Does technology make us all richer?  Certainly in one sense, poor people today have a lot more than poor people did 100 years ago.
Technology makes us richer in the sense that we have more things, but is that the only sense in which we want to be richer?

• does it make life easier?
• does it make our environment more pleasant?
• does it make our communities more supportive?
  

what did conservatives think of the modern era? Of the postmodern era?

• in the early years of modernism conservatives saw it as too much change
• later conservatives came to embrace technological change but reject social change (and new movements in art)
  
• change in science and technology and arts and society are all linked together--Lienhard
• Lienhard would say you can't have technological progress without it causing change in society
• conservatives became increasingly in favor of unrestricted capitalism
  

Watch out for Nye's use of the word "liberal."  He is using it in an economic history sense--technological/economic liberals believe that technological progress and economic growth are good things. 

• The space program is liberal in the sense that it is more about education/learning/exploration/science than about the success of American business
  
• it used to be (1970s) that conservatives wanted economic growth and therefore technological progress, liberals were more worried about the dangers of technology.  You go back even further and conservatives led the early fight to protect the environment because they saw conservatism as keeping the old traditions, limiting progress
  
• liberals today:
  
• worry about environmental dangers
• are more likely to worry about the damage that might be done by unrestrained economic growth (and military power)
• but they also want the government to do more to advance science and technology for the public good
  
• conservatives today:
• worry about preserving traditional values
• believe in a free market
• may be suspicious of science
  
• want the government to do as little as possible, including supporting the advance of science and technology
• libertarians today
• want minimal government and regulation
• want the government to stay out of personal moral choices
  
• the old definition of economic liberalism is not the way we use the word today
  

Nye is using liberal to mean pro-technology, pro-economic growth (as in economic liberalism)

Is technological progress and economic growth always a good thing?  Most of you probably automatically answer yes, but in this chapter you need to stop and think about that.  Think about this in terms of quality of life.

• standard of living: what things and experiences can you afford
• how does it affect our values?
  
• quality of life also includes pleasant community environment, good health, crime rate, do neighbors help each other

Does technology make us richer?  Yes, it gives us more things--a higher standard of living.
Is a higher standard of living the whole story?  Does it give us a better quality of life?
Standard of living is what we can buy--food, clothing, shelter, etc.

Quality of life is also the environment around us, both social and natural.

• almost everyone believes we have gained more than we have lost
• In the British industrial revolution the rich got the benefits and initially the poor did not see much improvement in their standard of living
• in the modern era rich and poor both got a lot of benefits from new technology
  
• in recent years a lot of products have become more affordable, but the gap between rich and poor is increasing
• technological progress has certainly given us more things

an argument that technology improves our quality of life

                                                                                                                                    one attempt at wider measures, for England:

Does technological progress and economic growth lead to more damage to our environment?  Do the factories that made more products cause more pollution?  Economic growth reduces the natural places we can visit and enjoy.

Key question from about 1970 to 2010:
How far should we go to protect the environment at the cost of economic growth?

• before the 1960s there was concern about human health and local unpleasantness (quality of life)
  
• in the 1960s the concern expanded to our effect on the natural world
• in the 1980s the assumption was we could afford to do a lot to preserve nature
• more recently more concern about the cost of environmental protection
• Since about 2010 there has been increasing concern that climate change is a fundamental threat, the question is
• are we willing to make big changes to slow climate change?
• or do we just figure we can adapt as it happens rather than prevent it?
• or that other countries have to commit to doing more before we start disruptive changes
  

Graph to right--is getting wealthier (country by country) good for the environment?

• in poor countries protecting the environment doesn't seem like the most important thing
• as countries get wealthier they tend to do more to protect the environment
• technology can be used to damage the environment more but also to clean it up
  

What about quality of life?

• we have gained a lot--entertainment, mobility, life expectancy. We have more choices.
  
• Are we happier than people were 200 years ago?  Are our cities more pleasant place to live than they were 200 years ago (in terms of layout, not sanitation)?  If so, why do people like to live in historic districts?
• what do we have less of as a result of technological progress?
• privacy
• time--we are busier
• we have lost the value of many skills and the ability to do things for ourselves
  
• customer service
• efficiency often means one person expected to do more, so less individual attention
  
• local community--people living nearby know what is going on and help each other out
• appreciation for what we have
• simplicity
  

Consider the example of Walmart

• Walmart shows what you can do if you set out to use technology to make products cheaper (and therefore improve our standard of living)
• we can afford to buy more things
  
• now we expect that things will always get cheaper
• quality, how long things last, reliability, has gone down
• gives one company monopoly power
• small businesses and small town centers are hurt
• do people buy too much?
  
• provides jobs, but are those less desirable jobs than those in smaller stores?
• the Walmart low price focus has contributed to manufacturing jobs moving out of the U.S.
  

Does technology give us improved quality of life?

• we can afford more things
• do we live in a more pleasant environment (outside our homes)?
• people feel a right to a good quality of life, which depends on the actions of other people
• if we become richer in things but our environment becomes worse are we really better off?
• standard of living is not the same thing as quality of life--other things affect our quality of life besides what we can buy (eg. a neighborhood playground)
  

Is impact on the environment a reason to question progress?

