La crisis de la energía y temas afines

Texto completo

(1)
(2)

• - •• ù

• - # .

y*

*

(3)
(4)

. C . C ,

e l

-fOHOO

UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE NUEVO LEON

C K N T K O K I L L C T I C O N K O I ) K C A M ' ( ' L O M A T A M O R O S 17!. PTE T I . ! , ; É 54 $4 Y •

MOMII.HHKY. N. L . M E X I C O

PAG. 1 . - F I V E VIEWS ON VALUES AND "ECHNOLOGY

KARL E . SCHEIBE 1 2 . - V I S I O N , F A I T H , AND KNOWLEDGE

DUNCAN T . HOLLOMON AND J . HERBEK', HOLLOMON 6 3 . - ON THE SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY OF ORGAiUZA'lIONAL .

RESISTANCES TO LONG RANGE S O C I A L PLANNING

DONALD N . MICHAEL. 1 3 4 . - GOALS FOR TECHNOLOGY

JOHN G . TRUXAL 2 0 5 . - U N I F I E D PROGRAM PLANNING

J . DOUGLAS H I L L AND JOHN N . WARF1ELD 2 4 6 . - THE MODELING PROCESS

G . ARTHUR MIHRAM. 3 5 7 . - S A T E L L I T E POWER STAT ONS: 9 NEW SOURCE

OF ENERGY?

WILLIAM C . BROWN

t , - ENERGY : C R I S I S AND CHALLENGE

GORDON D . FRUEDLANDER 5 4 9 . - TOWARD A NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

GORDON D . FRIEDLANDER. o l 1 0 . - O I L : THE OMNIPOTENT ENERGY SOURCE

GORDON D . FKIEDLANDER 6 9 1 1 . - CONSERVATION : A P O S I T I V E P O S I T I O N

ROLAND C . CLEMENT 7 3 1 2 . - PLUMBING THE OCEAN DEPTHS: A NEw

SOURCE OF ENERGY

ABRAHIM LAVI AND CLARENCE ZENER 7 7 1 3 . - SOLAR ENERGY PROGRESS - TWORLD PICTURE

JOHN I . GELLOTT= 8 3 1 4 . - POLLUTION P O L I T I C A L EXPEDIENCY AND TECHNOLOGICAL

COMPETENCE.

ED KEINECKE 9 0 1 ^ . - DESIGN O P T I M I Z A T I O N USING COMPUTER

TECHNIGNES

(5)

UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE NUEVO LEON

C E N T R O E L E C T R O N I C O I>E C A L C U L O

M A T A M O R O S 175 P T E TELS. 43 54-94 Y 43-42 40 MONTERRCY, N. L . MJTCICO

PAG

t

1 6 . - AN ENGINEER LOUÉS AT THE ENERGY DILEMMA ROBEKl W. GRAHAM

1 7 . - SOLAR POWERED REFRIGERATION

ROBE RI' JC. SWAR1MAN AND C . âWAMINATHAN 1 8 . - COMBINED HELIUM AND STEAM CYCLE FOR

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.

8 . R . KILAPORTI AND M. M. J A G I L 1 9 . - POWER I N THE YEAR 2 0 0 1 PART 1

DAWN OF THE SOLAR AGE SAMUEL WALTERS

2 0 . - POWER I N THE YEAR 2 0 0 1 PAR" 2 THERMAL SEA POVER

SAMUEL WALTERS

2 1 . - POWER IN THE YbAR 2 0 0 1 PAR"i 3 SOLAR POWER

SAMUEL WALTERS

2 2 . - POWKR I N THE YEAR 2 0 0 1 PART 4 ROCk BURNING AND SEA BURNING SAMUEL WALTERS

2 3 . - COOLED FAST FREEDER REACTOR DESIGNS J . B . DEE AND G . B . MELESE D HOSPITAL 2 4 . - M . H . D . CENTRAL POWER: ASTATUS REPORT

J . B . D I C K S .

2 5 . - POWER PLANT EFFUENT - THERMAL POLLUTION OR ENERGY AT A BARGAIN P R I C E ?

tf.S. LUSBY AND E . V . PRICE ? 2 6 . - RADIATION THERMOMETRY PARI 1

RECENT' ADVANCES AND TREDS GENE D . NUTTER.

2 7 . - ENVIROMENTAL M vNAGEMENTS TERRY W. ROTHE.ÜEL

2 8 . - RADIATION THERMOMETRY PART' 2 GENE D . NU I T E R .

2 9 . - ENGINE AND THE ENVIROMEM L . D. CONTA.

9 b

1 0 3

106

110

111

116

1 1 9

127

1 3 2

1 3 9

1 4 9

1 5 1

(6)

ó W M f c

UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE NUEVO LEON

C E N T I i O E L E C T K O N I C O D E C A L C I L O

M A T A M O R O S 175 PTE. TELS 43-54 9 1 Y 43-42 49

M O N T E R R E Y . N. L.. M E X I C O

FAÜ.

3 0 . - THE SOLAR ERA PARI 1 THE PRACTICAL PKOMISE

LEON P . GAUCHER 1 6 4

3 1 . - TRENDS I N ENERGY NEEDS

FRANK A R I T C h l N G S 168

3 2 .

3 3 .

3 4 .

-THE SOLAR ERA PARI 2

POWER PRODUCTION WITH SMALL SOLAR ENGINES

FARRINGTON DANIELS 1 7 4

THE SOLAR EKA PARI 3

SOLA! RADIATION: SOME IMPLICATIONS AND ADAPTATIONS

HAROLD R . HAY 1 7 8 TUNED D0AT1NG PLATFORM FOR OFFSHOkE

POWER F A C I L I T I E S .

JOHN F . HOLES AND CHARLES R . F I N K 1 8 4 THE SOLAk ERA FART' 4

THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA M E L E C T R I C n

H . R . A . SCHAEPER AND E R I C H A FÄRBER 1 9 0

3 b . - THE SOLAR ERA PARI 5

THE POLLUTION OF OUR SOLAR ENERGY

P . R . SWART MAN, VINH HA, MICHEL J U L I E N AND

D . J . WHITNEY 19'v

3 7 . - THE ENERY J R I S I S

THE ENERGY C R I S I S FORM NEW YORK 1 9 9

3 8 . - BOON TO SOCIETY THE L M F B R

R . J . CREAGAN 2 0 7

i

3 9 . - LONG-RANGE APPROACHES FOR RESOLVING THE ENERGY C R I S I S

ALVIN M. WEINFERG

4 0 . - TECHNOLOGY, THE ENERGY C R I S I S , AND OUR STANDARD OF L I V I N G

FRED SCHULMAN

(7)

UNIVERSIDAD AUTONOMA DE NUEVO LEON

C E N T R O E L E C T R O N I C O D E C A L C U L O

M A T A M O R O S 175 PTE. TELS 43 54-94 Y 43-42 49

M O N T E R R E Y . N. L . M E X I C O

PAG. 4 1 . - THE ROLE OF HTGRS AND FBKS IN MEETING

THE ENERGY C i t f S I S

PETER FORTESCUE AND H . B . STEWART 2 2 ^

4 2 . - E N E R G Y , T E C H N O L O G Y A N D S O L A R C H 1 T E C T U R E

II. R . HAY 2 2 9

4 3 . - LARGE - SCALE tiO^AR POWER VIA T H l PHOTOVOLTAIC EFh ¿CT.

(8)

. « £ H A N S A C T I O N S O N « Ü B B , M A N , A N D C n a i m t K X V O I . S » r . ; . N O . 5 . N O V , M , U K | » r

1

Five Views on Values and Technology

K A R L E. S C H E I B E

Abstract 'This paper describes four common postures in writings on values and lechnotogy. These a r e called: the Luddite, the techno ratic the apocalyptic, and the "cautionary moral sermon." These positio is a r e considered io be legitimate, but lacking in l.olh instruiiienial signifi ance or adequacy of their conceptualizations o | human v;,lues. A disci ssion of values in the framework of a rudimeniary decisam ¡heory is then presented. This leads to a consideration of several paradoxes involving values one based on the dimension of time, another based on the shift from individual to collective values, and the third bastd on the exchange of one type of value for another a s problems are solved. These paradoxes a r e offered as partial justification for a fifth perspeciive on the relation beineen values and technology: that of <be "curious, hopeful, and sometimes astonished observer."

I N T R O D U C T I O N

1 \ 7R , n N G S on values a n d technology seem t o m e t o

/ V fell i n t o several categories, all of which I w a n t t o a v o i d if only because e a c h c a t e g o r y is a l r e a d y well visited. I have forced f o u r such categories i n t o existence a n d »ave a f i x e d t o each a label. T h e s e a r e : t h e L u d d i t e , the t e c h n o -cratic, the a p o c a l y p t i c , a n d the c a u t i o n a r y m o r a l s e r m o n . A f i e r a brief description of each of these. I would like t o describe my o w n perspective o n the p r o b l e m , which I will call t h a t of the c u r i o u s , h o p e f u l , a n d s o m e t i m e s a s t o n i s h e d observer.

