unequivocal support from leading
postmodernists and post-structuralists of the time, including Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, and Jean-
Francois Lyotard.

In 1933, he joined the Nazi Party (NDDAP) and remained to be a member until it was dismantled
toward the end of World War II. This resulted in his dismissal from the University of Freiburg in 1949. He was
only able to resume teaching in 1951. Heidegger’s membership to the Nazi Party made him controversial-his
philosophical work was often eclipsed by his political affiliation, with critics saying that his philosophy would
always be rooted in his political consciousness.

Heidegger’s work on philosophy focused on ontology or the study of ‘being’ or dasein in German. His
philosophical works are often described as complicated, partly due to his use of complex compound German
words, such as Seinsvergessenheit (Forgetfulness of Being), Bodenstandigkeit (Rootedness-in-Soil), and
Wesensverfassung (Essential Constitution).

To know more about the life and philosophy of Heidegger, watch a five-minute Youtube video
entitled, The Philosophy of Martin Heidegger which can be accessed on this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br!sGrA7XTU. This can be done as a class, if the internet access is
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

available, or individually as an added out-of –class work. Remember, it is important to understand basis
concept related to Heidegger’s philosophy to better make sense of his work.

The Essence of Technology

It cannot be denied that science and technology are responsible for the ways society is continuously
being modernized. Science and technology continuously seep into the way people go about their daily lives.
However, the omnipresence of science and technology must not eclipse the basic tenets of ethics and morality.
Instead it should allow the human person to flourish alongside scientific progress and technological
development. In order to spark the discussion on the role of ethics and social morality in science and
technology, it is necessary to go back to the very essence of technology, i.e., its definition.

The essence of technology can be captured in its definition. In his treatise, The Question Concerning
Technology, Martin Heidegger (1977) explains the two widely embraced definitions of technology. (1)
instrumental and (2) anthropological.

1. Instrumental definition: Technology is a means to an end.

Technology is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. In this context, technology is viewed as tool
available to individuals, groups, and communities that desire to make an impact on society. How technology is
used varies from individual to individual, groups to groups, and communities to communities according to
their individual and collective functions, goals, and aspirations. While technology is omnipresent, knowing its
functions requires paying attention to how humans use it as a means to an end. In this sense, technology is an
instrument aimed at getting things done.

2. Anthropological definition: Technology is a human activity.

Alternatively, technology can also be defined as a human activity because to achieve an end and to
produce and use a means to an end is, by itself, a human activity. The production or invention of
technological equipment, tools and machines, the products and invention, and the purpose and functions
they serve are what define technology.

Both definitions, i.e., instrumental and anthropological, are correct. However, neither touches on the
true essence of technology.

Technology as a Way of Revealing

Heidegger stressed that the true can only be pursued through the correct. Simply, what is correct leads
to what is true. In this sense, Heidegger envisioned technology as a way of revealing – a mode of ‘bring forth’.
Bringing forth can be understood through the Ancient Greek philosophical concept, poiesis, which refers to the
act of bringing something out of concealment. By bringing something out of concealment, the truth of that
something is revealed. The truth is understood through another Ancient Greek concept of aletheia, which is
translated as unclosedness, unconcealedness, disclosure, or truth.

Thus, for Heidegger, technology is a form of poeisis—a way of revealing that unconceals aletheia or
the truth. This is seen in the way the term techne, the Greek root word of technology, is understood in different
contexts. In philosophy, techne resembles the term episteme that refers to the human ability to make and
perform. Techne also encompasses knowledge and understanding. In art, it refers to tangible and intangible
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

aspects of life. The Greeks understood techne in the way that it encompasses not only craft, but other acts of
the mind, and poetry.

Technology as Poiesis: Does Modern Technology Bring Forth or Challenge Forth?

Heidegger, in The Question Concerning Technology, posited that both primitive crafts and modern
technology are revealing. However, he explained that modern technology is revealing not in the sense of he
explained that modern technology is revealing not in the sense of bringing forth or poeisis. Heidegger made a
clear distinction between technology and modern technology in that the latter ‘challenges’ nature. Modern
technology challenges nature by extracting something from it and transforming, storing, and distributing it.

