Science and Technology,(political artifacts)

The question presented this week was "do artifacts have politics" my answer is yes if the artifacts in question are forms of wide spread technology. Almost all things in this world when looked at more closely have some form of political or social bias. And not only the examples given from the article like sidewalks, roads, highways, bridges and atom bombs which are all very effective examples because they illustrate how technology can not only contain politics but social biases but laws as well. But there’s a particular form of technology or a system of technology I want to address, which is banking more specifically savings accounts. The entire system its self is blocking out and almost making it impossible for people of lower incomes or social statuses to obtain one. Where I'm from(DC) homelessness is a big problem, but the system makes it almost impossible for the homeless to stop being homeless. The banks wont let you open up a savings account, without two forms of valid state I.D. (e.g. a driver's license or some variation of it must be one) and a prove of residence. While most people say what’s the big problem all you have to do is show a picture of your self and a envelope with your address on it for a chance at free electronic banking. But If your homeless you don’t have a home therefore you do not have a "proof of residence" and you probably cant afford 2 forms of state I.D. it cost 75 dollars for a permit/license and the 2nd I.D. I don’t even know where they expect regular people to get one. Now this system makes perfect sense when dealing with things such as credit cards and checking accounts where you would like to know where the person is who OWS you money but these savings accounts are held open at no cost to the bank(besides interest) and only contain money from the person who acquired it. So in the case of the homeless if society thinks there all lazy bums who need to get themselves out of there stifling situation why don’t we at least give them a chance to acquire a stable place for them to keep their money other then under their pillows at the shelter or taped to the sock in their shoes and give them a possibility to save up for things through savings accounts like everyone else.

Science and Society

Science and society are also co-evolving or as stated in the readings co-constructed bodies just as science and religion. Even though very closely similar, unlike religion society has the distinct power to control or regulate science, in earlier societies religion governed society and hence governed science but things change and for the most part society has begun or Tried to evolve independent from religion. The people or government in a society control science and what its allowed to research because the government and people establish what is acceptable and ethical as well as fund these pathways. Because scientist can only research the science, that they can get funded for
(as said in class not everyone is Bruce Wayne) society as of now seems to have a firm choke hold on science and its development only allowing it to breathe and expand as it chooses. Now this may sound like a horrible thing but there’s always two sides to every story. Because society has this control sciences will focus on the most pertinent things because that’s what people will fund, because no ones going to donate 3.5 billion dollars to research on the lung cancer of weasels and the chance of there being a crazed maniac like Dr.evil trying to take over the world with some super powered satellite laser is equally unlikely due to this fiscal and ethical controls. But this hold also prevents science from doing a lot of positive things as well or I think its better said as the most or more positive things. For example because of the ethical and fiscal restraints society has developed over science through their co-construction things like Malaria, Tuberculosis, Stem-cells and a quick and efficient cure for A.I.D.S; are not found cures for or researched in-depth because the companies or organizations that fund science based research want the things with the most revenue turn-out potential researched such as many non-life treating diseases or disorders like baldness, erectile malfunction or a fungal infections in toe nails. All things that are most likely to find them customers among the rich and middle class people of well off and economically stable countries. While things that could truly benefit man-kind as a whole are left up to the odds because their recipients are most likely to be poor citizens of war-torn and impoverished countries. But please don’t misinterpret what I’m saying some control is still better then none at all because science still gets a chance to do a lot of good things like the clean air act or the removal of harmful lead from gasoline and prosthetic limbs while societies constraints prevent or deter potentially harmful and “unethical” things like further research into nuclear warfare or animal testing

Science and Religon

From what I've absorbed from listening in class and interpreted from reading, if one was to take the same stand as Mr.McDonough or Braungart it would be probable to assume that Religion is used as a fail safe or back drop plan for any aspects of science or the "real" world we or society don’t understand. Like in ancient Rome environmental anomalies such as lighting and typhoons weren’t interpreted as charged electrical particles in the air or hot and cold air currents violently coming together they were instead thought to be the anger and disapproval of "Zeus" or "Poseidon".So in essence religion is basically depicted as the explanation to a particular era's un-explainable "science".Like in the case of the Mayans and Aztecs who once believed that the sun would not rise if a daily sacrifice wasn’t offered to the sun god Kinich Ahau. But as we all know the sun rises just fine, and will continue to have the world and the other Eight planets of our solar system rotating around it without one of us sacrificing or first born sons or virgin daughters.But Religion and science are two co-evolving bodies, because as one person said in class he believes parts of both the "Big Bang" theory and the scriptures that suggest "intelligent design", which is almost a perfect example of what im getting at which is as time progresses so does are understanding and grasp of the universe around us, and as that knowledge grows for the most part many peoples needs for a belief system or Devine explanation of the workings of the world shrinks or disappears because scince explains how that or many paticular things "really".
Now due to my own religious beliefs I am bias on this subject because regardless of what I read or hear from a book or in class or write in this or future blogs I'm still going to believe that the world was created from intelligent design and that, that particular intellectual is God as I know him. But that doesn’t change the fact that as society progress and transforms its grasp on knowledge religion as a whole transforms its self adapting and forming to explain the not yet explainable and will stay a crucial corner stone and building block to the evolution of human existence and our sciences wether it be the fail safe or the irrational concepts that push the sciences forward