The essay “Progress” compiled by Alan Lightman is a great one of the argumentative essay. The author asks every individual, whether developments in technology improve the caliber of existence. Or what ought to be the meaning of progress or development? It’s a crucial question for anyone residing in the 20th century in which the rise in science is uncontrollably moving extremely fast. Alan brings about the thesis statement from the essay advances in technology don’t always improve existence .
Lots of people define development as rise in quantity of cars, structures, factories, connection of roads, electricity, telephones, utilization of modern equipments through the maqui berry farmers etc… since it improves human lives. What this means is about most of people includes a false idea of progress based on Lightman. Lightman concurs that rise in science improves human lives but for a while of your time. Over time it affects human lives. To demonstrate the statement he provides a very relevant illustration of using ac. Whenever we use AC, it provides us comfort for a while of your time but over time it pollutes the atmosphere. Therefore we should make a decision from a temporary convenience of ac from the lengthy term convenience of a pollution free atmosphere.
“For a minimum of yesteryear 200 years, human society has operated underneath the assumption that developments in science constitute progress.” What this means is the author states when a brand new vehicle travels quicker than the present models, we ought to produce it. Similarly if your new plastic has got the strength to carry excess fat compared to older variety, we ought to produce it on the market.
But we’re not considering unhealthy impacts around the atmosphere later on.
The author persuades your readers to think that rise in science isn’t necessarily an indication of progress. He gives many benefits and drawbacks of rise in science within the essay, for example the author states with development we’ve electricity. But simultaneously due to electricity, human activities are extended even at night time. People’s entertainment has innumerably expanded – discotheques, browsing internet, studying and sports occasions. Many office works are carried out through internet. He concurs that it’s faster and less expensive than regular mails but you will find likelihood of making wrong decisions. Once the decision makers make wrong decisions, will there be progress? The night time entertainments disturb the daily existence schedule of humans. After getting difficulty sleeping, consider how can they work. Another example could be individuals are found using mobile phones while eating, people choose a a vacation in relax and spend time using their buddies and relatives but taking their modems together. What this means is there’s virtually no time for his or her buddies and relatives. This deteriorates probably the most essence of human values.
Another example may be the advances in healthcare industry, the narrator states, “We have clearly reduced physical suffering and substantially extended the healthy human life time.” but don’t let refer to this as progress? He’s quoted from H.G. Wells’ book “The Island of Dr.
Moreau”. The evil surgeon results in a creature that’s half human and half animal. If may be are possible through advance in science, we ought to really question ourselves, what ought to be the meaning of progress.
Alan lightman’s idea of progress is much like our 4th king’s objective of GNH. First of all, the author gives focus on human happiness much like our beliefs in thinking about GNH is much more important than GDP. Next, when the rise in science affects culture and tradition then it’s not regarded as progress. Thirdly when the invention or utilization of anything affects natural sources, it’s not an indication of progress. Fourthly when the economic growth doesn’t give happiness to folks, it’s not regarded as progress. We’re able to see all of the four support beams of GNH in Alan Lightman’s “progress”.
The essay ends using the line, “In the lengthy run, we have to change our thinking, to understand that we’re not just a society of production and technology but additionally a society of people.” It’s a geneuine produced by the writer to any or all your readers, that people as a person should think what’s truly essential in our way of life and choose which technologies to simply accept and which to face up to without having affected our human values and excellence of lives.