THE HUMAN PERSON FLOURISHING IN TERMS OF

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

 OUR GOAL

To help students know the value of Science and Technology in

the Society
To understand what Martin Heidegger meant by “Technology as
a way of revealing”
To understand Jason Hickel’s “Human Flourishing as reflected
in progress of development”
T E C H N O L O G Y A S A WAY O F R E V E A L I N G

Martin Heidegger is a
German Philosopher
focused all his writing on
technology.
He addresses modern
technology and its essence as
an instrumental way of
revealing the world.
 T E C H N O L O G Y A S A WAY O F R E V E A L I N G

Heidegger sees technology not as an instrument but is a way to understand

the world.
Modern technology is not seen as helping to come into being, but in a sense,
Heidegger says it's forcing into being. Meaning, a person can’t just create
materials but also they use it for a lot of purpose. Which neglects the idea of
technology NOT as an instrument
Heidegger also stated that technology is not a product of human activity but
technology has its way on understanding the world. Meaning, technology was
not made by man-kind but nature itself is the one who made it possible.
 T E C H N O L O G Y A S A WAY O F R E V E A L I N G

Technology is the Ultimate Danger

We might stop to see our self as the beings that can have
those deeper interpretations of the world. As soon as we
become raw material for ourselves we can manipulate with,
then we stop seeing ourselves as the ultimate place where
new interpretations of the world can show themselves.
 HOW CAN TECHNOLOGY BE
‘ A WAY O F R E V E A L I N G ’ ?
This means that everything we perceive or think of or interact with “emerges out of
concealment into unconcealment,” in Heidegger’s words. By entering into a
particular relation with reality, reality is ‘revealed’ in a specific way. And this is
where technology comes in, since technology is the way of revealing that
characterises our time. Technology embodies a specific way of revealing the world,
a revealing in which humans take power over reality. While the ancient Greeks
experienced the ‘making’ of something as ‘helping something to come into being’ –
as Heidegger explains by analysing classical texts and words – modern technology is
rather a ‘forcing into being’. Technology reveals the world as raw material, available
for production and manipulation.
 WHY IS TECHNOLOGY NOT A
HUMAN ACTIVITY?
“Geschick” something that is sent to us from the outside world which we can’t exert control over it.
This technological understanding of ‘being’, according to Heidegger, is to be seen as the ultimate
danger. First of all, there is the danger that humans will also interpret themselves as raw materials.
Note that we are already speaking about “human resources”. But most importantly, the technological
will to power leaves no escape. If we want to move towards a new interpretation of being, this would
itself be a technological intervention: we would manipulate our manipulation, exerting power over
our way of exerting power. And this would only reconfirm the technological interpretation of being.
Every attempt to climb out of technology throws us back in. The only way out for Heidegger is “the
will not to will”. We need to open up the possibility of relying on technologies while not becoming
enslaved to them and seeing them as manifestations of an understanding of being.
 HUMAN FLOURISHING AS
REFLECTED IN PROGRESS OF
DEVELOPMENT

Jason Hickel an
anthropologist at the London
School of Economics
He stated, reflect and rethink
on a different paradigm of “de-
development”
 ECONOMIC GROWTH IS
INEFFECTIVE

No matter how our world grew in an There will be 2 outcomes if economic
economic perspective, our population growth still continues:
will still grow and with the
MORE growth, LESS employment
advancement of technology, companies
would rather rely on man-made devices Or
rather than human strengths in terms of MORE growth, STABLE employment
labour causing unemployment
 ECONOMIC GROWTH IS
INEFFECTIVE
And that’s not all, as we continue to evolve and more growth
will spurt, the more we take up the planet’s bio-capacity.
Meaning, we are slowly destroying nature.
W H AT D O E S T H I S M E A N O F O U R
T H E O RY O F D E V E L O P M E N T ?
Peter Edward (Economist) argues
that instead of pushing poor
countries over, why not make them
catch up with the rich ones?
In his perspective, the economist
wants countries to see small things
efficient to prevent rapid production
and consumption which destroys the
planet’s bio-capacity
 H O W M U C H D O W E R E A L LY N E E D T O
LIVE A LONG AND HAPPY LIVES?

In the US, life expectancy is 79 years and GDP per capita is $53,000. But
many countries achieved similar life expectancy with a mere fraction of income.
WHICH ONE IS HAPPIER?
 H O W M U C H D O W E R E A L LY N E E D T O
LIVE A LONG AND HAPPY LIVES?

Overall happiness and well-being in addition to life expectancy, as

number of low and middle-income countries rank highly. In other words,
excess income and consumption we see in rich counties does not promote
overall happiness.
Rich countries should justify their excesses and underdeveloped countries
into appropriately developed. Both rich and poor countries must be
balanced to help the global economy instead of promoting more growth.
QUESTION AND ANSWERS