The Luddite

T h e basic premise of writers in this c a t e g o r y is that technological d e v e l o p m e n t is inevitably a n d f u n d a m e n t a l l y d e h u m a n i z i n g a n d c o r r u p t i n g . In a technologically de-veloped society, m a n is forced t o live in a way that is b o t h u n n a t u r a l a n d spiritually d e p r a v e d . A c o m m o n specter is thai of short-sighted little m e n , usually e n g i n e e r s a n d profiteering businessmen, w h o have t a k e n o v e r s p a c e s h i p e a r t h a n d a r e mindlessly extinguishing all h u m a n values

t h c r e , s h°PC- C h a r l e s Reich foresees a s p o n t a n e o u s

emergence of a new post-technological mentality which

r e s t o r e h u m a n a u t h e n t i c i t y . T h e o d o r e R o s / a k sees h o p e

in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f a n anti-technological c o u n t e r c u l t u r e .

The Technocratic

Skinner | I I ] asserts that technology is o u r s t r e n g t h a n d thai .f we want t o survive we must play f r o m s t r e n g t h . Technology is o n the m a r c h , a n d m a n must a d a p t t o it Science ,s accepted a s universal ethic, n o t j u s t a m e t h o d f o r finding the t r u t h . But the a d m i x t u r e of o u t m o d e d

Manuscript received April 28, 1972

t r a d i t i o n a l , quasi-religious ways of t h i n k i n g a n d the scien-tific sophisticated, correct way of t h i n k i n g a b o u t m a n h a s p r o d u c e d the inefficient a n d potentially d i s a s t r o u s c u s t o m of " m u d d l i n g t h r o u g h . " W e must clean u p o u r t h i n k i n g , design o u r f u t u r e s , a n d c o n t r o l that which we can c o n t r o l , which, t h a n k s t o technology, is jus! a b o u t everything.

The Apocalyptic

T h i s perspective h a s m u c h in c o m m o n with that of the Luddites. Both hold t h a t m a n h a s created the m e a n s of his own d e s t r u c t i o n t h r o u g h t h e exercise of his r a t i o n a l powers. H o w e v e r , the a p o c a l y p t i c vision d o e s not s h a r e the belief that technological d e v e l o p m e n t can be s t o p p e d o r that m a n will s p o n t a n e o u s l y reject the i n s a n e world he has created a n d return t o p a s t o r a l innocence. Scientists, w h o a r e still e n g a g e d in the pursuit o f saving t r u t h s , a r e not likely t o act as p r o p h e t s of d e s p a i r -it is i n c o m p a t i b l e with t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of their role. Instead, this view g a i n s clearest expression f r o m critics, such a s Leslie P . e d i e r a n d I h a b H a s s a n , novelists a n d filmmakers, such as ,<..n V o n n e g u t a n d Stanley K u b r i c k . O t h e r writers, s u c h as Paul Ehrlich a n d A l a n Toffler, present visions of t h e f u t u r e which seem a l m o s t a s hopeless, t h o u g h they m a y c o n t i n u e t o express t h e belief t h a t there is a way out. T h e or.e s red o f h o p e presented in this perspective is that p e r h a p s a p o c a l y p s e will act as a massive c u l t u r a l electric-shock t r e a t m e n t . Possibly, when the d u s t settles, the r e m a i n d e r of m a n k i n d will live a long while b e f o r e c r e a t i n g a n o t h e r massive disaster.

The Cautionary Mora/ Sermon

(9)

St •£!»£: FIVI VlFwi.ONVALUES ANI> TECHNOLOGY \ cl eel, a n d it is u p to scientists t o redeem the trust h u m a n i t y

h ; s placed in t h e m by dedicating themselves t o thi highest hi man values.

A "Other Perspective: The Curious, Hopeful, and St me times A ionisheu Observer

1 d o not mean to treat these perspectives on the ¡uestion o: value a n a technology with disrespect. In fact, i think ti.cre is considerable merit in each of them. But I have a general dissatisfaction with them on two c o u n t s . l i r s t , the p tctical benefit ¡01 h u m a n society of such c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ib not demonstrably great. A second a n d r e i a t e o difficulty is that each perspective c o n t a i n s presuppositions a b o u t h u m a n values which strike me a s psychologically naive.

Academicians are capable of considerable self-doception v\ ien it c o m e s to considering the impact of their ideas a n d d^coveries. N o t i n g ihe spate of scholarly w o r k s o n n a -tionalism, a subject not irrelevant t o the topic at h a n d ; K e d o u r i e [7, p. 125] n o t e s :

It is a b s u r d t o think that professors of linguistics a n d collectors of folklore can d o the w o r k of states: nen a n d soldiers. W h a t does h a p p e n is that academic < nquirics are used by conflicting interests to bolster u p thei • claims, a n d their results prevail. He w h o exercises p o w e r , exercises it while he can a n d a s he c a n , a n d if i e ceases t o cxercise power, then he ceases t o rule. A c a d e m i c research d o e s not a d d a jot o r a tittle to the c a p a c i t y f o r ruling, a n d to pretend otherwise is t o hide with e q u i v o c a -tion what is a very clear matter.

At a n o t h e r point, K c d o u r i e [ 7 , p. 5 0 ] observes, " I t is n »t philosophers w h o become kings, but kings w h o t a m e p lilosophy t o their u s e . " Mutatis mutandis this is ilso t r u e ft r science.

M y point is that knowledge is not necessarily p< wer, n o r d >es a n enlightened perspective a u t o m a t i c a l l y at ract the s: mpathelic c o o p e r a t i o n of those in positions o f social a n d political power. While we are occupied in talk a ¡»out t h e evaluative implications of technology, o u r efforts a r e m o c k e d by the force of events in the political a n d social realm. Lots o f sensible p l a n s exist for saving men f r o m the negative effects of technological d e v e l o p m e n t — p o l l u t i o n , o v e r - p o p u l a t i o n , dissatisfaction with meaningless, repcti-t. JUS labor, t h e a r m s race. But having a plan a n d being a »le t o implement a plan a r c very different things. Skinner's r an f o r survival could just work, t h o u g h I d o u b t its tech-r. cal efficacy. But even if it were a great p l a n . s »mebody v o u l d first have t o give massive political power t o the S%innerians, a n d this is an unlikely prospect, it is the Y .-ginning o f wisdom a b o u t values t o recognise that people c o not always d o w h a t is good f o r t h e m , even i f t h r y see the ci>nscqucnccs o f their a c t i o n s very clearly.

This brings mc to my second reservation about the

com-r on pecom-rspectives on the question of values and le» hnolojcom-ry.

t .ey d o not evince even this rudimentary insight into the

* dues that direct human behavior. A positivistic » heme lor

1 sane world order

is

all well and good,

but

such

1

scheme

T ó7

' . ' I t • , '' K ', - , " ; - ' . . " - ;

arouses little passion, instead, there is power in m o r e mysterious, doctrines. Leninism, it h a s been said, has t h e twin virtues of "simultaneously blurring the mind while guiding the f e e t . " In certain circumstances, under certain conditions, men will heed their p r o p h e t s . However, scientific training h a s h a r d l y been a s t r o n g suit of t h e effective p r o p h -ets o f t h e past. " W h e n a society stares ¿0 feel tsclf h e m m e d in by evil portents, whether they c o m e as social uncase, saber rattling, o r erratic D o w - J o n e s averages, there will always ¿>e s o m e o n e witn a f a r a w a y l o o k in his bright eyes, sliouiing, 'This way o u t ! ' A n d m a n y of us tend t o follow alt>n¿ because a t least he seems t o k n o w w h e r e he's going. The» in ;ics the timeless a p p e a l of psychic p r o p h e c y , " [ 1 3 ] . But by some m e a n s , effective p r o p h e t s h a v e acquired a g o o d f u n c t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of h u m a n values.

This point h a s n o t g o n e unrecognized. In c o m m e n t i n g o n the w o r k o f t w o recent panels assessing t h e impact o f n e w technology, o n e run by t h e N a t i o n a l A c a d e m y o f Sciences, the o t h e r by the Institute for t h e F u t u r e , J. Bronowski [2, p. 199] observes:

W h a t the panels guess a b o u t cliangcs in physical a n d

biological habits is as always bold and stimulating; but

w h a t they say a b o u t the effect o f sue!» changes o n per-sonal a n d social psychology is a s always meager,

old-womanish, and painfully vague.

I a s s u m e t h a t it is in recognition o f this kind of criticism t h a t a psychologist interested in values was asked t o participate in this w o r k s h o p . 1 a l s o suspect that w h a t I h a v e t o say a b o u t values a n d tccnnologv ..11 decrease r a t h e r t h a n increase y o u r sense o f certainty a t . . the topic.

