In this blog post, we will look at the positive and negative impacts of science and technology on human life and its potential to actually contribute to the promotion of happiness.
Corporate social responsibility is a big issue these days. Many companies are fulfilling their responsibilities through social activities and showing their active commitment by expressing them in advertisements. To give a few examples, Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction is engaged in activities to support the electrification of countries where electricity is not available, and KEPCO is helping to build power plants in countries that do not have their own power generation technology. Social activities take many forms, but I began this article by questioning the social activities of companies with advanced technology that distribute their technology to regions lacking in technological capabilities.
Does the act of supplying technology to a technologically backward country or providing electricity to people who live without electricity really increase their happiness? Shouldn’t we respect their way of life? Furthermore, can science and technology really increase the happiness of mankind? I couldn’t easily answer this question with a simple “yes.” This was a hopeless situation for me, who had vowed to major in science and technology to improve the happiness of humanity. I wondered, “What had all the scientists and engineers who had devoted their lives to the development of science and technology been working so hard for?” Until I found the answer to this question, I couldn’t take a single step toward my dream.
Before we begin the discussion, let’s look at the definition of happiness. According to the Oxford Dictionary, happiness is defined as “a feeling of contentment or pleasure in one’s life, or such a state.” Of course, the definition of happiness varies greatly depending on people’s values, but in this discussion, we will define happiness as a state of feeling contentment and pleasure.
Does the development of science and technology increase the absolute amount of happiness? If this proposition is true, we should be much happier now than we were in the primitive age, or at least the Joseon Dynasty. But can you be sure that you feel greater satisfaction and joy than the people of the Joseon Dynasty? If you think that the absolute amount of happiness cannot be measured, or that it is difficult to judge because you have not experienced the Joseon Dynasty, let’s ask a more specific question. Are Americans, who live with the most advanced science and technology, happier than Danes, who live with nature? It is impossible to express happiness in absolute terms, but if we compare it through the national happiness index, we can see that the happiness level of Americans is lower. If you think that direct comparison is difficult due to differences in culture, lifestyle, and values, answer the following question. Has your happiness, that is, your satisfaction and joy in life, increased thanks to smartphones, which are a collection of the latest technology? Can you say that your life in the mid-2000s without smartphones was happier than it is now?
I don’t think so. Today, we are so dependent on smartphones that it is difficult to feel satisfaction and joy in life without them, but in the era of feature phones, the existence of smartphones had no effect on our happiness at all. This is because the absence of smartphones, which were not even a concept in the past, cannot affect the satisfaction and joy of our lives. Through the three questions above, I hope that you will share the doubts I first had about the relationship between science and technology and happiness. Let’s continue the discussion with these questions.
This time, let’s analyze the opposing position. Does the development of science and technology not increase the happiness of mankind? Let’s take a counterexample that is commonly thought of. When we buy a new car or electronic device, we feel much greater satisfaction and joy than we did before (of course, this too fades quickly). So isn’t this an increase in happiness brought about by the development of science and technology? Here, we must distinguish between happiness from the satisfaction of material desires and happiness from the development of science and technology. If this is happiness that has increased thanks to the development of science and technology, you should feel satisfaction and joy in your life when a new car or electronic device is released, not when you buy it. However, people feel happy only when it becomes their own. This means that the enthusiasm, beauty, and freshness of new things are just a well-packaged science and technology, and science and technology itself only creates material desires and does not contribute to the promotion of happiness.
Let’s take a concrete example to further our discussion. Why do people want to buy the latest smartphones? If you want to use the latest technology, you should feel the same sense of happiness when you use your friend’s latest smartphone as when you buy and use the device yourself, but this is not the case. In the end, people buy smartphones to satisfy the material desires created by the advancement of science and technology. Therefore, it is difficult to say that science and technology itself has directly contributed to increasing the happiness of smartphone buyers.
Then why is science and technology not contributing to the promotion of human happiness? I found the reason in the dual nature of science and technology. I believe that science and technology always have dual nature, and that is why it is difficult to promote absolute happiness for humanity by its nature. Depending on who uses it and how, science and technology can promote or hinder human happiness. For example, nuclear fission technology has solved humanity’s energy problems, but at the same time, it also threatens humanity with nuclear weapons. Smartphones have made communication between people convenient and have enabled quick acquisition of information, but they also have a lot of negative elements, such as cervical disc herniation and invasion of privacy. The development of transportation has greatly increased the range of human activities, but it has also increased negative impacts, such as environmental pollution and the risk of accidents.
Some may ask, “Even if we acknowledge the duality of science and technology, if the positive effects outweigh the negative effects, then isn’t it contributing to the happiness of humanity?” But this is also not true. The duality of science and technology stems from the duality of the humans who use it, and science and technology themselves do not have positive or negative attributes. Science and technology are inherently neutral and cannot contribute to the happiness of humanity on their own. For example, although the performance of weapons has improved dramatically, the number of casualties in modern warfare has not increased exponentially. This is because the development of science and technology is not the main reason for this, but rather the manifestation of the negative aspects of human duality. This shows that even weapon technology can have a positive or negative effect depending on how and for what purpose it is used.
Then, do we, who major in science and technology, no longer need to study and develop science and technology? That is not the case. Science and technology itself cannot increase the happiness of mankind, but it can be a useful tool for increasing the happiness of mankind. For example, the development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can help many people who are dying in pain and do not know the name of their illness because they have not been able to diagnose it before. In addition, the development of assistive devices for the disabled is increasing their mobility and convenience of living, thereby improving their quality of life. Driverless car technology will also contribute to reducing the number of casualties in traffic accidents. These examples are examples of indirect happiness enhancement that can be achieved when science and technology are used in a positive way. This shows that science and technology are an indirect but important tool for enhancing human happiness.
Just because science and technology cannot directly promote happiness, we should not make the mistake of shunning science and technology for fear of its negative effects. This is like the initial European stupidity during the Industrial Revolution, when machines were destroyed because they were taking away jobs. Many people believe that the purpose of living in the world is to provide more opportunities for future generations to be happy. And this opportunity depends on the development of neutral science and technology. Of course, it is up to the descendants to decide how to use science and technology, but the entire generation has a responsibility to pass on the collective knowledge to future generations. We are creating opportunities for our descendants to find more happiness with the sweat we are shedding now. Let’s do our best, everyone majoring in science and technology. We are “indirectly” contributing to the promotion of human happiness!
