3 ms·
You can't separate a technology from it's use. Technology is created to be used. Besides I could just as easily say some knowledge is good and some knowledge i
by frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
You can't separate a technology from it's use. Technology is created to be used.
Besides I could just as easily say some knowledge is good and some knowledge is bad. If you want to say that "knowledge is definitely not bad" then I'm going to ask you your own question - can you support that statement?
- TomMarius 8y ago> You can't separate a technology from it's use. Technology is created to be used. False. Every day, dozens of thousands of people in academia engage in basic research (actual term), something that does not lead to "usable technology" most of the time. > some knowledge is good and some knowledge is bad Are you saying that guns kill people? I thought that people kill people, using guns.
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago>Are you saying that guns kill people? I thought that people kill people, using guns. I don't understand why you're resorting to metaphor, I think what I said was pretty clear. Can you support the statement that all knowledge is good?
- TomMarius 8y agoSo our knowledge about guns is bad because guns kill? I can't explain it more, sorry. I think the explanation I've given is very obvious - technology can be used badly, but it's always the people who do it, not the technology itself. Technology is neutral, you can simply not use it - knowing it still might prove important for development of other technologies, e.g. for prevention, reparation, ... after the original technology is used, in case of nuclear weapons for example (how would we know how to prevent and treat radiation illness without knowing anything about nuclear physics), and at the very extreme, the technology itself will do nothing - until people start using it. People are bad, not technology.