As a student o f h u m a n values, I find my os. legitimate stance t o be that of the " c u r i o u s , hopeful, a n d sometimes astonished o b s e r v e r , " a n d it is 'this perspective which I a s s u m e f o r the present discussion. M u c h is t o be learned a b o u t the origins a n d o p e r a t i o n o f h u m a n values, b u t the learning will c o m e f r o m o b s e r v a t i o n , not f r o m prioristic theoretical c o n c e p t i o n s a b o u t w h a t values must be. Like all scientists, the student o f values must be h o p e f u l that his o b s e r v a t i o n s will be of positive use. But, if I m a y hark back t o the earlier point a b o u t the differences between knowledge a n d power, it is i m p o r t a n t t o distinguish between hopes a n d realistic expectations a b o u t what the f u t u r e might bring. Finally, if the observer is honest a n d if he observes widely e n o u g h , he will discover facts a b o u t values which are truly astonishing, or a t the very least deeply puzzling.

T h e next section presents a r u d i m e n t a r y conception of values in a psychological f r a m e w o r k . This will be followed by a consideration o f three sets of observations a b o u t h u m a n values, each of which is both puzzling and highly relevant t o the question of evaluating the impact of

tech-nological development.

A P S Y C H O L O G I C A L C O N C E P T I O N O F THE G E N E S I S A N D O P E H A T I O N OF V A L U E S

A few years a g o I wrote a little b o o k {10]. which m a j o r pre 1 tise is both useful a n d interesting to conceptualize at

(10)

ivliefs a n d values. T h e t w o key terms are related to t w o n a j o r a r e a s of psychological research a n d t h e o r y c o g n i -tion and motiva-tion. Also, the terms beliefs a n d values are related in a generic way to two subdivisions of philosophical inquiry, epistemology a n d ethics. W h a t a m a n does is conceived as d e p e n d i ng b o t h u p o n w h a t he believes (ex-pects, knows, suspects) a n d what he values (wants, desires prefers).

Admittedly, such a con. e q u a l i z a t i o n is highly schematic a n d c r u d e : indeed, even il developed it t u r n s out that there are many i m p o r t a n t psychological questions which simply c a n n o t o r should not be a p p r o a c h e d in this way. Hut if o n e is to undertake a discussion of values, it is i m p o r t a n t to recogmzc the logistic position o f values in a full behavior theory.

A clear paradigm is afforded by m o d e r n decision theories o f both descriptive a n d n o r native varieties. AH su. h theories contain a variable that is c o g n a t e to value a n d all contain a variable that is c o g n a t e to belief. It is also c o m m o n to all such theories that choices, decisions, o r behaviors a r c presumed to result f r o m s o m e c o m b i n a t i o n of motivational a n d cognitive antecedents. In simple gambling games, f o r instance, choice of play is presumed to depend u p o n the expectancy of success associated with each o u t c o m e a n d t h e positive o r negative payofT of each o u t c o m e . In n o r m a -I ve terms, the expected value of each bet can be readily calculated f o r all well-defined games. In descriptive terms, a m a j o r psychological scaling problem exists in under-standing how individual expectancies a n d utilities a r e functionally related t o the objective o d d s and payoffs

T h e f u n d a m e n t a l operation for defining values in this a p p r o a c h relies upon the preference p a r a d i g m . Given a range of possible objects, events, o r states o f being, all of which a r e equally available t o the subject (in this case e x p e c t a n c e s are equivalent f o r all options), the relative frequency of choice a m o n g o p t i o n s is supposed t o reflect

r c , a t'v I c v a , u c s o f t h c o b j e c t f o r the objects, events, o r

states of being in the array. As we shall ce later, s o m e f u n d a m e n t a l problems are submerged by «his m e t h o d of operational,zing values. However, it should be clear t h a t the preference p a r a d i g m is the m a j o r way of closing the conceptual g a p between values a n d behavior

If decision theories offer a way o f conceptualizing the relationship of values to behavior, they d o so by i n c o r p o r a t -ing certain f a c i l i t a t e a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t the n a t u r e of values. It is generally assumed, for example, that values are where you find t h e m - p r e f e r e n c e hierarchies a r e assumed a s given a n d t h e p r o b l e m of the genesis o f values is simply avoided. T h e question of how values a r e translated i n t o behav,or ,s only one of the concerns o f the motivational psychologist. T h e o t h e r question is that of genesis o r deve opment. H o w d o evaluative dispositions c o m e t o be wha they a r e ? W h a t are the antecedents for the develop-ment of h u m a n motives?

w c r J i T J r t h e K s , 0 C k a n S W C r s f o r this sort o f question

J 0 ! ' m S l , n C t P s y c h 0 ,° gi e s- Post-Darwinian

t i r j I l i T U ? W C r C r e a d* 1 0 consider h u m a n 3 5 m o t , v a l c d by ^ e s a m e sorts of instinctive

dis-T R A N S A C dis-T K > N S O N SYSdis-Tdis-TMS. MAN. AND <~Ydis-TIFCIdis-TM.dis-TICS, S O V E M M * 1 9 7

positions as were thought t o control lower animals. H o w -ever. the bchaviorist-empiricist revolution in 20th c e n t u r y American psychology led t o a rejection of this sort o f explanation. In its place, great e m p h a s i s was placed on the processes of learning a n d conditioning. T h e second law of thermodynamics, leading in physiology t o the princ.pie of homeostasis, led in psychology to the proposition that all behavior is drive-reducing. This principle, together with the principles o f association borrowed f r o m the British em-piricists, led t o a p p a r e n t theoretical solutions to both the p e r f o r m a n c e a n d the development p r o b l e m s of motivation Behavior results f r o m a state of disequilibrium a n d is directed t o a rccstabl.shmcnt of equilibrium. T h e sorts of stimulus events which can lead to disequilibrium a n d the kinds of m o t o r i c p e r f o r m a n c e s which are instrumental t o the ^ e s t a b l i s h m e n t of equilibrium were acquired t h r o u g h associative learning.

It would take us far afield to c o n s i d e r the controversies to which psychology was led by this general point o f view Suffice it t o say f o r the present that the old instinct doctrines have never again enjoyed the use they o n c e had in answers to the question of where values c o m e f r o m . However, the empiricist doctrine of a s s o c i a t i o n ^ which replaced in-stinct theory has c o m e u p o n evil days a s an a d e q u a t e theoretical base f o r responding t o the same question. Some of my colleagues will still disagree, but I believe it correct to assert that both instinct t h e o r y a n d classical learning theories have failed a s a t t e m p t s t o account for the origins of h u m a n values.

But the question of the origins o f values still a very lively one. In c o n t e m p o r a r y psychology, research a n d theory on this problem c o m e s under the heading of s,,cialization. T h e h u m a n i n f a n t is born a s a social innocent out c o m e s in the course of development t o manifest a n entire range of tastes, preferences, passions, desires, a n d moral principles as a p r o d u c t o f his continual interaction with societal influences. Freud suggested that the m a j o r mechanism of socialization is identification, whereby the child c o m e s to introjcct the moral s t a n d a r d s a n d values o f his parents. M o r e m o d e r n theorists a n d researchers, f r o m G . H. Mead to Jean Piaget a n d Lawrence K o h l b e r g . consider that a child develops t h r o u g h a series o f stages in the process o f socialization which c o r r e s p o n d in part to the stages o f his cognitive o r intellectual development. T h e sources o f in-ternalized n o r m s a n d values arc considered t o be not only parents, but peers, social reference g r o u p s , a n d idealized ethical systems.

F o r the present discussion it is sufficient to recognize that there is in c o n t e m p o r a r y psychology a great a m o u n t o f theoretical a n d research activity on the problem o f socializa-t i o n — o n socializa-the problem of how individuals c o m e socializa-to a c q u i r e the values that regulate their social behavior.

(11)

I

SCIU.Iill I IVI \ ¡ ! A S 1 1 \ V A I l i S I I I I I V ' K K . l

evident f.iei that political socialization in the U n i t e d S l a t e s d o s not a p p e a r t o be work in;! very well. Dissent a n d radical att. m p t s t o r e f o r m the political o r d e r c e r t a i n l y seem t o be ma lifesiaiion o f social values, bin they are not (he sorts of vai ies which ihose w h o m a n a g e ¡he c u r r e n t system would ret >gnizc as t h e m o s t a d m i r a b l e ones

A n o t h e r e x a m p l e of research o n soc ialization is provided by B a n d u r a ( I j a n d his s t u d e n t s at S t a n f o d University. C h i l d r e n a r e allowed t o observe the styli/ei b e h a v i o r of nu JeK in novel s i t u a t i o n s , a n d a r c observed on s u b s e q u e n t occasions t o d e m o n s t r a t e themselves the s o r t s of b e h a v i o r they h a v e observed. T h e acquisition of social v; lues is s h o w n t o t a k e place by o b s e r v a t i o n a l or vicarious ex-perience a n d can be a c c o m p l i s h e d in a sin> le trial. T h e evidence f o r t h e effects of o b s e r v e d violence on television u p o n exhibited aggression is o n e of the p r o d u c t s of this line of research. While B a n d u r a a n d o t h e r s w h o a r e w o r k i n g o n the p r o b l e m c o n t i n u e t o explore t h e c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r which this effect occurs, we m a y t a k e it as established that socialization proceeds in pa t t h r o u g h the assimilation of vicarious experience a n d is lot merely a m a t t e r of higher ori er c o n d i t i o n i n g .