On the surface, Heidegger’s criticism of modern technology might appear counterintuitive to the
purpose of nature to human existence. However, by digging deeper into Heidegger’s question, it becomes clear
that the essence of modern technology is not to bring forth in the sense of poiesis. Instead, Heidegger considers
modern technology’s way of revealing as a way of challenging forth. Modern technology challenges forth,
because it makes people think how to do things faster, more effectively, and with less effort. It prompts people
into dominating and enframing the earth’s natural resources. Challenging forth reduces objects as standing-
reserve or something to be disposed of by those who unframe them—humans. This is evident in the way
people exploit natural resources with very little concern for the ecological consequences that come with it.
Challenging forth as a result of modern technology is also evident in the transformation age, such that greater
control of information to profit from its value gives rise to concerns about privacy and the protection of human
rights.

The challenging forth of modern technology is seen everywhere in the rise and depletion of petroleum
as a strategic resource, the introduction and use of synthetic dyes, artificial flavorings, and toxic materials into
the consumer stream that bring about adverse effects on human health; and the use of ripening agents in
agriculture that poses threats to food safety and health security.

Enframing as Modern Technology’s Way of Revealing

If the essence of technology can be understood as a way of bringing forth the truth in the sense of
poiesis, Heidegger distinguished the way of revealing of modern technology by considering it as a process of
enframing. Humankind’s desire to control everything, including nature, is captured in this process. By putting
things, in this case nature, in a frame, it becomes much easier for humans to control it according to their
desires.

Enframing, according to Heidegger, is akin to two ways of looking at the world: calculative thinking
and meditative thinking. In calculation thinking, humans desire to put an order to nature to better understand
and control it. In meditative thinking, humans allow nature to reveal itself to them without the use of force or
violence. One thinking is not necessarily better than the other. In fact, humans are capable of using both and
will benefit from being able to harmonize these ways of looking at the world. Yet, calculative thinking tends to
be more commonly utilized, primarily because humans’ desire to control due to their fear of irregularity.

Enframing, then, is a way of ordering (or framing) nature to better manipulate it. Enframing happens
because of how humans desire for security, even if it puts all of nature as a standing reserve ready for
exploitation. Modern technology challenges humans to enframe nature. Thus, humans become part of the
standing reserve and an instrument of technology, to be exploited in the ordering of nature. The role humans
take as instruments of technology through enframing is called destining. In destining, humans are challenged
forth by enframing to reveal what is real. However, this destining of humans to reveal nature carries it the
danger of misconstruction or misinterpretation.
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

The Dangers of Technology

The dangers of technology lie in how humans let themselves be consumed by it. Although humans are
looped into the cycle of bringing forth or challenging forth, it is their responsibility to recognize how they
become instruments of technology.

The Brazilian novelist, Paulo Coelho, once remarked that it is boastful for humans to think that nature
needs to be saved, whereas Mother Nature would remain even if humans cease to exist. Hence, in facing the
dangers of technology, the fear of disappearing from the face of the Earth should concern people more potently
than the fear of the Earth disappearing. As mere tenants on Earth, people must not allow themselves to be
consumed by technology lest they lose the essence of who they are as human beings. In this sense, humans are
in danger of becoming merely part of the standing reserve or, alternatively, may find themselves in nature.

Recognizing its dangers of technology requires critical and reflective thinking on its use. For example,
social media has indeed connected people in the most efficient and convenient way imaginable, but it also
inadvertently gave rise to issues such as invasion of privacy, online disinhibition, and proliferation of fake
news. The line has to be drawn between what constitutes a beneficial use of social media and a dangerous one.
As exemplified, social media comes with both benefits and drawbacks.

However, the real threat of technology comes from its essence, not its activities or products. The
correct response to the danger of technology is not simply dismissing technology altogether. Heidegger (1977)
explained that people are delivered over to technology in the worst possible way when they regard it as
something neutral. This conception of technology, according to Heidegger, to which today human particularly
like to pay homage, makes them utterly blind t the essence of technology. Ultimately, the essence of
technology is by no means anything technological (Heidegger, 1977).

