Nick Acheson
March 26, 2010
[NICK ACHESON]
IN A CONTINUATION OF LECTURES ON WESTERN CIVILIZATION AND AMERICAN LIBERTY, CHARLES T. RUBIN, A PROFESSOR AT DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY GAVE A LECTURE FRIDAY AFTERNOON TITLED, “TECHNOLOGICALLY ENHANCED HUMANITY: IS IT THE END OF LIBERTY, OR IS IT THE END OF LIBERTY?”
[TAKE VO]
[CG: CLIP OF PROFESSOR RUBIN DELIVERING HIS LECTURE]
THE LECTURE COVERED THE ETHICAL BARGAIN BETWEEN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY VS. AMERICAN LIBERTY.
[TAKE VO]
[CG: CLIP OF A UMAINE STUDENT ASKING RUBIN A QUESTION]
IT ALSO DESCRIBED A NEW MOVEMENT KNOWN AS THE TRANSHUMANIST MOVEMENT WHERE A SMALL BUT GROWING NUMBER OF PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE USING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDESIGNING THE HUMANKIND TO BE HEALTHIER, SAFER, AND BETTER.
[Nick Acheson]
THIS NEW MOVEMENT HAS SPARKED HEAVY DEBATE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND BEGS THE QUESTION: JUST BECAUSE WE CAN DO SOMETHING DOES THAT ME WE SHOULD?
Friday, March 26, 2010
Assignment 9-1: Lecture
Nick Acheson
March 26, 2010
ORONO- In a continuation of Lectures on Western Civilization and American Liberty Charles T. Rubin , a professor at Duquesne University gave a lecture Friday afternoon titled “Technologically Enhanced Humanity: Is the End Liberty, or is it the End of Liberty?”
The topic covered the ethical bargain between science and technology vs. American liberty. According to Rubin, a small but growing number of people known as “Transhumanists” have started a movement to use science and technology for the purpose of redesigning humanity in order to make mankind healthier, safer, and better than we presently are. Transhumanism describes human life presently as undesirable, disabled, suffering, aging, and unnecessary death.
Professor Rubin used an example of the Transhumanist argument to cover the topic of a prosthetic limb. If we can make a prosthetic limb for a disabled veteran or accident victims couldn’t be design one to be better than a regular, healthy working human hand? This prosthetic limb topic opens doors to more topics that seem closer to science fiction books than to actual science or technology. These include: uploading human minds into computers, and making humans so they never need to eat, as well as the very controversial topic of serious life extension.
Ethical dilemmas are faced in each of the arguments brought about by transhumanists. The major topic that each dilemmas faces is, “Just because we can do/create something, does that mean we should?”
Rubin, equates the transhumanist movement to a topic out of a George Orwell book called “Brain in the Bottle” where all that is needed to control vast amounts of machines and technology is a human brain but no other human parts. This is similar to the transhumanist view of “post humans” where everything would be performed by genetically enhanced parts and no actual human parts.
The argument that most transhumanists have come to side with is, “you can’t stop science and technology from growing and coming up with new ideas.” When asked about this argument, Professor Rubin agreed that it might not be possible to stop science and technology from coming up with new ideas but he also stated that, “Not everything (humans) do becomes popular and desirable, in order for these new technologies to take effect they must be desirable to humans.”
March 26, 2010
ORONO- In a continuation of Lectures on Western Civilization and American Liberty Charles T. Rubin , a professor at Duquesne University gave a lecture Friday afternoon titled “Technologically Enhanced Humanity: Is the End Liberty, or is it the End of Liberty?”
The topic covered the ethical bargain between science and technology vs. American liberty. According to Rubin, a small but growing number of people known as “Transhumanists” have started a movement to use science and technology for the purpose of redesigning humanity in order to make mankind healthier, safer, and better than we presently are. Transhumanism describes human life presently as undesirable, disabled, suffering, aging, and unnecessary death.