Obviously, in the m o d e m w o r l d the r a n g e of value mi dels which is actually o r potentially a v a i l a b l e t o develop-ing i n d i v i d u a l s is very large. O n e of the most impressive p r o d u c t s of a d v a n c e d technology is the c a p a c i t y t o exhibit r e i . o t c occurrences t o the d e v e l o p i n g person. T h e visibility o f t u m a n i t y t o h u m a n i t y is increasing t r e m e n d o u s l y . T h i s int o d u c e s t h e possibility that the process of socialization wiil o c c u r in a f a r less p r e d i c t a b l e way in the f u t u r e than n haN in the past, w h e r e a m u c h m o r e limited set of value m«. dels were available for possible a d o p t i o n . T h e general no ms of f r e e d o m of access t o i n f o r m a t i o n a n d individual

; re don of choice .'¡. soliciting i n f o r m a t i o n p r o d u c e c o n

-st.. aences which a r e mimical to a consistently a n d efficiently socialized social o r d e r .

A ease is c u r r e n t l y p e n d i n g in t h e stale of Wisconsin c o c e r n i n g ihe c o n t r o l which a n Amish sect m a y m a i n t a i n ov. r tlie e d u c a t i o n of their c h i l d r e n . T h e A m i s h p r o v i d e

>• r o w n schooling f o r their children t h r o u g h the eighth ie. but d o not .end t h e m t o school t h e r e a f t e r . T h e s t a t e • >J Wisconsin has a general s t a t u t e r e q u i r i n g all children l o

a!.- • ,d school until age sixteen, a n d has b r o u g h t suit against

t A m i s h in an effort t o send the children t o public high

sci oo':s. T h e p r o s e c u t o r f o r the state a r g u e s lhat the

c , id.-en ire bein£ forcibly oppressed a n d that the s t a t e of Wisconsin h a s a responsibility 10 liberate these children b y ex >osing t h e m l o the r a n g e of values which n o n - A m i s h

W.-sicni c u l t u r e has IO present, Bui the A m i s h k n o w that

ct> u r o ! of i n f o r m a t i o n is c o n t r o l of socialization. F o r the >a e of their o w n c u l t u r a l survival, they c a n n o t a f f o r d lo i : c h a n c e s with f r e e d o m of i n f o r m a t i o n a n d f r e e d o m of

v h'.icc [ I 4 j .

Similar r e s t r i c t i o n s of i n f o r m a t i o n a r e practiced by the r e g i m e . of S o u t h A f r i c a , where television is p r o h i b i t e d , a n d China, where until recently, M a o ' s b a m b o o curta n cfiec-v icfiec-v. ueided ihe p e o p l e of C h i n a f r o m the o p p o r ; unity t o assimilate by o b s e r v a t i o n the c o r r u p t i n g values of the West.

in o u r society we have been socialized t o the p r o p o s i t i o n that knowledge is g o o d , f r e e d o m is g o o d , individual choice is g o o d , technological progress is g o o d . O u r decisions as individuals a n d as a society have been strongly influenced by these values. I n d e e d , the message of ihe c a u t i o n a r y m o r a l s e r m o n is that these kinds of values should be applied t o o u r decision matrices. It is my objective in t h e r e m a i n d e r of this p a p e r t o s h o w h o w the i m p l a n t a t i o n of these per-fectly a d m i r a b l e values leads t o u n i n t e n d e d a n d . f r o m my perspective, highly undesirable c o n s e q u e n c e s .

T H E V A L U E P A R A D O X P O S E D n v T I M E , OR W H E N A R E T H E C H I P S C A S H E D I N

Decision theorists c o n s i d e r only those choice situations which can be m a p p e d a n d which a r e b o u n d e d in time. Similarly, in c o s t - b e n e f i t analyses of p r o p o s e d projects or technical d e v e l o p m e n t s , a time horizon must be established. But the a r b i t r a r y e s t a b l i s h m e n t of time b o u n d a r i e s p r o d u c e s a d i s j u n c t i o n between the decision model a n d the real world. S e c o n d , third, a n d higher o r d e r c o n s e q u e n c e s of c h o s e n courses of action c o n t i n u e t o be realized into the indefinite f u t u r e . Because t h e s e c o n s e q u e n c e s a r e not evaluatively n e u t r a l , the initial solution t o the decision p r o b l e m m a y yield p a r a d o x i c a l a n d n o n m a x i m a l c o n -sequences.

C o n s i d e r a b l e psychological research has been d o n e on t h e p r o b l e m of delay of gratification [ 8 j . E x p e r i m e n t a ! s i t u a t i o n s a r e devised such lhat a subject m a y accept a small reward n o w or a larger r e w a r d later. T h i s r e s e a r c h has established the existence of c o n s i s t e n t i n d i v i d u a l dif-ferences in the c a p a c i t y t o delay gratification. S o m e in-dividuals seem t o m a k e decisions in a larger f r a m e w o r k of time t h a n o t h e r s .

T h e f u n c t i o n a l relationship b e t w e e n time a n d utility is, of c o u r s e , included in t h e analysis o f technological feasibility studies. S o m e d e v e l o p m e n t s arc explicitly designed t o yield s h o r i - t e r m benefits, which in the l o n g e r r u n p r o d u c e nega-tively valued o u t c o m e s . F o r e x a m p l e , the d e v e l o p m e n t of efficient m a s s - p r o d u c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s f o r m a n u f a c t u r e d articles yields relatively i m m e d i a t e benefits. However, ihe long-term c o n s e q u e n c e s , such as w o r k e r a n d c o n s u m e r b o r e d o m a n d rapid d i m i n u t i o n of raw materials will eventually be realized, a n d in such a way as t o make q u e s t i o n a b l e the wisdom of initially o p t i n g for ihe tech-niques of m a s s p r o d u c t i o n . Clearly, different c o m p a n i e s a n d different n a t i o n s differ in the extent t o which they try t o include long-term c o n s e q u e n c e s in their decision m a t r i x .

(12)

S7<»

o p j .»rtunities I».; Iiio siarving people of the a. id Nr.rilio.iM ol" i i a / i l . .is well ..s tiie less mngible beneii of b i d d i n g n a t i o n a l pride ..re :v isonable objectives in the long iun f o r

B r a i l . However, the on sequences o l ' t h i s projeet vv II n o t

S ,° P suddenly with the realization o f these objective-. I he

A m . v o n rain lores, p r o d u c e s a sizable p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e w o r l d ' s o w g e n . \ \ ii; the d e v e l o p m e n t of the A m a z o n region e n d a n g e r this s u p p l y ? T h e d e v e l o p m e n t of irazil as a m a j o r e c o n o m i c p o w e r is a l r e a d y being perceived as a threat by o t h e r n a t i o n s in Latin A m e r i c a . Brazil h a s 11 t h e past 150 years had ¿inly o n e w a r with a n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t r y . Will the increased p o w e r o f Brazil bring a b o u t new Latin American w a r s ' ' Will the present p r e c a r i o u s b a l a n c e of p o w e r in the world be upset by the e m e r g e n c e o f a new super-power, which the J r a n s - A m a z o n highway will facil-itate?

Merely suggesting these possible long-term c o n s e q u e n c e s is likely t o lead foreign o b s e r v e r s to wish Brazil t o g o si >wly with its d e v e l o p m e n t F r o m o u r perspective, t h e r e in; y be the a d d i t i o n a l hazard that the technical a n d ccon >mic deve »pment of Brazil m a y m e a n the end o f o n e oi the most delightful tourist a t t r a c t i o n s on e a r t h .

T I N : L \ N I V I I N ; A I - G > L I I < I I V I I V V A L U E P A R A D O X

We m a y n o w see a relation between the t i m e p a r a d o x a n d t h e p r o b l e m which H a r d i n [ 4 ] has a p t l y called. " T h e tragedy of the c o m m o n s . " H a r d i n d e m o n s t r a t e s that in-dividual p r u d e n c e max inexorably p r o d u c e collective disaster. As t h e limits of scarce resources a r c a p p r o a c h e d :\v mass d e v e l o p m e n t a n d c o n s u m p t i o n , t h e benevolent invisible h a n d of A d a m S m i t h m a y turn i n t o a device o f mass s t r a n g u l a t i o n .

