Pandora's Chokehold

Does science gives us the illusion of being in control?

Ever since the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s, our lives took a dramatic turn. The invention of labour automatons was just a start; for the next few hundred years since, science has grown to become so pervasive that it even appears to dominate mankind and its progress. This observation is, regrettably, valid, because while it seems like science has made us so much more capable of determining our lives and shaping our natural environment to suit our constantly changing lifestyles, it is nothing than more than a chimera that we have led ourselves to believe. Science gives us power, but not control, because that power comes with a price. For every way we try to take charge of our lives and society, something backfires, and that implies a loss of control.

 

To be in control is to ensure every aspect of our lives goes according to our plans – and science does offer us a means to do so. On the individual level, we are able to determine the breed and quality of our offspring by simply shopping for the genes we desire them to have. Genetic engineering has now become a choice – though a rather extravagant one – to guarantee the ‘perfect’ offspring, and this therefore has been viewed by many as a form of determining the quality of the next generation. Thus, we are now in control of our future. Likewise, science has now given us the power to control the lives of others, to determine who lives and who does not. Such a power is seen from the act of abortion, wherein we can decide the fate of an unborn foetus. On a larger scale, we now also have the power to determine the lives of countless masses. With the advent of nuclear warfare, people can be wiped out almost effortlessly. Surely if we can control the fate of others, and manipulate our DNA to attain the state we deem as perfection, we must be in control of our lives and our environment, thereby making it suit our needs.

 

However, this is based on the assumption that being in control is being in control of others’ lives, as well as our environment. The fact is that science, while bestowing us with unprecedented power, does not give us control. The power that we now possess, due to science, presents us with the false illusion that we are in control over our lives. However, how can we be in control of our lives when the repercussions of science are growing more and more out of our control? If being in control merely means controlling the way our lives turn out, then a crucial factor has been overlooked. The society is part of our natural environment, and by using science to change our lives (for the better, or so we think), our society shifts in conventions, norms and ideas as well. For instance, genetic engineering may give us the autonomy to choose the type of genes we desire, but because of its income-biased nature (wherein only the well-moneyed can afford such a bonus), the social gulf between the rich and poorer income groups will widen. There will be a new elite breed of the near-perfect sub-species of Man that is blessed with the means to get ahead faster than their peers, leaving behind a weaker and therefore less desired group that will even fall out of the struggle for survival. This dystopia may be seen as a slippery slope, but it is also a plausible way our society may turn out. In such a society, it is difficult – if not almost impossible – to find any form of control, because it has already spiralled out of it.

 

Another reason why we think science makes us more in control is the fact that it provides us with solutions for our problems. Being in control entails the ability to overcome the problems we face, and science appears to be a tool we use to do so. For instance, when Malthus’ theory of the arithmetically-increasing supply of food and exponentially-increasing world population rang true –thereby leading to an impending global food shortage – the Green Revolution was then formulated to cope with the imminent problem. Better quality grains with shorter growing periods led to more crop yield which mitigated the problem. Similarly, we can correct our physical defaults just by going under the knife and tweaking our features in conformity to the beauty standards set by the mass media. Likewise, we are promised attractive willowy figures with the incredible help of fat-melting gadgets and weight-loss pills. In this way, we are a step closer to our goals, and our problems and fears (of losing out to other more attractive specimens) are eradicated by the possibilities offered by science. This thereby creates the notion that we can control our problems by using science to solve them.

 

This is, in reality, not quite as propitious as we may think. Our blinkered views towards how science has, ever since it entered our lives, alleviated our problems may suggest that we are impervious to its side-effects. Science has granted us the power to take control over our lives and environment; however, it has also unleashed more problems than before. When science tampers with our morals, it becomes a contentious issue because it presents us with more possibilities that may not abide by our inherent moral compasses. For instance, society becomes fragmented when the pro-life and pro-choice camps decry each other’s views on matters such as abortion and euthanasia; the same happens when the media, with its extensive reach, propagates a standard perception of beauty. Thus, when can we say that we are in absolute control when we are unable to hold our society together and use science to complement it instead of oppose it?

 

Our ability to be in control is independent of science and the plethora of options it presents. Science does not make us in control – of ourselves or of our environment – because it is a neutral tool that is wielded by us. Therefore, we are the ones who are ultimately in control. Being empowered, if that is what science makes us, is not tantamount to being in control – especially (ironically) not with science, because it appears to be creating more problems than it is solving them for us.

 

Reviews

[Vanessa]

Wow. That's really impressive. Incredibly well thought out and well written. I really agree with your entire premise. Sometimes I really wish I had been born in a simpiler time. There was a time when rocket ships and submarines were whims of science fiction writers with brilliant imaginations, now they are common place. One can only begin to imagine the discoveries yet to be made.

[Berserker[Diktator Von ..]

You bring up really great points with this piece..It makes the reader think about the world in which they live in...Great Job!

[Jon Klement]

This thesis could easily be expanded into a book with specific chapters on computers/the Internet, genetics, health/fitness, the history of scientific thought, etc., etc.

This is a big topic and an important point of view that deserves expansion.