Creative Human Development: Between Technology Transfer and Appropriate Technology
In the excitement over the unfolding of his scientific and technical powers, modern man has built a system of production that ravages nature and a type of society that mutilates man. Such is the philosophy of exaggerated materialism, which we here challenge as inadequate for the purpose of human development. This philosophy promotes a narrow vision of reality, and emphasises the accumulation of goods and the manipulation of techniques, to the neglect of the development of persons. The destructive forces of the modern world cannot be brought under control simply by mobilizing more resources of wealth, education, and research – to fight pollution and chemical hazards, preserve wild life, to discover new sources of energy, and to arrive at more effective agreements on peaceful co-existence. Wealth, education, research, and many other things are needed for any civilization though, a revision of the ends which these means are meant to serve must be in accord with the logic of appropriate technology. This implies, above all else, the development of a life-style, which accords to material things their proper, legitimate place, which is secondary and not primary. The paper views human development as the progressive humanization of society; a movement away from the materialistic, and towards the humanistic and argues in particular that, the logic of development expressed through the creative application of knowledge of other cultures which is technology transfer should be shifted in favour of the design and application of technical knowledge for the benefit of the immediate community, which is appropriate technology.
Introduction
The destructive forces unleashed by it (the logic of production – exaggerated materialism) cannot be brought under control, unless the logic of production’ itself if brought under control – so that destructive forces cease to be unleashed. It is of little use trying to suppress terrorism if the production of deadly devices continues to be deemed a legitimate employment of man’s creative powers. Nor can the fight against pollution be successful if the patterns of production and consumption continue to be of a scale, a complexity, and a degree of violence which, as is becoming more and more apparent, do not fit into the laws of the universe, to which man is just as much subject as the rest of creation. Equally, the chance of mitigating the rate of resource depletion or of bringing harmony into the relationships between those in possession of wealth and power and those without is non-existent as long as there is no idea anywhere of enough being good and more-than-enough being evil (Schumacher, 1979:291).
This argued point in question in the above quip is that, pollution must be brought under control and population of mankind and his consumption of resources must be steered towards a permanent and sustainable equilibrium – this can be made possible through a conscious effort of intersecting the material and immaterial, the visible and invisible. Thus the tendency of the modern man to see and become conscious of only the visible and to forget the invisible things that are making the visible possible and keeping them going does not, and cannot amount to development. The philosophy of exaggerated materialism promoted and protected by scientific technology produces a “process of mutual poisoning” whereby successful industrial development in the cities destroys the economic structure of the hinterland, and the hinterland takes its revenge by mass migration into the cities, poisoning them and making them utterly unmanageable. As already stated above, our crudely materialistic philosophy that makes us liable to see only the material opportunities and to overlook the immaterial factors is a misguided effort in human development.
Human development is not primarily a problem for economists, least of all for economists whose expertise is founded on a crudely materialist philosophy. Human development requires a new philosophy which takes cognisance of the yearnings and aspirations of the entire human population; it must be humanistic, which takes poverty and other inhuman conditions as diseases which must be permanently exterminated from the human system. From a severely practical point of view, this new thinking no longer support the saying that “what is good for the rich must be good for the poor”, but support a development policy that “care for all people” because they are the primary and ultimate source of wealth.
The conclusion here is that, man’s current pursuit of profit and progress, which promotes giant organizations and increased specialization is not and cannot be called development (at least in human terms). In fact, it has rather resulted in gross economic inefficiency, environmental pollution and inhuman working conditions. Thus, man is pulling the earth and himself out of equilibrium by applying only one test to everything he does: money, profits and therefore giant operations. We have got to ask instead, “what about the cost in human terms, in happiness, health, beauty and conservation of the planet?” which indices are architectonics of human development.
It is argued on this score that all success which end promote the essential needs of man are likely to be illusory unless there is also a healthy growth or at least a healthy condition of stability – among the very great number of people today whose life is characterised not only by dire poverty but also by hopelessness. Such healthy growth or condition of stability it is said, could come about through technology transfer, while others say it could be made possible through appropriate technology. Our work appraises these positions and argues the conclusion that African communal expression of the logic of solidarity and subsidiarity promotes the totality of the human person.
Author:
Alloy, S. Ihuah (PhD) Department of Rel. & Philosophy Benue State University Makurdi. NB: The complete version of this article will be published in the upcoming issue of our scientific journal Africa & Science in Spring 2013.An Interdisciplinary Master’s Programme (History, Political Science, Sociology) Bon à lire: «Médicaments, le casse-tête indien»
Comments are currently closed.