Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site hplabsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!dual!lll-lcc!pyramid!hplabs!hplabsc!taylor
From: taylor@hplabsc.UUCP (Dave Taylor)
Newsgroups: mod.comp-soc
Subject: Re: Some thoughts on technology
Message-ID: <540@hplabsc.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 9-Aug-86 02:33:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.540
Posted: Sat Aug  9 02:33:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 9-Aug-86 12:23:48 EDT
Reply-To: hplabs!caip!uw-beaver!uw-vlsi!tony
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
Lines: 23
Approved: taylor@hplabs
Reference: <445@hplabsc.UUCP>

This article is from caip!uw-beaver!uw-vlsi!tony (Tony Marriott)
 and was received on Fri Aug  8 17:49:44 1986
 
>     ...But the object itself has an inherited moral and societal value
>by virtue of this.   Again, to circle back to my original comment, 
>technology cannot be considered independent of the environment it exists
>in.

Leonardo da Vinci designed war machines of optimum technology; yet these
were not produced in any functional capacity for centuries.  One should not
confuse the ethics of thought with the moral questions they involve.  It
seems to be the most common assumption in current discussions that
"technology cannot be considered independent of the environment it exists
in."   We are human kind, a creature capable of molding our environment to
our needs.  Why don't we begin?   

It often appears that technology is being used in lieu of more basic forms
of communication.  Simplicity of form or function does not readily lend
itself to simplicity of psychology or moral principal.  Even within this,
a hostile environment by any historical comparison (immediate and distant,
locally and global), there is in your neighbor a judge to assure the
success of your enterprise.  I hope you know where I guest in your burden.
Good eating!