Art as the Saving Power

Necessary reflection upon and confrontation with technology are required in order to proactively
address the dangers of technology. Friedrich Holderlin, a German poet quoted by Heidegger, said: “But where
danger is, grows the saving power also”(1977, p. 14). Following this, the saving power can be traced exactly
where the danger is – in the essence of technology. As mentioned, this essence is not neutral and by no means
anything technological. Along this line, Heidegger proposed art as the saving power and the way out of
enframing: “And art was simply called techne. It was a single, manifold revealing” (1977, p. 18). Heidegger
saw art as an act of the mind, i.e., a techne, that protected and had great power over the truth. By focusing on
art, people are able to see more clearly how art is embedded in nature. Art encourages humans to think less
from a calculative standpoint where nature is viewed as an ordered system. Instead, it inspires meditative
thinking where nature is seen as an art and that, in all of art, nature is most poetic. Heidegger encapsulated this
as follows:

Because the essence of technology is nothing technological, essential reflection upon technology and
decisive confrontation with it must happen in a realm that is, on the one hand, akin to the essence of
technology and, on the other, fundamentally different from it. Such a realm is art. But certainly only if
reflection on art, for its part, does not shut its eyes to the constellation of truth after which we are questioning
(1977, p. 19).
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

Questioning as the Piety of Thought

Heidegger concluded his treatise on technology by saying:

The closer we come to the danger, the more brightly do the ways into the saving power begin
to shine and the more questioning we become. For questioning is the piety of thought (1977, p. 19).

Heidegger underscored the importance of questioning in the midst of technology. For him, there is
unparalleled wisdom gained only when humans are able to pause, think, and question what is around them.
Humans are consumed by technology when they are caught up in enframing and fail to pay attention to the
intricacies of technology, the brilliance of the purpose of humankind, and the genius of humans to bring forth
the truth.

Questioning is the piety of thought. It is only through questioning that humans are able to reassess
their position not only in the midst of technology around them, but also, and most importantly, in the grand
scheme of things. Heidegger posited that it is through questioning that humans bear witness to the crises that a
complete preoccupation with technology brings, preventing them from experiencing the essence of technology.

Thus, humans need to take a step back and reassess who they were, who they are, and who they are
becoming in the midst of technology in this day and age.

Exercise 1. Reflection

Name: ________________________________________ Date Submitted: ___________

 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

Course/Section: ________________________________

Instructions: After studying the full text of Martin Heidegger’s The Question Concerning Technology,
available on www.psyp.org/question_concerning_technology.pdf, answer the following:

1. What three concepts remain unclear of difficult for you to understand?

a. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
b. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
c. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

2. What three significant insights did you gain in studying this text?

a. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
b. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
c. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

3. What three questions do you want to ask about the text?

a. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
b. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
c. ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 2. Art as Saving Power

Instructions: Heidegger explained that art holds power that could save humans from the danger of being
consumed by technology. In his words, “[art] is pious… yielding to the holding-sway and the safekeeping of
truth” (1977, p. 18). In this activity, focus on art as the saving power of technology. Form groups with four
members each and look for an artwork that ‘reveals’ the human person in the midst of technology. In class,
brainstorm for 30 minutes. Discuss the artwork in relation to the general concepts discussed in Martin
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

Heidegger’s The Question Concerning Technology, and present your chosen artwork and the summary of your
discussion.

[Paste a photo of your chosen artwork here.]

Assessment Task. The Dangers of Technology

Name: ____________________________________________ Submitted date: _____________

Course/Section: ____________________________________

Instruction: Read the article below. After reading, work with a partner and answer the questions that follow.
Write your answers on a separate sheet of paper.

Facebook says 87 million may be affected

by data privacy scandal

by Agence France-Presse
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

WASHINGTON DC, USA – Facebook said Wednesday, April 4, the personal data of up to 87 million
users was improperly shared with British political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, as Mark Zuckerberg
defended his leadership at the huge social network.

Facebook’s estimate was far higher than news reports suggesting 50 million users may have been
affected in the privacy scandal which has roiled the company and sparked questions for the entire internet
sector on data protection.

Zuckerberg told reporters on a conference call he accepted responsibility for the failure to protect user
date but maintained that he was still the best person to lead the network of two billion users.

“I think life is about learning from the mistakes and figuring out how to move forward, “: he said in
response to a question on his ability to lead the company.

