e-portfolio for Tony Seok

ROUGH DRAFT OF PAPER THREE

The world’s carrying capacity determines how many biological species it can sustain. This refers to space, food supply, water supply, sunlight, etc. Hence, it is normally thought of as a scientific fact. However, according to Nye “Ultimately, the world's carrying capacity is not a scientific fact but a social construction." Thus it can no longer be referred to as a scientific fact due to the influx of technology. Technology manipulates all the factors that determine the world’s carrying capacity.

Before the reign of technology the availability of space played a major role in determining the carrying capacity. Each specie needs their own niche and niches cannot overlap otherwise there will be an increase in competition. In simple terms, human beings have to limit their population at a certain area depending on the space available. However, as technology slowly came to life, space was dramatically increased to support the growing population. In highly populated societies the issue of space is fixed by building buildings. This increases the number of people living in one area. For example in Seoul, Korea a majority of the population live in apartments. If these apartment buildings did not exist only a hand full of people can occupy that lot, but with the buildings this number increases to 200-300 people. Furthermore, the apartment buildings get taller and taller as the technology progresses. In terms of animal species there are increasing amounts of national parks, which allow different biological species to grow and prosper undisturbed. However, even with this so-called untouched wilderness “the intermingling of culture and nature continues”. People control these places whether or not it is intentional. For example, people determine the migration of plant species as well as firebreaks and camp sites. This factor of the carrying capacity is no longer a scientific fact because it is not natural. It is something constructed by the society in order to manipulate the carrying capacity.

Additionally, food supply also affects the carrying capacity of the world. Before technology, the population size was dependent on the food supply, but now, food supply is dependent on the population. Naturally food is available based on when it’s in season. However, in the world today season does not limit what is available. Technology, such as planes and buses, has stepped in to provide food that is out of season. During the World War selective breeding and hormone injections were used to increase food supply, particularly poultry. This was done in order to supply sufficient amounts of protein for the general population regardless of ones social status. This idea of selective breeding is still used to meet the needs of the growing population. Society is strives for economical power, hence increasing food supply benefits both general population as well as the competing industries. From this one can see that whilst depends on nature for basic necessities. Instead people manipulate nature to satisfy the standards of society.

Furthermore, more people are living longer due to medical technology, thus increasing the population of the world. With the invention of x-ray machines and microscopes scientists were able to examine bacteria and viruses in order to find a cure. This increased the average life span dramatically. This means that the population after technology erupted is much greater than before. This is no longer a scientific fact because the carrying capacity is increased due to unnatural causes. Moreover, new medical discoveries allow people who are almost infertile to have multiple children. This increase in birth rate and decrease in death rate means that the population continually grows. Technology once again manipulates the natural carrying capacity by lengthening the average life span as well as increasing birthrates.

Despite increasing the carrying capacity, this manipulation of nature has taken a toll on the earth. Technology benefits people but it has consequences against nature. For example “burning coal produces not only electricity but also smoke containing sulfur dioxide that falls to the earth as acid rain”. This benefits humans as it produces electricity for their comfort however it kills plants, fish and other wildlife. Technology is destroying the environment through the green house effect yet most people cannot live without it. This also means that the population of certain plants and animals has decreased dramatically. Only now that awareness has been raised that people are realizing how many species have become extinct due to technology and increase in human population. It can be said that the extinction of species can be blamed on humans and their manipulation of nature.

In today’s world it is difficult to say what is natural and what has been manipulated by culture and society. The increase of technology gave people the power to extend the carrying capacity of the world. Advancements in infrastructure, food and medicine have allowed an increase in human population. Technology provides sustainable abundance but it does come at a price. The manipulation of nature has caused destruction such as the ozone layer and green house effect.


