Group 5

Science, Technology, and Society

Submitted By:
Mark Racraquin
Princess Pañares
Lei Hon Mercado
Justine Vallaso
Ahron Mark Parita

Submitted To:
Mrs. Marifel Salinas
Lesson Objectives:
Identify different conceptions of human flourishing;
Determine the development of scientific method and validity of science;
Critic human flourishing vis-à-vis progress of science and technology to be able to define for
themselves the meaning of a good life.
I. Concepts of Human Flourishing
A. Definition and Aristotelian view of Human Flourishing
Eudaimonia, literally means "good-spirited", is a term coined by renowned Greek philosopher
Aristotle (385-323 BC) to described the pinnacle of happiness that is attainable by humans. This
has often been translated into "human flourishing". In literature, arguably likening humans to
flowers achieving their full bloom. As discussed in the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle's human
flourishing arises as a result of different components such as phronesis, friendship, wealth, and
power. In the Ancient Greek society, they believe that acquiring these qualities will surely bring the
seekers happiness, which in effect allows them to partake in the greater notion of what we call the
"good"..
As times change, elements that comprise human flourishing changed, which are subject to the
dynamic social history as written by humans. People found means to live more comfortably,
explore more places, develop more products, and make more money, and then repeating the process
in full circle. In the beginning, early people relied on simple machines to make hunting and
gathering easier. This development allowed them to make grander and more sophisticated machines
to aid them in their endeavors that eventually led to space explorations, medicine innovations, and
ventures of life after death. Our concepts of human flourishing today proves to be different from
what Aristotle originally perceived then humans of today are expected to become a "man of the
world". He is supposed to situate himself in global neighborhood, working side by side among
institutions and the government to be able to reach a common goal. Competition as a means of
survival has become passed, coordination is the new trend.
B. Eastern and Western Conception of Human Flourishing
Interestingly, there exists a discrepancy between eastern and western conception regarding society
and human flourishing. It has been observed that western civilization tends to be more focused on
the individual, while those from the east are more community-centric. Human flourishing as an end
then is primarily more of a concern for western civilizations over eastern ones. This is not discredit
our kinsfolk from the east, perhaps in their view, community takes the highest regard that the
individual should sacrifice himself for the sake of the society. This is apparent in the Chinese
Confucian system or the Japanese Bushido, both of which view the whole as greater than their
components. The Chinese and Japanese encourage studies of literature, sciences, and art, not
entirely for oneself but in service of greater cause. The Greek Aristotelian view, on the other hand,
aims for "Eudaimonia" as the ultimate good, there is no indication that Aristotle entailed it
instrumental to achieve some other goals. Perhaps, a person who has achieved such state would
want to serve the community, but that is brought upon through deliberation based on his values
rather than his belief that the state is greater than him, and thus is only appreciate that he should
recognize it as a higher entity worthy of service.
Nevertheless, such stereotypes cannot be said to be true given the current stance of globalization
Flourishing borders allowed people full access to cultures that as a result, very few are able to
maintain their original philosophies. It is in this regard that we would tackle human flourishing-in a
global perspective and as a man of the world.
C. Science, Technology, and Human Flourishing
In the previous chapters, contributions of science and technology have been laid down thoroughly.
Every discovery, innovation, and success contribute to our pool of human knowledge. Perhaps, one
of the most prevalent themes is human's perpetual need to locate himself in the world by finding
proofs to trace evolution. The business of uncovering the secrets of the universe answers the
question of our existence and provides us something to look forward to. Having a particular role,
which is uniquely ours, elicits our idea of self-importance. It is in this regard that human flourishing
is deeply intertwined with youth setting relevant to science and technology. In this case, the latter is
relevant as a tool in achieving the former or echoing Heidegger's statement. Technology is a human
activity that we excel in as a result of achieving science. Suffice to say that the end goals of both
science and technology and human flourishing are related in that the good is inherently related to
the truth. The following are two concepts about science which ventures its claim on truth.
II. Development of Scientific Method and Validity of Science
A. Scientific Method
For the most part, science's reputation stems from the objectivity brought upon by an arbitrary, rigid
methodology whose very character absolves it from any accusation of prejudice.
Such infamy effectively raised science in a pedestal untouchable by other institutions its sole claim
to reason and empiricism- garnering supporters who want to defend it and its ways. In school, the
scientific method is introduced in the earlier part of discussions. Even though the number of steps
varies, it presents a general idea of how to do science:
1. Observe and determine if there are explained occurrences unfolding
