Nee EE NN

2 EY Te I ey

 

ee

 

 

February 14, 1985 PAGE 11

 

from page 10

centralized way in which people could
obtain printed information.

In these ways, society became
fragmented. In such a society collect-
ions of individuals would fight among-
st each other for dominance of
ideology (this is common in close
elections or split elections). The
stronger grouping of individuals with-
in society would effectively dictate its
standards to the entire society.

In this way, the ‘‘democratization’’
of the printing would result in individ-
uals of the dominant-ideology as the
law and order, and the minority-
ideology as subordinate in law and
order. Under a one-fold system of
culturally appropriate oral informat-
ion, through the churches (or any
other single grouping), this would
have had a unifying effect on the
population” of providing one ideology
to one people and in this way, social
oral unity over ‘‘print discord.’’

One last invention (of material
qualities) which eroded the traditional
patterns of life for the ordinary
individual was science.

Science was the process of obtain-
ing information through the experi-
mental method. The experimental
method encompassed the following
sequences of linear thinking: 1. the
creation of a hypothesis - a specific
argument which was to be subjected
to verification or dismissed by the
experimental method; 2.the setting up
of artificially controlled situations
through which the hypothesis could
be subjected to testing, 3. observat-
ions of the controlled situation which
would result in tentative truths being
establish (the hypothesis was either
proved or disproved).

Ultimate ‘‘truths’’ could be dis-
covered by merely setting any parti-
cular idea (of physical and _ later,
psychological forms) to the acid test of

scientific scrutiny. Science created
answers which were visible, repeat-
able and observable. The scientific
method, in the same way as printing,
had several important social impli-
cations for the ordinary individual
within society.

The scientific method was a highly
powerful abstraction of logical reason-
ing which provided alternative an-
swers to the established authority of
the church. In the same vein as

science tended to invalidate old the-

ories of science and_ therefore,
“‘truth’’ seemed to become an im-
possible ideal.

The theory of the concrete, indivis-
ible atom came to be known to be a
divisible structure with three parts:
the proton, the electron and the
neutron. In addition, the separate
entities of time and space became
known as one dualistic unit of time-
space. Hence, science, like the people

 

 

 

 

 

 

printing, the scientific method allow-
ed new ideas to percolate through the
social fabric and challenge and under-
mine the functions of the church.
Agnosticism and atheism were two
currents of thought which science
could provide for the individual. But
in the years to come, this ‘‘science of
the concrete’’ (Levi-Strauss, Science
of the Concrete) became, ‘‘science of
the intangible.’’ New theories from

who followed it as their doctorine of
belief, were wanderers trying to
define themselves in obscure and
uncertain and forever changing reali-
ties. ‘‘Science of the concrete’ had
and would continue to produce indivi-
duals who were uncertain of them-
selves, their goals and their ‘‘right’’
and ‘‘wrong’’ modes of thought (Mc-
Kay, A History of Western Civili-
zation).

By contrast, the Church offered
concrete ways of believing and living,
and whether they (the church) were
“right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’, seemed to be
irrelevant. The church merely needs
to provide an answer or a path for
which to travel upon to ensure a
steady-state of existence and presum-
ably, therefore, a more ‘‘happy’’
existence.

Clearly, the pursuit of technological
and/or material progress is not in the
best interests of the ordinary man. By
subjecting imperfect man to the exact-
ing efficiency of the quantitative
clock, one reduces man to machine-
like qualities and dissociates him from
his natural social and sensory quali-
ties which characterize an acceptable
existence.

Both printing and science were re-
sponsible for undermining the author-
ity of the church which provided solid
answers to the people. Science and
printing seemed to yield no ‘‘real’’
answers to the pressing problems of
the day, rather, they were the seeds
of social discord and individual un-
rest.

Science created material comfort
and subsequently a system of social
programs. While it is impossible to
deny the success of material gains,
the social programs (created by social
scientists) have been an overwhelm-
ing failure. These programs have
been unable to create the sense of
security and happiness that preceeded
accelerated technological ‘‘progress’’.
(Masters and Johnson have failed to
help men adjust to sexual difficulties,
Welfare and Economic policy are as
uncertain as governments themselves,
crime, rape and divorce — the seeds
of social destruction — are on the
increase). If one considers that a
man’s highest goal is the pursuit of
happiness, then technology has truly
failed’ mankind.