ROUGH DRAFT OF PAPER ONE

In today’s world it’s very rare to imagine life without technology. People cannot live their everyday lives without it. Even the smallest things require some sort of technology, for example in order to talk to someone outside your immediate vicinity you use a phone. It’s come to the point that people depend on it. This is ironic because man believes that since they built technology they automatically have control over it. However, the reality of it is the dependency on technology is so overwhelming that we lose our control over it. Ralph Waldo Emerson clearly states this in his poem “Ode, inscribed to W.H. Channing.
When analyzing Emerson’s poem, one can notice that he uses the “chattel” and “thing” as a metaphor of technology and this is ironic because both technology and the chattel are commonly thought of as possessions. Hence, it is controlled and owned. But, he goes on to say “Things are in the saddle and ride mankind” and this is ironic because the initial precept, that man has the control, is altered. Our society is lead to believe that the man is in the saddle. However it is the “thing” that rides man. This implies that man almost subjects himself to technology. Emerson then goes on to talk about the two laws present in society. He emphasizes the separate laws applicable to man and thing. This shows how they are two separate entities that do not work in partnership. Historically man, by nature, builds and creates his own towns and fleets, however through the technological advances man has been replaced and it is now technology that “builds town and fleet…” However, as suggested by Emerson, this technologically built towns and fleets “runs wild,” suggesting that technology is an entity that man has no control over. Though this society is built by technology and makes lives much easier, mankind has lost control over it. Hence, man is “unking” to something that they have built.
In comparison to David E. Nye’s essay “Does Technology Control Us?” it is noticeable that Nye suggests a variety of perspectives regarding how people saw the power of technology in relation to the human society. For instance, one of the first examples Nye presents is the rejection of the gun by the Japanese. In this example, Nye conveys how the nation of Japan was able to reject such a beneficial and advanced form of weaponry in order to preserve the Samurai culture of using ancient traditional weapons including swords. This clearly shows that Nye is proposing that the human society is capable of determining whether or not to advance their society with a new form of technology or not. However, later throughout Nye’s essay, one can notice that he also states examples in which technology does seem to have a dominant role in society. For example, Nye tells his readers that some Victorians were afraid of losing control or “political means,” to be specific, over the rapidly growing use and amount of machinery. Nye creates a follow up to this example by mentioning how Marx “argued that industrialization’s immediate results were largely negative for the working class.” This is solely due to the fact that skilled workers lost their jobs as their wages were cut down and as the newly made factories did all the work they were required to do. And because of this, some believe that “industrialization broke the bonds of communities and widened the gaps between social classes.” Overall, Nye does not directly present his opinion of whether or not technology controls the human power to live in their society. Instead, he mentions the arguments that other historians of technology believe, which does not affirm or refute, but complicates what Emerson has stated in his poem.
After analyzing both Emerson’s and Nye’s arguments, I personally believe that humans have control over their technological creations only to a certain extent. When I say “only to a certain extent,” I mean that when the technological creation is massive and is continuing to grow rapidly globally humans can lose control over it and be dominated by it. For instance, humans can have control over the machinery they use when working. However, similar to Marx’s argument within Nye’s essay, when these machines are advanced to do the same type of work in a much faster speed in a short amount of time, factories are created which does not require that many workers to be working at the same time. At this point, it is clear that humans lose their power over the technological invention. Another example that is a bit modern would be the advancement of weapons. Yes, in Nye’s essay, the Japanese were able to reject the guns and the benefits it came with. But in today’s world, guns have been adopted all over the world, technology has improved the power of weapons so much that it is so lethal and destructive if used. When the guns were first invented, humans had the power to control them to a certain extent. At this point, it was used for one purpose: to shoot at single targets at a time. Now, however, the idea of guns have assisted in developing other weapons, such as machine guns, missiles, nuclear weapons, and now even biological weapons. This conveys the lost of human control over the technological weapons as the power of these weapons are not controllable when released. The damage it will result in is inevitable and technology, even as of today, is still continuing the advancement of weapons.
To conclude, I tend to believe that both Emerson’s and Nye’s arguments are partially true. But if I had to choose one, I would say that Emerson’s poem is more realistic at this point in today’s world. Technology has grown so rapidly and massively that no nation or group of people tends to reject it. It is so advanced and useful that people rely on it in their daily lives, making their life a lot comfortable and relaxing. Nye simply does not state his opinion clearly within his essay on whether or not he believes humans are under the control of their own technological creations or vice versa, leaving me no other option but to agree with Emerson.