ObM'ousIv. it IN m the interests of all o f the m o r e t h a n :M) n lions o n earth t o seek technological d e v e l o p m e n t , i he n odern media act as o u r missionaries, only they d o the j o b m u c h m o r e elliciently. W i t h o u t q u e s t i o n , the u n d e r -developed n a t i o n s of the world want wlijft we have, they can sc.- the i m a g e s of o u r p r o d u c t s a n d o u r t e c h n i q u e s very clearly We m a y a t t e m p t a cauti »nary m o r a l s e r m o n t o the ellect hat o u r o w n society is in d e e p t r o u b l e that the technological p r o b l e m s we h a w solved have left in their wake m u c h m o r e difficult p r o b l e m s d e s p a i r , the mindless urge t o destroy, pervasive p s y c h o n e u r o t i c difficulties. T h e c a u t i o n a r y m o r a l sermon will have n o ellect. It is as if the neighboring f a r m e r urges y o u not t o a d d a n o t h e r cow t o iMa/e on the c o m m o n s because he can attest that a big herd 1.1 e the one he has brings n o t h i n g but h e a d a c h e s .

O u r t t e m p t s to tell smaller n a t i o n s that they s h o u l d not dove!«»; a nuclear arsenal, in the interests of the collectivity •>re ol , similar kind. It is o b v i o u s that p o w e r m a t t e r s in interna lonal relations. If you d o not have p o w e r you a r e n o t getting a s m u c h respect as you might if y o u did h a v e p o w e r . Result: It is in the interests of every n a t i o n t o d e v e l o p irs n u c e a r capability. O f course, the result is collective d i s a s t e r

T h e point is that it is difficult to get an individual o r a collective entity socialized to the interests a n d values o f their c o m p e t i t o r s , so that when they m a k e decisions, they will

.III IHANSA« HON. ON N^SHMS. MAN. A-.l» « .1 , < s ./ •••-, - f

3

t a k e our values i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . In o r d e r t o a c c o m p l i s h tins, t o revert t«> an earlier point, socialization u> collective interests must be c o n t r o l l e d a n d directed. But if socializa-tion t o collective interests is truly !«. be c o n t r o l l e d a n d

directed, we must establish not only a world o x c r n m e m

bu; a world g o v e r n m e n t which d o e s not give ultimate value t o knowledge, f r e e d o m of inquiry, individual e .o.ce. a n d technological progress.

N o b o d y wishes t o d o this. W e have s t e a d n v resisted a t t e m p t s at tyrannical collcclivizali«»n in ¡his c e n t u r y , a n d we a r e likely to c o n t i n u e t o d o so. But in the > ¡eantimc. the inexorable t r a g e d y o f the c o m m o n s is w o r k i n g t o w a r d s its iast act. I rlich's p o p u l a t i o n b o m b is ticking Nine million n e w a u t o m o b i l e s c o n t i n u e t o a p p e a r each year as tcsiin.onv t o o u r veneration f o r f r e e d o m o f choice W a i s of 'libera, t i o n " c o n t i n u e , so that newly liberated people^ can aspire-to the s a m e kind of material allluencc which A m e r i c a n s a r e I m d i n g t o be s o stale a n d tasteless. T h e s e a r e s o m e o b s e r v a -tions a b o u t h u m a n values which the student m a y iind a s t o n i s h i n g o r puzzling.

f i l l O i l Ml R A oi PROBt.i Soi.V'INCj

Both of the p r e c e d i n g value p r o b l e m s may be considered p r o b l e m s of extension. F o r the lirst. e x t e n d i n g t h e dimension of time yields p a r a d o x i c a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s of decision payoffs. F o r the s e c o n d , extension f r o m the individual t o the collectivity p r o d u c e s u n a n t i c i p a t e d t r a n w a l u a t i o n v I wish t o close by m e n t i o n i n g a third v a l u e - p a r a d o x o n e that is a p r o b l e m of intension r a t h e r thai, e x t e n s i o n . I refer t o the p r o b l e m of i n t r a p s y c h i c value conflicts.

While o n e m a y not agree with F r e u d a b o u t the instinctual origins of the p r o b l e m , a b u n d a n t evidence e x i c s for tnc p r o p o s i t i o n that m a n is at w a r with himself, that he d o e s not have u n e q u i v o c a l values, that the solution t«> what he t h i n k s of a s his p r o b l e m s only p r o d u c e s o t h e r p r o b l e m s .

I wish t o resort t o a q u o t a t i o n f r o m Orwell |4>. p. 163 j

which illustrates very well the sort o f p a r a d o x I have in m i n d :

If y o u look i n t o y o u r o w n m i n d , which a r e y o u ; D o n Q u i x o t e o r S a n c h o P a n / a ? A l m o s t c e r t a i n l y y o u are b o t h . T h e r e is o n e part o f y o u that wishes t o be a h e r o or a s a i n t , but a n o t h e r part of you is a little fat m a n w h o sees • very clearly t h e a d v a n t a g e s of staying alive with a w h o l e skin. He is y o u r unofficial self t h e voice of the bells p r o t e s t i n g against the soul. His tastes lie t o w a r d s saietv. soft beds. 11«) w o r k , p o t s of beer a n d w o m e n with V a c -i n o u s ' f-igures. He -it -is w h o p u n c t u r e s y o u r :ine a t t . i u j c s a n d urges you to look a f t e r N u m b e r One. to be nn:a;:hi"al t o y o u r wife, t o bilk y o u r debts, a n d so on a n d so f o r t h . W h e t h e r y o u a l l o w yourself t o be influenced i n iiin. s different question. But it is simply a lie t o say that he is not part of y o u . j u s t as it is a lie to say that D o n Q u i x o t e IS not part of y o u either, t h o u g h most of w h a t is said a n d written consists of o n e lie o r the o t h e r , usually the first.

(13)

II t i : T R A N S A C T I O N S O N S Y S I f MS, M A N , A N D C Y B t R N E T K 'S, V O L . S M C - 2 . N O . 5 , N O V E M B E R 1 9 7 2

6

t o g e t h e r with the o b s e r v a t i o n that technology c a n only solve p r o b l e m s of the S a n c h o P a n z a variety. T h e c o n c l u s i o n is that technical s o l u t i o n s d o not really solve a p e r s o n ' s n o M e m * they merely t r a n s f e r the p r o b l e m t o a d i f f e r e n t a>peci of self. W h e n a p e r s o n ' s belly is e m p t y his over-whelming p r o b l e m is well d e f i n e d , a n d it h a s a technical solution. But when his belly is full, he m a y have leisure t o pursue a depressing scries o f t h o u g h t s a b o u t the significance of his efforts, the m e a n i n g of his life." " W h a t a r c people f o r . " asks o n e of K u r t V o n n e g u t ' s c h a r a c t e r s j u s t b e f o r e he c o m m i t s suicide. Such a question would n o t o c c u r t o s o m e o n e struggling t o live.

M y final o b s e r v a t i o n , then, is that technical p r o b l e m s a d m i t of technical solutions, but that these s o l u t i o n s will inevitably p r o d u c e a d d i t i o n a l psychological p r o b l e m s not s o m u c h deficit p r o b l e m s as identity p r o b l e m s . W icn in-dividuals feel an identity p r o b l e m c o m i n g o n , th. y may retreat f r o m it, but only at the cost of c r e a t i n g f o r themselves living p r o b l e m s of a m o r e technical k i n d . T h u s we sec the m o d e r n p h e n o m e n o n of the high level d r o p - o u t , the profes-sional m a n w h o o p t s o u t , c h u c k s it all a n d j o i n s a r u r a l c o m m u n e . I d o not see that kind of regressive role t i a n s f o r -m a t i o n as a solution t o the society's p r o b l e -m s , but r a t h e r as a n indication of t h e n a t u r e of those p r o b l e m s .

A s a final n o t e of o b s e r v a t i o n , I m u s t c o n f e s s t h a t I can see n o clearly realizable s o l u t i o n t o such p r o b l e m s as over-p o over-p u l a t i o n , over-p o l l u t i o n , the n u c l e a r a r m s race, d i m i n u t i o n of

n a t i o n a l resources, o r the less tangible p r o b l e m s of loss of identity a n d c u l t u r a l despair. 1 expect t h a t we will c o n t i n u e t o t r a d e these p r o b l e m s f o r each o t h e r . But I a m a s t o n i s h e d because I r e m a i n h o p e f u l a b o u t t h a t which I d o n o t see.

R E F E R E N C E S

[ l j A. B a n d u r a , "Social-learning theory of idcntificaiory processes." in Ha/idlmok of Socialization Theory and Research, D. A . G o s i i n , Ed. Chicago, III.: R a n d McNaily, 1969.

[21 J. Bronowski. "Technology a n d culture in e v o l u t i o n . " Amer. Scholar, vol. 41. pp. 197-211, 1972.

[31 F. I. Grecnstcin, Personality ami Politics. Chicago, III.: M a r k -h a m , 1969. „ . , , , , [41 G H a r d i n , " T h e tragedy of the c o m m o n s . Science, vol. 162, pp. 1243-1248, 1968. . , [51 R. D. Hess a n d J. Torney, The Development of Political Attitudes

in Children. Chicago. III.: Aldinc, 1967.

[6] H . H y m a n , Political Socialization: A Study in the Psychology of Political Behavior. Glencoe, III.: Free Press, 1959.