“When you’re building something like Facebook which is unprecedented in the world, there are things
that you’re going to mess up… What I think people should hold us accountable for is if we are learning from
our mistakes.”

Zuckerberg said 87 million was high estimate of those affected by the breach, based on the maximum
number of connection to users who downloaded an academic researcher’s quiz that scooped up personal
profiles.

“I’m quite confident it will not be more than 87 million, it could be well be less,” he said.

To remedy the problem, Zuckerberg said Facebook must “rethink our relationship with people across
everything we do” and that it will take a number of years to regain user trust.

The new estimate came as Facebook unveiled clearer terms of service to enable users to better
understand data sharing, and as a congressional panel said Zuckerberg would appear next week to address
privacy issues.

Facebook has been scrambling for weeks in the face of the disclosure on hijacking of private data by
the consulting group working for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The British frim responded to the Facebook announcement by repeating its claim that it did not use
data from the social network in the 2016 election.

“Cambridge Analytica did not use GSR (Global Science Research) Facebook data or any derivatives
of this data in the US presidential election,” the company said in a tweet. “Cambridge Analytica licensed data
from GSR for 30 million individuals, not 87 million.”

Zukerberg on the Hill

Facebook’s chief technology officer Mike Schroepfer meanwhile said new privacy tools for users of
the huge social network would be in place by next Monday, April 9.
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

“People will also be able to remove apps that they no longer want. As part of this process we will also
tell people if their information may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica,” he said in a
statement.

Schroepfer’s post was the first to cite the figure 87 million while noting that most of those affected
were in the United States.

Facebook also said its new terms of service would provide clearer information o how data is collected
and shared without giving the social network additional rights.

Earlier Wednesday, the House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee announced what
appeared to be the first congressional appearance by Zuckerberg since the scandal broke.

The April 11 hearing will “be an important opportunity to shed light on critical consumer data privacy
issues and help all Americans better understand what happens to their personal information online,” said the
committee’s Republican chairman Greg Walden and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone in a statement.

The Facebook co-founder is also invited to other hearings amid a broad probe on both side of the
Atlantic.

Deleting Russian ‘trolls’

Zuckerberg told the conference call he was committed to ensuring that Facebook and its partners do a
better job of protecting user data, and that it must take a more serious approach after years of being “idealistic”
about how the platform is used.

“We didn’t take abroad enough view on what our responsibility is, and that was a huge mistake. It was
my mistake.”

He said that while “there are billions of people who love the service,” there is also a potential for
abuse and manipulation.

“It’s not enough just to give people a voice,” he said. “We have to make sure people don’t use that
voice to hurt people or spread disinformation.”

Late Tuesday, April 3, Facebook said it deleted dozens of accounts linked to a Russian-sponsored
internet unit which has been accused of spreading propaganda and other divisive content in the United States
and elsewhere.

The social networking giant said it revoked the accounts of 70 Facebook and 65 Instagram accounts,
and removed 138 Facebook pages controlled by the Russia-based Internet Research Agency (IRA).

The agency has been called a “troll farm” due to its deceptive post aimed at sowing discord and
propagating misinformation.

The unit “has repeatedly used complex networks on inauthentic accounts to deceive and manipulate
people who use Facebook, including before, during and after the 2016 US presidential elections,” said a
statement Facebook chief security officer Alex Stamos. – Rappler.com
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph

Source: Agence France-Presse. (2018, April 5). Facebook say 87 million may be affected by data privacy
scandal. Rappler. Retrieved on Aprinl 24, 2018 from
https://ww.rappler.com/technology/news/199588facebook-data-affected-cambridge-analytica-scandal.

Questions:

1. What is this data privacy scandal all about?

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

2. How does this Facebook privacy scandal relate to Heidegger’s notion of revealing of modern technology as
challenging forth?

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

3. How are Facebook users ‘enframed’ in this particular data privacy scandal?

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

4. How do you think Facebook can be used in a way that is more consistent with Heidegger’s idea of poiesis or
a bringing forth of technology?

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

5. How can the Heideggerian notion of ‘questioning ‘guide Facebook users toward a beneficial use of social
media?

_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
 Republic of the Philippines
COTABATO FOUNDATION COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato
Telefax: (064) 288-1343
Email Address: [email protected]; Website: www.cfcst.edu.ph