Measuring Technological Progress
Many sociologists and anthropologists have created social theories dealing with social and cultural evolution. Some, like Lewis H. Morgan, Leslie White, and Gerhard Lenski, declare technological progress to be the primary factor driving the development of human civilisation.
Morgan’s concept of three major stages of social evoluton (savagery, barbarism, and civilization) can be divided by technological milestones, like fire, the bow, and pottery in the savage era, domestication of animals, agriculture, and metalworking in the barbarian era and the alphabet and writing in the civilisation era.
Instead of specific inventions, White decided that the measure by which to judge the evolution of culture was energy. For White “the primary function of culture” is to “harness and control energy.” White differentiates between five stages of human development: In the first, people use energy of their own muscles. In the second, they use energy of domesticated animals. In the third, they use the energy of plants (agricultural revolution). In the fourth, they learn to use the energy of natural resources: coal, oil, gas. In the fifth, they harness nuclear energy.
White introduced a forumula P=E*T, where E is a measure of energy consumed, and T is the measure of efficiency of technical factors utilising the energy. In his own words, “culture evolves as the amount of energy harnessed per capita per year is increased, or as the efficiency of the instrumental means of putting the energy to work is increased”. Russian astronomer, Nikolai Kardashev, extrapolated his theory creating the Kardashev scale, which categorizes the energy use of advanced civilisations.
Lenski takes a more modern approach and focuses on information. The more information and knowledge (especially allowing the shaping of natural environment) a given society has, the more advanced it is. He identifies four stages of human development, based on advances in the history of communication. In the first stage, information is passed by genes. In the second, when humans gain sentience, they can learn and pass information through by experience. In the third, the humans start using signs and develop logic. In the fourth, they can create symbols, develop language and writing. Advancements in the technology of communication translates into advancements in the economic system and political system, distribution of goods, social inequality and other spheres of social life. He also differentiates societies based on their level of technology, communication and economy: 1) hunters and gatherers, 2) simple agricultural, 3) advanced agricultural, 4) industrial 5) special (like fishing societies).
Finally, from the late 1970s sociologists and anthropologists like Alvin Toffler (author of Future Shock), Daniel Bell and John Naisbitt have approached the theories of post-industrial societies, arguing that the current era of industrial society is coming to an end, and services and information are becoming more important than industry and goods. Some of the more extreme visions of the post-industrial society, especially in fiction, are strikingly similar to the visions of near and post-Singularity societies.
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_technology
Technology and the Past
A Virtual tour of the Pantheon Notes: Concrete and the Roman Civilization
Technology and the Present
A Virtual Tour of Gehry’s Walt Disney Concert Hall Notes: Frank Gehry and Bent Steel
Technology and the Future
A Virtual tour of Non Standard Architectures at the Pompidou Centre
Liquid stone: New Architecture in Concrete at te National Building Museum, Washington DC
Notes: Cultural Concerns in Computational Architecture
Technological Singularity
The prediction of a cyborg era
Reading List for Week 3
Ira - http://www.erco.com/
Entries (RSS)
June 9th, 2006 at 12:01 am
1. The Past
Human use the technology only concerning to make life is being simple. Probably they don’t realize that the use of technology cause damage of environmental elements. They only took energy to make life easier and to push the maximum ouputs of daily life activities.
Talking about architecture and space, technology cause people build and make a lot of things that it was imposibble to be done before.From cave and then buitresses to column,beams, and pilars, dome and arc in Rome previously, Gothic church,etc.
2. Present
Human realized that the using of technology can make better life, but in the other side it also cause damage of energy resouces. Because the technology has make life easier, it has made people depend on it, but in the other side human also faced with the degradation of life quality, such as sickness and negative behaviour ( as what I have said in last week session ).
It also change the way of how people think.
People realize that technology sometime could be dangerous and harmfull to their life.
In architecture, technology developing has make change in the quality of space. Learning from our daily life, we don’t have to spent a lot of time in some place, such as our class.
Architecture and space become abstracts. It’s can be stated in virtual , not only in physical.
3. Future
Human seeking the alternative of energy resource. I think they will back to nature energy resource. Nowadays, people can use solar energy in any of aspects in daily life. Australia use solar energy to run their public busses. Japan produce vehicles using water as their source of energy to run the automobiles. And many other things.
I think people will seek energy resource back to the nature, which cannot be vanished and not being danger to human themselves. Human will seek energy resource that could be recycle and provide better quality in human life.
How about space and architecture? Are people will go back to nature scents?Or make it virtually, because the nature has been “sold out”, so they make the imitation of nature?
Or, how to make space in architecture from water? Or ice? Or..anything else ?
Like ice hotel in Finland and or ice building from Harbin, China? Or back to the cave?
I think there won’t be absolute theory to explain about it,will there? Like Einstein has said, everything is “relative”.
So, Let us discuss…!!
June 18th, 2006 at 9:15 am
in the past, man kind discovered technologies and create interesting inventions that benefit the later. these creations and interventions had sure benefit human race in one way or another. many of these discoveries in the past, had gave us many interesting and intelligent ways to look present technologies and what’s going to happen in the future.
it might appear to many that people in the past can “predict” what’s going to happen now and future. well, honestly, i’m not sure about it. but let’s take a look in the past. In the past, there has been no cranes or heavy machineries that could help us on building fantastic architectures. You can’t find nails or hardly even any rivets to join beams to columns. Take a look at Japanese Architectures, columns and beams are joined togather by just using simple joints. As during those eras, infrastructures in Asia nations are built mainly on timber. And now present technologies, we had seen many fantastic ways of construction detailings.
However, not all present interventions are benefitical to human race. Why? Human race, in mist of defending themselves are building more and more powerful and destructive fire arms that could kill many. Many had used the present technologies to create biological weapons that could kill millions in just few minutes.
Present technologies had also caused us to consume huge amount of energies. These huge consumations thus cause the universe to lose many of it’s wonderful stuffs. And some thus created atomic energies for their own benefits.
In the early dawn of future technologies, we might or maybe looking into bringing many new interventions into space. We might be able to construct buildings in space environment or we could see multi-programming in design and architectures. Combining common facilities into one structures could reduce the excess use of energies and thus use more solar power energy.
however, what’s going to happen 50 years or 100 years down the road we can’t exlpain. could there be another paradox yet again? i don’t know…as up to now…we have yet to have anyone to prove that future interventions would or would not have a “paradox”…
June 26th, 2006 at 9:39 am
a piece of ‘expired’ comment
jus a little thought…
wat we do not have in the past
we have it in the present
n
will certainly have it in our future
but
wat we have in the past
we might still have it in the present
but
will not certainly have it in our future
r we loosing to gain?