[7] E. Kcdourie, Nationalism (rev. cd.). New Y o r k : Pracgcr, 1961. [81 W. Mischel, "Preference for delayed reinforcement a n d social

responsibility," J. Abnormal und Social Psychology, vol. 62, pp. 1-7, 1961.

[9] G . Orwell, " T h e art of D o n a l d M c G i l l , " in The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, S. Qrwell a n d I. Angus. Eds. New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t . 1968, vol. 2.

[IOJ K. E. Scheibc, Beliefs and Values. New Y o r k : Holl Rheinhardt & W i n s t o n , 1970.

[11] B. F. Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New Y o r k :

K n o p f . 1971. „ [121 A. N . Whitehead, The Aims of Education; and Other Essays.

New Y o r k : Macmillan, 1929.

[131 P. Andrews, " T h e prediction g a m e , " Saturday Rev., J a n . 15,

1972. , [14] S. A r o n s , " C o m p u l s o r y e d u c a t i o n : the plain peop.e resist.

Saturday Rev., J a n . 15, 1972. t

[15] R. G . H u m m e r s t o n e , " C u t t i n g a road through B r a z i l s green hell'," New York Times Mag., M a r . 5, 1972.

Vision, Faith, and Knowledge

D U N C A N T . H O L L O M O N AND J. H E R B E R T H O L L O M O N

Abstract—The authors discuss the general relationships between technology and personal and social values. They attempt to stimulate consideration by individuals and societies of the changing judgments and ethics now required both for the engineering profession and individual engineers.

They suggest that values and actions in the social enviro; ment a r e symbolic and that most of our present institutions a r e rcspoi.dve to an environment of the rather distant past. Laissez-faire, the Ad.im Smith "hidden hand," and "caveat emptor" no longer can be the guiding principles of a technology or of an afilucnt social system.

Manuscript received May 22, 1972. This paper was presented at the I E E E W o r k s h o p o n National Goals, Science Policy, a n d T i c h n o l o g y As-vcssment. W a r r e n i o n . Va.. April 26- 28. 1972.

D. T . H o l l o m o n is with the Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Tex. 75222.

j . H. H o l l o m o n is with the Center for Policy Alternatives, Massa-chusetts Institute of Technology, C a m b r i d g e , Mass. 02139.

T

W O H U N D R E D years a g o A d a m Smith articulated

a n ingenious e x p l a n a t i o n t o a n u n c o m f o r t a b l e p r o b l e m . He theorized that individual e c o n o m i c action t a k e n t o maximize p e r s o n a l utility w o u l d , t h r o u g h a process of co-o r d i n a t i co-o n by a n " U n s e e n H a n d , " lead t co-o a m a x i m i z a t i co-o n of the collective g o o d . I m p o r t a n t as this theory h a s been in o u r e c o n o m i c history, it is n o t clear w h e t h e r its wide ac-c e p t a n ac-c e h a s been d u e t o its empiriac-cal a ac-c ac-c u r a ac-c y or t o its intellectual c o m f o r t . W h a t a reassuring t h o u g h t it is t o c o n s i d e r t h a t the m o r e selfish a n d n a r r o w m i n d e d we are, t h e m o r e we a r e f u r t h e r i n g t h e public interest.

(14)

•tmtàm

.

•he individual a n d the c o s m o have been shattered Iv a new

awareness of unintended ev I. T h e u n a c c o u n t e d * r c o n -sequences of e c o n o m i c a n d t cluneal activity a r e becoming .ne.eas.ngly inescapable. A. . noise, and water p, llutum

o u r natural resources, an I o u r central cities arc in m a n y

c a s t s rapidlv becoming unliv. ble.

1 he impact of these consequences has been to cause some m o i a l , q u e s t i o n i n g and much name-calling a n d c a s s a t i o n . !S b , a m c f o r o u r c u r r c nt s i t u a t i o n ? W h o s e f i u l t is

p o l l u t i o n ? W h o s e responsibility is its alleviation? W h o is to blame for unsafe a u t o m o b i l e s ? A f t e r all. r e m e m b e r

careat emptor. Is the government the sole p r o t e c t o r of the publ.c g o o d , leaving individuals t o maximize their self-interest? What responsibilities d o you have a s citizens as engineers employed by a c o r p o r a t i o n , a s members of a profession, and as political and e c o n o m i c leaders?

a r c n o's o P ^ s u m p t u o u s a s to pretend to be able to

a n s w e r any of these questions, and we should all be sceptical of any attempt we should make. We can together, however s e a rc h lor ways to think a b o u t such problems in o r d e r t o

so that they are m o r e a m e n a b l e to clear thinking, r a t h e r than merely losing sleep over them o r ascribing blame to s o m e o n e else so that we can go to sleep m o r e easily

T h e p h e n o m e n o n of unintended detrimental consequences n o n w ^ r r 6 K° a C t i°n S t a k e" i n t h e s m a" ' * of course

not new. Cities have had to c o p e with the p r o b l e m of g a r b a g e collection for centuries, a n d the questions oT re-s p o n re-s e , lay have been pondered re-since re-such p r o b t m re-s were

ecog, .zed: the Socratic dialogues are full of exaTt y the vi'h " T ] q U e S l ,°n S W h i c h h a v e raised here

fee th • n H i 'S d i i T C r e n t a h°U t °U r t i m c s ? W hy ^ o u l d we

leel t h , need to come together here a n d now to talk a b o u t o u r mutual c o r c e r n ? First, a n u m b e r o f changes I ave taken increas'» 7 " , h e ^ ^ <>r *> w c h

increase o u r awareness o f these problems a n c give an g rCa n d ° t h ^ f°r S O , U t i°n S l h c' " T h c A "

f m l h i

L

°

n s

!

q u e n c e s

of economic activity (for

ex-alTev . e d t : V ^ ^ C a n M g e r £

alleviated by a deeper penetration into the h i n t e r l a r d s

Moreover, the system is vastly m o r e complex a "

m , , . . " " " « m a i , is lei much m o r e quicklv anrl

X ^ Z T J Z

f 'S I O r y' »

allowing us t o be a « „ r m o r e s° P * ' ^ a t e d , A n n. | , . ' 1 0 r c c° g " i z c their interconnections

S K S S S B S S r

5

®

8

selv.. ' r i y C C , , n g r c sP ° n s i b i l i t y for " o u r

-selves ar.d o u r posterity.

Lei us ,hen begin t o look a! , h e rela.ion between .eel a"d V a l u e o r- precisely, technology ^ e ^ C

n*H TXANüArTIONS ON SYSfilMS, MAN, ANI* l'Vili KMTIIS, . , „ „ « „ „ , ,9 7 2

W e c h o o s e I he . e m , c h i c s because i. refers , „ b o , h a s p e c t , r j . ' " » « o ™ » » : value, good a n d b a d ; and o b l ^ t i o n u g h . a n d w r o n g (,.e.. roses which smell swee.ly are . o X ' valued, hut we o u g h , n o . , 0 use ,hen, , o m a k e i u p ,

N o n c e . h a . A d a m S m i . h ' s f o r m u l a n o , , o f .he relation between , „ d , v , d u a l self-,„teres, a n d . h e collective good requires a d.s.inclion between two moral p e r s p e c t i v e

-wo ways o f looking a . value a n d o b l i g a . i o , . T h e first is individual personal goals and motivations designed , 0 max.mize individual satisfaction. T h e second is collt-ctivei a pe specuve which considers benefits which accrue to the people in general, not to a n y o n e in particular. S m i t h ' s hcory proposed a correlation between these t w o caTcü.a ions Of good (value) : the m o r e individuals maximize t h e t nd vidua, good the m o r e the public good is p r o m o t e d IMS precisely this correlation which has now been called

n o question a n d which serves a s the f u n d a m e n t a l q u e l l c c o n n ^ r T W H a l ¡ S , h C re,alion " " » « n individual

w h a t T a n Z ^ T ™ , n d l h e ™ *

pul,lie g o o d ? d°n e 1 0 a d j U S t l h i S rela,i°" 1 0 ' h e

Delving f u r t h e r into this problem, utilizing this distinction between in-out (individual, a n d ou.-in (collective) ethical

ZToTrlel 7

d

'

S l i n s u , s h

proposals. T h e first accepts the Smithian (or, more ac-curately, H o b b e s i a n ) f o r m u l a t i o n of the self-Leking natu e

e s s , T n P r O P O S a , S a C C O r d , n s t o , h i s P e r s p e c t i v e a r e