• Technology did a lot of harm to the environment, but in recent years that has been much improved
  
• Our rivers are probably healthier than they were 30 years ago, but they are certainly less healthy than they were 150 years ago.
• technology harming the environment is no longer a clearly visible pattern
• is it enough to have a pleasant environment?
  
• What we think of as natural often isn't natural, for example the beautiful view may only be visible because trees were cut down
• In the Clemson area, the forest that was here before the land was cleared for agriculture will not grow back--farming led to the loss of so much topsoil that the shortleaf pines that used to be the dominant tree don't grow well here any more
• as we control nature more and more there is the danger we will turn wilderness into something like a zoo
  do we lose something then?
• do we want an environment that is independent of people or a garden--an environment changed to please us
  
• one way to look at environmental issues is to look at how human beings are harmed
• another way is to look at what is lost
• There are still dramatic ways we are harming the environment--mountaintop removal
  

technological progress may mean environmental harm that reduces quality of life

• what is the cost of pollution--can directly cause economic loss
• health effects of pollution
• are we happier or better people if we get to enjoy nature?
• there are things we can learn from nature

So we may want to take seriously the environmental costs of technological progress
We have to manage the natural environment now, natural forces will no longer keep it stable because of the changes we have made

---

Questioning the harm done by technology is not new:

• Thomas Carlyle: men have become mechanical
• Henry David Thoreau criticized the direction in which civilization was going:
  
  
  
• "To have done anything just for money is to have been truly idle."
  
• "Most of the luxuries and many of the so-called comforts of life are not only not indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of mankind. " Walden
• "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." Walden
• "If a man walks in the woods for love of them half of each day, he is in danger of being regarded as a loafer. But if he spends his days as a speculator, shearing off those woods and making the earth bald before her time, he is deemed an industrious and enterprising citizen."
• "Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end."
  
• "Thank God men cannot as yet fly and lay waste the sky as well as the earth! "
• "What does education often do? It makes a straight-cut ditch of a free, meandering brook."
  
• "How does it become a man to behave towards the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. "

• John Muir's  ideas came from transcendentalism: nature is a mirror reflecting the Creator
  
  
  
• "Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountain is going home; that wildness is necessity; that mountain parks and reservations are useful not only as fountains of timber and irrigating rivers, but as fountains of life. "
• "Wander a whole summer if you can. Thousands of God's blessings will search you and soak you as if you were a sponge, and the big days will go by uncounted. If you are business-tangled and so burdened by duty that only weeks can be got out of the heavy laden year, give a month at least. The time will not be taken from the sum of life. Instead of shortening, it will indefinitely lengthen it and make you truly immortal. "
  
• In God's wildness lies the hope of the world - the great fresh unblighted, unredeemed wilderness. The galling harness of civilization drops off, and wounds heal ere we are aware. -- John of the Mountains
• Against the building of a dam in a valley near Yosemite: "These temple-destroyers, devotees of ravaging commercialism, seem to have a perfect contempt for Nature, and instead of lifting their eyes to the God of the mountains, lift them to the Almighty Dollar. Dam Hetch Hetchy! As well dam for water-tanks the people's cathedrals and churches, for no holier temple has ever been consecrated by the heart of man."
  
• "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." -- My First Summer in the Sierra
  

what was the result of such questioning?

• preserve special wilderness areas
• later you get zoning--preserve some balance of how we use the land inside towns and cities
• we are willing to have regulation to create a nicer environment

A couple of examples of how this has shifted:

• the depression caused people to question technology in a new way
  
• 1933 Chicago Worlds Fair: "Science Finds--Industry Applies--Man Conforms." --an example of belief in technological determinism
  
• 
• with the end of the modern era people began to question progress more
  
• people mostly saw technology as a good thing but now and then came face to face with the negative impacts
  
• Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring, 1962
• pesticides were a great success story
• would it be a good thing to make mosquitoes extinct?
• harm was not so much to human beings as to birds
• wanting a pleasant environment includes the pleasure of birdsongs
  
• galvanized public opinion

Can technology solve these problems without it costing more

• do we always have to face tradeoffs?
• could home solar energy create economic growth and environmental benefit?
• technology can sometimes save us from having to make tradeoffs
• Technological fix--technology can give us easy solutions to our problems
• but technology doesn't usually solve problems of human behavior
  

Are we ready to face limits?

• we do have the idea of preserving wilderness and open space before it is gone
• we accept limits on hunting and fishing
• bans on gasoline powered cars?
  
• we haven't fully absorbed the idea that the world can absorb only so much pollution
• limits and medicine
  
• percentage of the economy going to medical care is increasing
• can we cut waste--but waste is tricky to design
  
• related area--rationing medical care (example: until the late 1980s if you were over 50 you generally weren't eligible for kidney dialysis in England)
• can the cost of college education continue to grow relative to median income?
  
• are we going to run out of oil?
• consumption cannot continue to increase indefinitely--we don't face that