Sean Osterman
Dr. Johns
9/24/08
Pacification of Nature
Herbet Marcuse is one of the most brilliant men in the world. The author of One-Dimensional Man, created the idea of “Pacification of Nature”. With this idea came the idea of trade off’s with every decisionin which technology goes forward. This idea completely controdicts the ideas of Lee M. Silver who believes that we should dominate nature with new technologies and no harm shall come from these technologies. Personally, I am on the side of Marcuse here. How can Silver be so sure of the unknown?
In a passge from Chapter 9 of One Dimensional Man, Marcuse states “The ladder involves the reduction of misery, violence, and cruelty”. Marcuse is identifying the fact that humans are only trying to reduce their pain and misery through technology such as medicines, machines, etc. He continues to state “This realm is gradually mediated in the course of the Historical transformation of Nature…” Marcuse knows that if humans use technology to alter the natural course of the world that the results could be drastic. He uses an example of birth control to illustrate this idea. Birth control is an unnatural substance in a natural world. Yes, birth control can regulate unplanned pregnancy, but on the other hand we don’t know what this can do to our body.
Silver on the other hand would completely disagree with these ideas. Silver is convinced that as we are the superior species, we should push hard with technology and not look back. His absurd ideas are conveyed in his novel Challenging Nature. How can Silver be pushing for such rapid technological advancement when we don’t even know the future side effects? On page 126 Silver demonstrates his views by saying that “biotechnology has become powerful enough to control the destiny of individual human cells”. He continues with talking about how scientists must experiment with human DNA to become the ultimate species. Silver is out of mind. Fooling around with DNA is one of the most dangerous experiments anyone can conduct because it is the basis of human nature. DNA determines everything about a human being and to change that can cause catostrophic damage to the human species. Yes, we may find some sort of way to prevent a disease, but on the other hand we could drastically alter the human species. In thinking along the lines of Marcuse, the risks are much higher than the rewards.
The human race is consistantly gaining information about the world and how it works. As new technologies are invented, new controvercies will brew up about whether it is right or not to use these technologies. Humans are very intellgent people and will make the right decision that will benefit them the most.
4 comments:
Sean, good first draft, but if I had the choice to either build and expand upon your essay, or counter your argument, I would counter it.
Marcuse’s ideas of trade-offs are based primarily on the moral and ethical backgrounds that come standard with most religions. Silver, through “Challenging Nature” proves that religion is non-existent, and certainly not real in the literal sense. Due to this, the trade-offs that come with advancements in technology should not be valued as high as Marcuse thinks. The concept of not administering birth control because we are unsure of the effects it has on our bodies is outrageous, as birth control has been in existence for numerous years. In order to be put out on the market, it must have passed vigorous tests. Also, Marcuse’s argument that the risk of experimenting with DNA are higher than the rewards are absurd. The possible rewards of using DNA to help people with fatal diseases and deformities could be spectacular. The main risks in that Marcuse discusses are changing the basis of human nature. This would be considered a risk because of the background ethics of religion, which essentially states that man should not play God. Silver clearly has no religious beliefs, and that is why he is confident that man should push forward in advancements in science and technology, without hesitation.
Sean Osterman
Dr. Johns
9/24/08
Pacification of Nature
Herbet Marcuse, the author of One-Dimensional Man, formulated the idea of “Pacification of Nature”. This theory states that with technological advancement comes a negative trade-off.
In a passage from Chapter 9 of One- Dimensional Man Marcuse states that innovation “involves the reduction of misery, violence, and cruelty.” Marcuse is identifying the fact that humans try to construct a false world to aviod real issues. He continues, “In Nature as well as in History, the struggle for excistence is in the token of scarcity, suffering, and want.” An example of this is seen through genetically modified foods. Modified foods are created by altering the foods DNA to resist rotting, insect, pesticides, etc. These foods were not introduced to the market until about 10-15 years ago. We cannot be certain if these foods have negative effects on our bodies, but yet we still eat and distribute them to the masses.
This philosophy completely controdicts the ideas of Lee M. Silver who believes that we should dominate nature with advancements and no harm shall come from these technologies. Silver is on the other side of the spectrum would argue these ideas to the fullest. Silver is convinced that as we are the superior species, we should push hard with technology and not looking back.
His absurd ideas are conveyed in his novel Challenging Nature. How can Silver be pushing for such rapid technological advancement when we don’t even know the future side effects? On page 126, Silver states that “biotechnology has become powerful enough to control the destiny of individual human cells.” He continues with talking about how scientists must experiment with human DNA to become the ultimate species. Silver is out of mind.
Fooling around with DNA is one of the most dangerous experiments anyone can conduct based on morality isses surrounding the tests. Look at stemcell research in today’s world. There are huge arguments about whether or not the subjects are humans, and whether it is morally correct to conduct these tests. Nothing positive can result from these arguments except for split sides on the topic.
The human race is consistantly gaining information about the world and how it works. As technologies are invented, new controvercies will brew up about whether it is right or not to use these technologies. As Ogden Nash once said, "Progress may have been all right once, but it has gone on too long."
Jim - this is a solid response - but do you mean Marcuse here, or someone else?
Sean - While I think there are problems with your understanding of Marcuse, the fact is that you're extracting an interesting idea from him anyway, and curiously he *is* interested in the creation of "false worlds" (especially via popular culture) even if that's not what he's really talking about with "the pacification of nature."
For the rest of your short essay, you attack Silver for, basically, having crazy and dangerous ideas. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you aren't backing up any of these assertions. Why do you think he's crazy? What, specifically, does he suggest that's so dangerous? You generalize about Silver's stupidity/insanity rather than explaining in detail why he is stupid/crazy at a particular moment. This might, of course, demand a little bit of outside research, but as it stands, I don't see anything here but opinion - why would any of this convince a skeptical reader to agree with you?
Post a Comment