T b r i n yHm a n'P U, 'a l , 0 n °r e c o"o m- institutions in o r d e r

ù n s i , f f ° ? c o o r d i n a t i o n for which the H a n d ,s unseen ( f o r example, Milton F r i e d m a n t a x i n , pollution) T h e second type of proposal for r e f o r m is f o u n d e d u p o n the h o p e . h a . the n a t u r e of man can be c h a n g e d bv i n s L t i n g new e c o n o m i c relationships, a n d by a system of p r o p a g a n d a which encourages business a n d technical people , 0 consider heir social responsibility. N o t e that the difference between h e ? l Za P P r 0 a C h C S Í S n° ' °n C °f U"i m a , e

they often agree concerning the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the g nera welfare. R a t h e r , they disagree as , 0 the malleabili y a s s u m i i n T " "t h C f 0 r m C r a S S e r l i n« l h a t « be

assumed to be constant over lime a n d self-seeking in

a n d 'h e 'a t l C r a S S C r t' " « t h- » » n be changed® f "r

It follows f r o m this distinction between two tvpes of reform , ha t ,he r e are. correspondingly, . w o f o r m u l a t i o n s

o r the moral responsibility o f the consequences of the e c o n o m i c a n d technical system. T h e firs, (fixed n a t u r e of c 7 „ „ i T f S i'K C m a" i s n a , u r e ^ch-seckina, it

c o s l T L t u - V •S P O n M b M , t y I O C h a" ^ h l s calculations o f

cos. a n d b e n e . . 0 include public considerations. I, is t h u s he r e s p o n s e l . t y of the g o v e r n m e n t , 0 c o m p e l o r a r r a n g e such considerations of the public welfare. Rousseau a r . i t -h n, I ,,h PrS' "0 n,W i t h h i S d a S S i C 'o r m u' u t i o n of the stag

h u n t . In this f o r m u l a t i o n he supposes that ten men want to organize themselves for the purposes of h u n . i n c a tag 1 hey agree that if o n e o f t h e m finds a stag, he will call to

kd in h i m " ' » '0 g e , h e r , h C y W' " h 3 V C " o f

(15)

IIOI t«IVS«>N \NI> IHi||UMil\ \ ISM IN, IAIMI, AM> kNDWi.l IK,I

maii would follow ihc h a r e a n d t h e r e b y gain m o r e t h a n what his s h a r e of the stag might be. T h u s , s o m e system of a u t h o r i t y is necessary t o e n s u r e collective gain in t h e face of individual c a l c u l a t i o n s of p e r s o n a l benefits. It is the responsibility of the men w h o c o m p o s e this g o v e r n m e n t t o " p r o v i d e f o r the c o m m o n defense, p r o m o t e the general w e l f a r e . " T h e o t h e r type of r e f o r m position ascribes m o r a l responsibility t o the individual a c t o r s in the system, assert-ing t h a i , in a d d i t i o n t o individual c a l c u l a t o r s of p e r s o n a l gain, they a r e citizens of a collectivity. A s such, they have a responsibility t o c o n s i d e r the public welfare in their individual decisions. C o n i i d i s o n . a c c o r d i n g to this view, s h o u l d (i.e., has the m o r a l responsibility to) c o n s i d e r the cost t o the locale of their pollution o f the H u d s o n River when they p r o p o s e t o build their new hydroelectric g e n e r a t o r .

Just as there is divergence of o p i n i o n a s to the malleability of the n a t u r e of m a n a n d the p r o p e r a s c r i p t i o n of m o r a l responsibility, there is a l s o divergence as t o the r e l a t i o n s h i p between individual m o t i v a t i o n a n d institutional imperatives. O n e point o f view claims that the m o t i v a t i o n s of e c o n o m i c a c t o r s a r e d e t e r m i n e d by institutional incentives (he w h o is s e l f - a g g r a n d i / i n g gets a h e a d ) . Marxists, f o r e x a m p l e , a r g u e t h a t the acquisitive, m a n i p u l a t i v e , materialistic n a t u r e of m o d e r n e c o n o m i c m a n is d u e t o the n a t u r e of l a b o r relations a n d , m o r e b r o a d l y , t h e capitalist system. A c c o r d i n g t o this view it is pointless to try t o c h a n g e the n a t u r e of m a n (e.g., e n c o u r a g e him t o consider his b r o a d e r social responsibilities) because it is the e c o n o m i c system per se which d e t e r m i n e s the m o t i v a t i o n s o! his actions. R a t h e r , the e c o n o m i c in-s t i t u t i o n in-s a n d relationin-s themin-selvein-s muin-st be c h a n g e d . A n o t h e r view asserts that it is m a n ' s " r e a l " n a t u r e which is d r a w n u p o n by the system, in this case, it is pointless t o a t t e m p t u> c h a n g e e c o n o m i c m o t i v a t i o n s a n d incentives by m a n i p u l a t i n g the institutional relationships or by using s o m e f o r m of p r o p a g a n d a , since t h o s e m o t i v a t i o n s a r e i n n a t e 111 m a n ' s c h a r a c t e r a n d will be o p e r a t i v e in a n y sys-tem. R a l p h N a d e r , f o r e x a m p l e , d o e s n o t a r g u e f o r a p r o p a g a n d a c a m p a i g n to e n c o u r a g e c o r p o r a t i o n policy-m a k e r s t o c o n s i d e r their social responsibility f o r the b r o a d e r c o n s e q u e n c e s of their individual actions. R a t h e r , h e a c t s as a w a t c h d o g for the general welfare, b a r k i n g loudly when the c o r p o r a t i o n thief c o m e s trespassing 011 the posted g r o u n d of c o n s u m e r welfare.

T h u s we can m a k e two f o r m u l a t i o n s of the p r o b l e m of m o r a l responsibility in o u r p o s t - S m i t h i a n world, a n d two c o r r e s p o n d i n g p r o p o s a l s f o r r e f o r m . T h e first asserts that it is m a n ' s f u n d a m e n t a l n a t u r e t o be self-seeking, that his decisions will always be m a d e 011 the g r o u n d s of individual utility m a x i m i z a t i o n . Accordingly, the only h o p e f o r alleviat-ing the c u r r e n t p r o b l e m s which arise f r o m the nonexistent H a n d (i.e., the divergence between individual a n d system rationality) is t o m a n i p u l a t e institutional r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d incentives t o e n s u r e the protection of the general welfare. T h e second position asserts that m a n ' s n a t u r e is m o r e malleable, a n d e c o n o m i c a c t o r s can be c o n v i n c e d of the wisdom of a c t i n g in a c c o r d a n c e with the public interest r a t h e r than c o n s t a n t l y seeking individual gain.

8

C o n s e q u e n t l y , these t w o views can be distinguished a l o n g three d i m e n s i o n s : I) the malleability o f m a n ' s n a t u r e ( c h a n g e a b l e o r n o t , d e t e r m i n e d by e c o n o m i c institutions o r n o t ) ; 2) the c o r r e s p o n d i n g view of m o r a l responsibility ( g o v e r n m e n t o r citizen); 3) the m e t h o d of r e f o r m (institu-tional m a n i p u l a t i o n o r moralistic p r o p a g a n d a ) .

N o w that these t w o idealtypical views have been c o n -ceptually distinguished f r o m o n e a n o t h e r , vvc s h o u l d like t o proceed t o c o n s i d e r sonic of the t e r r i t o r y between these t w o p o l a r extremes. We a r c sccptical of m o n o c a u s a l a n t h r o p o -logical e x p l a n a t i o n s of social p h e n o m e n a . F o r e x a m p l e , both t h o s e w h o assert that certain i n n a t e characteristics of m a n ' s n a t u r e " d e t e r m i n e " e c o n o m i c institutions, a n d t h o s e w h o assert t h a t t h o s e i n s t i t u t i o n s " d e t e r m i n e " m a n ' s n a t u r e a n d m o t i v a t i o n s oversimplify the s y m b i o t i c correlative n a t u r e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r s o n a l i t y a n d c u l t u r a l institutions. An ecological perspective of this i n t e r r e l a t i o n -ship might p e r h a p s be m o r e elucidating. In the case of m a n . the o r g a n i s m r e s p o n d s t o c h a n g e s in its e n v i r o n m e n t by a d a p t a t i o n b u t at the s a m e t i m e can m a n i p u l a t e certain c h a n g e s in its e n v i r o n m e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , when m a n first developed agricultural tools, they allowed him t o m a n i p -ulate his e n v i r o n m e n t . H o w e v e r , t h e new e n v i r o n m e n t created ncto pressures f o r a d a p t a t i o n in t e r m s of social o r g a n i z a t i o n , which in t u r n created new possibilities f o r m a n i p u l a t i o n of the e n v i r o n m e n t . Each element in the ecological system affects e a c h o t h e r e l e m e n t symbiotically. T h u s o n e c a n n o t d e t e r m i n e causal p r i m a c y since the c h a n g e s a r e m u t u a l l y causative.