2. Determine the problem and identify factors involved.
3. Through past knowledge of similar instance, formulate hypothesis that could explain the said
phenomenon. Ideally, the goal is to reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis
of the study "to count as significant" (can also be separated into additional steps such as "to
generate prediction" or "to infer from past experiments")
4. Conduct experiment by setting up dependent and independent variables, and trying to see how
independent ones affect dependent ones
5. Gather and analyze results throughout and upon culmination of the experiment. Examine if the
data gathered are significant enough to conclude results.
6. Formulate conclusion and provide recommendation in case others would want to broaden the
study
The methodology above shows two distinct features of that give science edge over other schools of
thought-experimentation and empiricism.
B. Validity Theories
i. Verification Theory
The earliest criterion that distinguishes philosophy and science is verification theory. The idea
proposes that a discipline is science if it can be confirmed or interpreted in the event of an
alternative hypothesis being accepted. In that regard, said theory gives premium to empiricism and
only takes into account those results which are measurable and repeatable (with experiments),
This was espoused by a movement in the early twentieth century called the Vienna Circle a group
of scholars who believed that only those which can be observed should be regarded as meaningful
and reject those which cannot be directly accessed as meaningless.
At first, it was proved to be attractive due to general consensus from people, which happened to see
for themselves how the experiment occurred, solidifying its validity and garnering supporters from
esteemed figures, However, it was proved to be a somewhat risky-several building theories that
lack empirical results might be shot down prematurely, causing slower innovation and punishing
ingenuity of newer, novel thoughts
For instance, Einstein's theory on the existence of gravitational waves would, following this
thought, be dismissed due to lack of evidence almost a hundred years ago. Quantum mechanics
would not prosper if the scientific society during the time of Erwin Schrodinger did not entertain
his outrageous thought that the cat in the box is both dead and alive, which can only be determined
once you look in the box yourself.
Moreover, this theory completely fails to weed out bogus arguments that explain things
coincidentally. A classic example is astrology, whose followers are able to employ the verification
method in ascertaining its reliability. The idea is that since one already has some sort of
expectations on what to find, they will interpret events in line with said expectation.
American Thomas Kuhn warned us against bridging the gap between evidence and theory by
attempting to interpret the former according to our own biases, that is, whether or not we subscribe
to the theory.
ii. Falsification Theory
The current prevalent methodology in science is the falsification theory that asserts that as long as
an ideology is not proven to be false and can best explain a phenomenon over alternative theories,
we should accept the said ideology. Due to its hospitable character the shift to this theory allowed
emergence of theories otherwise rejected by verification theory. It does not promote ultimate
adoption of one theory but instead encourages research in order to determine which among the
theories can stand the test of falsification. The strongest one is that which is able to remain upheld
amidst various tests, while being able to make particularly risky predictions about the world.
Karl Popper is the known proponent of this view. He was notorious for stating that up-and-coming
theories of the time, such as Marx's Theory of Social History and Sigmund Freud's Psychoanalysis,
are not testable and thus not falsifiable, and subsequently questioning their status as scientific.
Similarly, it also presents certain dangers by interpreting otherwise independent evidence in light of
their theory.
III. Human Flourishing and Progress of Science and technology
A. Science as Social Endeavor
Sciences cease to belong solely to gown-wearing, bespectacled scientists at laboratories.
B. Science and Results
Science does not monopolize the claim for definite results.
C. Science as Education.
Science school was trained to regard science in a distinct accord.
If one is really in pursuit of human flourishing, it would make sense for them to pursue it
holistically. Simply mastering science and technology would be inadequate if we are to, say,
socialize with people or ruminate on our inner self. Aristotle's eudaimonic person is required to be
knowledgeable about science, among other things of equal importance. They are supposed to
possess intellectual virtues that will enable them to determine truth from falsehood or good
reasoning from poor reasoning. A true eudaimon recognizes that flourishing requires one to excel in
various dimensions, such as linguistics, kinetics, arts, and socio-civic. Thus, we should understand
that we should not focus on one aspect alone.
Summary
 Human flourishing is defined as being "good-spirited" in the classical Aristotelian notion.
Eastern and western concepts of human flourishing differ from each other. As times change,
the elements for human flourishing change as well.
 The good is inherently related to the truth. To confirm the truth, a systematize called
scientific method and several rationalize validity theories emerge verification and
falsification.
 In pursuit of human flourishing, it should be pursued holistically. Eudaimonic person must
not only be knowledgeable about science for reasoning, but also excel in various dimension.