The Role Of Technology Essay Research Paper
The Role Of Technology Essay, Research Paper
Man is still the most extraordinary computing machine of all.
– John F. Kennedy
Speech, May 21, 1963
As we look back in retrospect, civilisation has evolved greatly from coevals to coevals. Our promotion has been entirely dependent on one factor, the human head. The human head has brought us from the bondages of Neanderthal epoch to today s modern age. It has brought us legion of comfortss that are every bit simple as a cock to every bit sophisticated as the personal computing machine. These creative activities have multiplied exponentially and have been the crutch for our society. The anxiousness of Y2k exemplifies the magnitude in which we rely on these machines we have created. The quandary in which the development of engineering brings is a simple inquiry: To what extent should these machines govern our lives? This medium is the important reply to future endurance of our being.
If we look back to a small over two centuries ago in our universe, engineering was non every bit outstanding as it is now. A twenty-four hours in which the Equus caballus cart broke did non greatly affect day-to-day life for people in that clip period. On the other manus, conceive of a twenty-four hours when electricity stops. Airports would be shut down, communicating failures, concern loss, and etc. Recently an temblor hit the state of Taiwan, where a bulk of the semiconducting material industry is located. During the temblor with a Richter graduated table of 7.4, many of the mills halted production on computing machine french friess. In the one of two yearss the workss were shut down, stocks associating to the computing machine industry plummeted. Dell Computer announced that its 3rd one-fourth net incomes would be lower than outlooks, Gateway portions dropped, and the harm went down the concatenation to companies that were related to the computing machine industry. If the craze over Y2k is accurate, we will see in first manus, the appreciation in which engineering has on our society. I have observed that a popular secret plan in sci-fi novels is the impression that someday in the hereafter, computing machines will regulate our lives and we will go slaves to them. The Terminator film series is a authoritative illustration that uses this secret plan. One must inquire himself if this fiction has become a world for worlds. Weapons of mass devastation were a changeless fright for all citizens during the Cold War and are still a menace to us. Reading about the Oklahoma City bombardment, the Columbine shots, the recent Xerox shots, and so forth makes me inquire if we have become slaves to our creative activities.
To happen the medium in which we can equilibrate engineering with our lives, we must understand the differences and analogues that computing machines portion with us. An evident disparity is that computers/machines do non posses the ground and intuition that a human encephalon contains. Descartes foresaw this differentiation and grounds as follows:
For whereas ground is a univeral instrument which can be used in all sorts of state of affairss, these variety meats [ of animate beings, like mechanisms in general ] need some peculiar temperament for each peculiar action ; hence it is for all practical intents impossible for a machine to hold adequate different variety meats to do it move in all eventualities of life in the manner in which our grounds makes us move. ( Descartes 1637, p.140 )
Descartes continues, even though such machines might make [ or state ] some things every bit good as we do them, or possibly even better, they would necessarily neglect in others, which would uncover that they were moving non through understanding but merely from the temperament of their variety meats. There is a common misconception that computing machines are perfect in their several maps and that they are the solution to the erroneous human being. Therefore, we trust it with all of our day-to-day responsibilities. Many continue to believe that since computing machines appear to be perfect and that we trust it with all our responsibilities, finally computing machines are smarter than worlds and someday may assist us carry through all of our undertakings. We have been fascinated by the capablenesss of the new cheat title-holder, Artificial Intelligence. The fact of the affair is that Artificial Intelligence can be flawed merely like worlds can be. The Chinese Room Argument proposed by John Searle gives us a glance to the abilities of AI. The experiment requires puting individual in a room with a clump of Chinese Hagiographas. Based on the batches of direction they give you are required to decode the Chinese characters. This carbon monoxide
rrelation is evidently impossible to most existences and one of Searle s decisions is:
If he doesn t understand so there is no manner the system could understand because the system is merely portion of him.
Behind every computing machine system or package lays a plan or codification that was created by a human being. Therefore if you believe that worlds are erroneous, so the plans created would be besides flawed sharing a analogue between machines and worlds.
In order to find whether to choose the consequences from the computing machine or the ace sawbones as given in the scenario, the benefits and disadvantages of computing machines must be underlined foremost. In the paragraphs above, I have tried to happen grounds to confute the impression that computers/machines are unflawed. However, computing machines can go a great complement to our day-to-day undertakings. The quandary we face is how much or how small we should trust on engineering before it controls us. The medium is simple ; blend the best of what worlds may offer such as the flexibleness of our heads with the increased truth and efficiency of the computing machine. In this given scenario, the computing machine that predicts the possibilities of a bosom onslaught should be viewed as a 2nd sentiment. Each bosom onslaught instance varies from patient to patient, computing machines may be accurate most of the clip but on the rare occasions it may besides be incorrect. Merely a physician would be able to take in history particular conditions such as a rare bosom status or a phenomenon that was ne’er discovered. The computing machine on the other manus would either give a false end product or syntax mistake. With the benefits of a physician and the computing machine as a 2nd sentiment, the patient would so be able to do an informed determination. However, if we become wooed by the computing machine s ability to do these anticipations and hope to replace physicians someday with these devices, we so cross the thin ruddy line from utilizing it as a tool to trusting on it. Promotions in the medical field have made medical specialty pattern today, more efficient and accurate. Inventions such as the X ray have become tools or nurses for physicians. Yet with these comfortss, most physicians do non trust entirely on generated informations but besides their experience and cognition learnt making a balance between adult male and engineering.
Most resistance on this affair will reason on the virtue of a few points. First and first, cost efficiency ; if we are able to change over computing machines into physicians someday imagine the reduced cost of medical advice. There would be an obvious demand for these devices and therefore driving down the monetary values for medical attending. Peoples from all fiscal backgrounds would eventually be able to afford some kind of medical advice since surgery and advice presents have become extortionate in their costs. Second, this new signifier of medical specialty is clip efficient every bit good. Alternatively of leaping from physician to sophisticate for secondary sentiment, one computing machine will bring forth the same consequence as the other devices. Third, the computing machine may be able to give a more accurate diagnosing a individual physician today without the 2nd sentiments. However, there are many ethical issues that are involved in this state of affairs. Computers will non be able to observe any new signifiers of diseases or rare conditions therefore giving many lives.
My attack to this quandary from the article in the New Yorker is straightforward. I would take into consideration what the physician informs me of and besides the statistical informations compiled by the computing machine. However, I would non trust entirely on the computing machine but besides 2nd sentiments from other heart specialists besides the primary 1. Statistically wise, if I sought out three physicians and all three said I was all right and healthy. I would take their word for it and overruling the consequence generated by the computing machine. However, if the other two physicians agreed with the computing machine my obvious pick would be to understand that a bosom onslaught might happen. The most critical component I believe in this quandary is non to trust on engineering itself. The head is far more complex than computing machine french friess that were made by worlds. If the gift of our head were compromised, so they would be apparently no demand for them.
Where there is the necessary proficient accomplishment to travel mountains, there is no demand for the religion that moves mountains. Eric Hoffer
Man must understand its function with engineering before any continual patterned advance or else the sci-fi books we read may someday go a world.