A n o t h e r view of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between institutional s t r u c t u r e s a n d e c o n o m i c incentive is seen in w h a t we might call the " a f t e r y o u , A l f o n s c " p r o b l e m . In this view t h e in-centive f o r c h a n g e is seen as a l r e a d y existing within the personalities of the m e m b e r s of industry, but the e c o n o m i c s t r u c t u r e a n d the legal f r a m e w o r k within which they o p e r a t e prevents them f r o m c h a n g i n g their b e h a v i o r accordingly. F o r e x a m p l e , the a u t o m o b i l e m a n u f a c t u r e r s c l a i m e d t h a i they were q u i t e willing t o design a n d build s a f e r c a r s , but two f a c t o r s prevented t h e m : the public was not interested in safer cars, a n d a n t i t r u s t laws prevented their c o m b i n i n g their research d e v e l o p m e n t resources. A c c o r d i n g t o this view there existed a situation in which each firm v\as willing t o c h a n g e its p a t t e r n of b e h a v i o r if the o t h e r firms did so at the s a m e time. Yet each fifm was unwilling t o g o first, since by d o i n g so it would be c o m m i t t i n g e c o n o m i c suicide, o r so they felt. H e n c e — a f t e r y o u , Alfonse.

(16)

t

M O R I B A S I C C O N S I D I R A T I O N S

1 he unprecedented power given mankind by a science-based technology places him in a race between Utopia and oblivion.

Carl Madden, Chief Economist U.S. Chamber of Commerce [Systems simulations] give indications that suggest cor-rective action will often be ineffective or even adverse in its results . . . choosing an ineffective or detrimental policy for coping with a complex system is not a mere matter of random choice. The intuitive process will select the wrong solution more often than not.

Jay Forrester

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge. Moss.

What is needed, but lacking, is a set of procedures to

enable consideration of social utility and of scientific merit to be fused in both the design of institutions and the process ol public policy.

CarI Madden

U n d e r l y i n g the concern with pollution, g h e t t o s l u m s

unsale a u t o m o b i l e s , a n d r o b o t assembly-line w o r k m e n is a m u c h m o r e general loss of f a i t h . S o m e h o w w h a t was g o o d a n d h o l y - the work ethic, the efficacy of t e c h n o l o g y t o

solve social p r o b l e m s is no longer to be u n q u e s t i o n a b l y revered. It ,s a r u d e a w a k e n i n g t o m a n y t h a t the totem of

t e c h n o l o g y h a s no. worked its magic. T h i s is in its deepest sense not a crisis of e c o n o m i c values at all it is a religious crisis. Beliefs which have been deeply held a n d cherished a r e being s m a s h e d by o u r n a t i o n ' s iconoclastic y o u t h O u r c o n d i t i o n is n o t only o n e of c o n f u s i o n a n d malaise, it is o n e ol a n g u i s h .

W h a t is the n a t u r e of this religious q u e s t i o n i n g ? W h a t a r e he old values? W h a t are the new ones being r e c o m m e n d e d

C i r P, a< * ? W h a t c h a n g e s in belief a r c called for, a n d

\Vn*v . A r c i n e r c e d i t i o n s which m a n d a t e c h a n g e at this

deeply p e r s o n a l level? We s h o u l d p e r h a p s a p p r o a c h this c o n f u s i n g a n d e m o t i o n a l l y c h a r g e d area o f c o n c e r n I) with a language with which we can n a m e intellectual c o n c e p t s

c o m m« n » M l e with o n e a n o t h e r with less c h a n c e of

mis-i n t e r p r e t a t mis-i o n : a n d 2) f r o m a n hmis-istormis-ical perspectmis-ive mis-in

o r d e r t o view the present situation in its a p p r o p r i a t e

c h r o n o l o g i c a l context. I « « p r i d u .

f ,WK Jh , n k,l hri'r r C m •S t C p , i c i s m o f o u r industrial system

fUt by m u c h of the y o u t h of the c o u n t r y a n d by m a n y of

h e m o r e t h o u g h t f u l m e m b e r s of the " e s t a b l i s h m e n t " fin*

o i n , T h " " a M C l C n e , S °f'h C i n d u s t r i a l - t e c h n o l o g i c a l

cffic CV of , S S?n l , S m l h C r d i e ,'O U S b c , i e f «he

efficacy ol science and technology t o solve p r o b l e m s , a d -vance m a n k i n d a n d bring " p r o g r e s s . " T h e r e is of c o u r s e m u c h evidence to s u p p o r t this view, but f o r m o s t of us it h a s a very large allective o r e m o t i o n a l c o m p o n e n t as well

c ^ Z ' ^ l :h U t l e e^n° l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t is

ei.icdcious a n d beneficial.

T h e s e c o n d f u n d a m e n t a l tenet of the spirit of W e s t e r n

e c h n o l o ' " I , S;n d'V , d U a , i s m' belief that c u l t u r a l a n d

technological a d v a n c e m e n t takes place most rapidly a n d

a n d rf1 when m e m b e r s of the c u l t u r e work individually

a n d i n d e p e n d e n t l y . T h i s type of activity m a x i m a J

I M F . T R A N S A C T I O N S O N S V S r t M S . M A N . AN I > C Y H , K N , „ < S. N O V f Mill R J 9 7 ^

Cf c h a n c e s o f i n n o v a t i o n , clear t h i n k i n g , a n d h u m a n crcati v ' v . A s M a x W e b e r a r g u e s with such insight, the ri.se o f the spirit of capitalism c a m e a b o u t in Calvinist G e r m a n y following the P r o t e s t a n t R e f o r m a t i o n , which restored the direct link between individual m e n a n d .heir Ciod. T h r o u g h faith a n d w o r k , individuals could o b t a i n salvation t h r o u g h G o d ' s c l h c a a o u s grace. I his e t h i c was in o p p o s i t i o n lo the previous e t h i c of t r a d i t i o n a l i s m the a c c e p t a n c e of . h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l -' c h u r c h a s , h c between m a n a n d G o d . P r o t e s t a n t i s m

was a see lie (self-denying), n o n v i r t u o s i c (individuals could t h r o u g h their o w n e f f o r t s o b t a i n s a l v a t i o n ) , a n d rationalistic (the m e a n i n g of the universe was u n d e r s t a n d a b l e : p u r p o s i v e action could be t a k e n , as o p p o s e d t o the p r e v i o u s belief in

the m a g i c a l , the mysterious, a n d the t r a d i t i o n a l institution of the collectiviiy).

W e b e r asserts that it was precisely this P r o t e s t a n t ethic which served as t h e u n d e r l y i n g spirit o f capitalism a n d industrial d e v e l o p m e n t . In m o r e simple language, it m e a n t t h a t individuals did the work that w a s b e f o r e t h e m : they did their j o b . S u c h was the highest f o r m of h u m a n e n d e a v o r If men w o r k e d a . the tasks b e f o r e t h e m a n d lived a self-d e n y i n g . c o n s c i e n t i o u s life, they maximizeself-d their c h a n c e s of going t o h e a v e n at the s a m e time as they w o r k e d f o r the g o o d of their c u l t u r e . T h u s the e t h i c w a s essentially this-w o r l d l y — i n v o l v i n g a c o r r e l a t i o n betthis-ween t h e religious a n d the secular a s o p p o s e d t o a l m o s t every o t h e r m a j o r religion which involves a s e p a r a t i o n between this world a n d the n e x t - between a c t i o n s taken f o r p e r s o n a l material benefit a n d a c t i o n s t a k e n f o r spiritual benefit.

C o m b i n e this new P r o t e s t a n t ethic with the S m i t h i a n view of the u l t i m a t e collective benefits o f individual eco-n o m i c actioeco-n a eco-n d o eco-n e c a eco-n begieco-n to see b o t h the p o w e r a eco-n d the c o m f o r t of the new view o f e c o n o m i c - t e c h n o l o g i c a l b e h a v i o r . Life was so simple. All we h a d t o d o was look out f o r o u r o w n interests a n d e v e r y t h i n g which we w a n t e d in both this world a n d t h e next w o u l d result. All we h a d to d o everyday was o u r j o b s , a n d plo.j a h e a d d o i n g o u r d u t i e s to G o d , self, a n d c o u n t r y , a n d we would a d v a n c e science cul-ture, a n d ourself s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . Such was the definition of p r o g r e s s - individualistic a n d self-aggrandizing, based o n the efficacy of technological a d v a n c e s .

N o w

O f c o u r s e c o n d i t i o n s have c h a n g e d radically since t h e beginnings of . h e industrial revolution. But what c h a n g e s affect this underlying faith in individualism a n d scientism the P r o t e s t a n t - c a p i t a l i s t e t h i c ? W h y is it b e i n g q u e s t i o n e d n o w ? Essentially w h a t has h a p p e n e d , a n d o n f v within the las. twenty years, is that the collective c o n s e q u e n c e s of individual a c t i o n a r e m o r e easily perceived. T h e f r o n t i e r is g o n e ; land a n d o t h e r n a t u r a l resources can n o l o n g e r be c o n c a v e d as inexhaustible, a n d the e c o n o m i c system of m a n u f a c t u r e r s , buyers, a n d sellers is n o w closed. T h e r e f o r e t h e f e e d b a c k processes a r e a p p a r e n t to all p a r t i c i p a n t s

Figure

Actualización...

Referencias

Actualización...

Descargar ahora (252 pages)