Professor Rubin used an example of the Transhumanist argument to cover the topic of a prosthetic limb. If we can make a prosthetic limb for a disabled veteran or accident victims couldn’t be design one to be better than a regular, healthy working human hand? This prosthetic limb topic opens doors to more topics that seem closer to science fiction books than to actual science or technology. These include: uploading human minds into computers, and making humans so they never need to eat, as well as the very controversial topic of serious life extension.
Ethical dilemmas are faced in each of the arguments brought about by transhumanists. The major topic that each dilemmas faces is, “Just because we can do/create something, does that mean we should?”
Rubin, equates the transhumanist movement to a topic out of a George Orwell book called “Brain in the Bottle” where all that is needed to control vast amounts of machines and technology is a human brain but no other human parts. This is similar to the transhumanist view of “post humans” where everything would be performed by genetically enhanced parts and no actual human parts.
The argument that most transhumanists have come to side with is, “you can’t stop science and technology from growing and coming up with new ideas.” When asked about this argument, Professor Rubin agreed that it might not be possible to stop science and technology from coming up with new ideas but he also stated that, “Not everything (humans) do becomes popular and desirable, in order for these new technologies to take effect they must be desirable to humans.”
Friday, March 19, 2010
CMJ 236 Assignment 8-2
Nick Acheson
March 19, 2010
In the previous post, the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) Board Examination Proposal was discussed. This is a proposal that would allow high school 10th graders to “test out” of high school if tests are passed at the end of their sophomore year. Maine is one of eight states in the country that have joined with NCEE and at the moment these exams are currently intended to take effect in the 2011-2012 school year.
I interviewed a current teacher at Brunswick junior high school to see what her thoughts were about these newly proposed examinations. She first admitted that she had not received or read much information on the topic, due to the fact that it is a relatively new proposal, but admitted she had mixed feelings. On one hand she explain, “why hold the bright kids back if they know the material.” She was then quick to say that school is not only about just passing a test, “Education is more than just an accumulation of skills; it should also be about learning for the sake of learning.”
This teacher also brought up that it might be better than the current system if over time a test like this was used in every state. She explained that currently the “No student left behind act” allows each state to make separate standards and a separate test, so there are students from around the country being tested over different material which makes it hard to compare the results from state to state.
I was also able to talk to Rob Walker, Deputy Executive Director of the Maine Education Association (MEA) in Augusta, ME. Mr. Walker explained that although the MEA has no official position on the subject, they have raised some concerns. “I’m not convinced that this proposal answers all the concerns associated with education.” He also went on to say, “The high school experience is not just about getting enough credits, other opportunities should be explored.”
So while some feel like this would be a good idea, it is safe to say there are number of concerns with the NCEE Board examination proposal. Although more information is still needed it is safe to say we will be hearing about this proposal many times in the near future.
March 19, 2010
In the previous post, the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) Board Examination Proposal was discussed. This is a proposal that would allow high school 10th graders to “test out” of high school if tests are passed at the end of their sophomore year. Maine is one of eight states in the country that have joined with NCEE and at the moment these exams are currently intended to take effect in the 2011-2012 school year.
I interviewed a current teacher at Brunswick junior high school to see what her thoughts were about these newly proposed examinations. She first admitted that she had not received or read much information on the topic, due to the fact that it is a relatively new proposal, but admitted she had mixed feelings. On one hand she explain, “why hold the bright kids back if they know the material.” She was then quick to say that school is not only about just passing a test, “Education is more than just an accumulation of skills; it should also be about learning for the sake of learning.”
This teacher also brought up that it might be better than the current system if over time a test like this was used in every state. She explained that currently the “No student left behind act” allows each state to make separate standards and a separate test, so there are students from around the country being tested over different material which makes it hard to compare the results from state to state.
I was also able to talk to Rob Walker, Deputy Executive Director of the Maine Education Association (MEA) in Augusta, ME. Mr. Walker explained that although the MEA has no official position on the subject, they have raised some concerns. “I’m not convinced that this proposal answers all the concerns associated with education.” He also went on to say, “The high school experience is not just about getting enough credits, other opportunities should be explored.”
So while some feel like this would be a good idea, it is safe to say there are number of concerns with the NCEE Board examination proposal. Although more information is still needed it is safe to say we will be hearing about this proposal many times in the near future.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
