WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL

WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL

Science, Technology and Society
Flexible Learning Packets

WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL

College of Arts and Sciences

COURSE TITLE: SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY

MODULE 2: SCEINCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND SOCIETY AND THE HUMANCONDITION
UNIT 3: THE GOOD LIFE
INSTRUCTOR: MS. ALONA BAJA
SY AND SEM: 2020-2021/ 1ST SEMESTER

I. INTRODUCTION

In Ancient Greece, long before the word “science” has been coined, the need to understand the
world and reality was bound with the need to understand the self and the good life. For Plato, the
task of understanding the things in the world runs parallel with the job of truly getting into what will
make the soul flourish.

It was Aristotle who gave a definitive distinction between the theoretical and practical sciences.
Among the theoretical disciplines, Aristotle included logic, biology, physics, and metaphysics,
among others. Among the practical ones, Aristotle counted ethics and politics. Whereas truth" is the
aim of the theoretical sciences, the good is the end goal of the practical ones. Every attempt to know
is connected in some way in an attempt to find the “good" or as said in the previous lesson, the
attainment of human od is flourishing. Rightly so, one must find the truth about what the good is
flourishing before one can even try to locate that which is good.

In the previous lesson, we have seen how a misplaced or an erroneous idea of human flourishing
can turn tables for all of us, make that Sciences work against us rather than for us, and draw a
chasm between the search for truth and for the good. In this lesson, we endeavour to go back a
little and answer these questions: What does it really mean to live a good life? What qualifies as a
good existence? Granting this understanding, we are assumed to be in a better position to reconcile
our deepest existential needs as human beings and science as tool to maneuver around the world.
WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
II. CONTENT’S LIST

Aristotle and How We All Aspire for Good Life

Happiness as the Goal of a Good Life
• Materialism
• Hedonism
• Stoicism
• Theism
• Humanism

III. LESSON OBJECTIVES

At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to:

1. Examine what is meant by a good life;

2. Identify how humans attempt to attain what is deemed to be a good life; and
recognize possibilities available to human being to attain the good life.

Time allocation for this subject: 3 hours per week

Technological tools:
• Mobile Phone or Laptop
• Social Platform (Fb, Messenger, G-mail, Google Classroom, Zoom)

RESOURCE MATERIALS YOU NEED TO LEARN IN THIS UNIT

• My Video lectures to be posted in our Facebook group
• YouTube Link : https://youtu.be/VFPBf1AZOQg
WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL

IV. LECTURE
NOTES

ARISTOTLE AND HOW WE ALL ASPIRE

FOR A GOOD LIFE

It is interesting to note that the first philosopher, who approached the problem of reality from a
"scientific" lens as we know now, is also the first thinker who dabbled into the complex problematization
of the end goal of life: happiness. This man is none other than
Aristotle.

Compared to his teacher and predecessor, Plato, Aristotle embarked on a different approach in
figuring out reality. In contrast to Plato who thought that things in this world are not real and are only
copies of the real in the world of forms, Aristotle puts everything back to the ground in claiming that this
world is all there is to it and that this world is the only reality we can all access. For Plato, change is so
perplexing that it can only make sense if there are two realities: the world of forms and the world of
matter.

Consider the human person. When you try to see yourself in front of the mirror, you normally
say and think that you are looking at yourself-that is, you are the person who slept last night and you
are the same person looking at yourself now, despite the occasional changes like a new pimple that
grows on your nose. The same is true for a seed that you threw out of the garden last month. When
you peek into the same patch of land where the seed ingrained itself into, you may be surprised to see
a little plant showing itself to you and to the sun. Plato recognized change as a process and as a
phenomenon that happens in the world, that in fact it is constant.

However, Plato also claims that despite the reality of change, things remain and they retain their
ultimate "whatness"; that you remain to be you despite the pimple that now sits atop your nose. Plato
was convinced that reality is full of these seemingly contrasting manifestations of change and
permanence. For Plato, this can only be explained by postulating two aspects of reality, two worlds if
you wish: the world of forms and the world of matter. In the world of matter, things are changing and
impermanent. In the world of forms, the entities are only copies of the ideal and the models, and the
forms are the only real entities. Things are red in this world because they participate in what it means
to be red in the world of forms.

Aristotle, for his part, disagreed with his teacher's position and forwarded the idea that there is
no reality over and above what the senses can perceive. As such, it is only by observation of the
external worn that one can truly understand what reality is all about. Change is a process that is inherent
in things. We, along with all, other entities in the world, start as potentialities and move toward
actualities. The movement, of course, entails change. Consider a seed) that eventually germinates and
grows into a plant. The seed that turned to become the plant underwent change- from the potential
plant that is the seed to its full actuality, the plant.
WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
Aristotle extends this analysis from the external world into the province of the human person and
declares that even human beings are potentialities who aspire for their actuality. When a girl tries to
finish her degree in the university, despite the initial failures she may have had, she definitely is being
propelled by a higher purpose than to just graduate. She wants something more, maybe to have a
license and land a promising job in the future. Every human person, according to Aristotle, aspires for
an end.

No individual-young or old, fat or skinny, male or female-resists happiness. We all want to be

happy. Aristotle claims that happiness is the be all and end all of everything that we do. We may not
realize it but the end goal of everything that we do is happiness. If you ask one person why he is doing
what he is doing, he may not readily say that it is happiness that motivates him. Hard-pressed to explain
why he is motivated by what motivates him will reveal that happiness is the grand, motivating force in
everything that he does. When Aristotle claims that we want to be happy ne does not necessarily mean
the everyday happiness that we obtain when we win a competition or we eat our favourite dish in a
restaurant. What Aristotle actually means is human flourishing; a kind of contentment in knowing that
one is getting the best out of life. A kind of feeling that one has maxed out his potentials in the world,
that he has attained the crux of his humanity.

HAPPINESS AS THE GOAL OF

A GOOD LIFE

In the eighteenth century, John Stuart Mill declared the Greatest Happiness Principle by saying
that an action is right as far as it maximizes the attainment of happiness for the greatest number of
people. At a time when people were sceptical about claims on the metaphysical, people could not make
sense of the human flourishing that Aristotle talked about in the days of old. Mill said that individual
happiness of each individual should be prioritized and collectively dictates the kind of action that should
be endorsed. Consider the pronouncements against mining. When an action benefits the greatest
number of people, said action is deemed ethical. Does mining benefit rather than hurt the majority?
Does it offer more benefits rather than disadvantages? Does mining result in more people getting happy
rather than sad? If the answers to the said questions are in the affirmative, then the said action, mining,
is deemed ethical.

The ethical is, of course, meant to lead us to the good and happy life. Through the ages, as has
been expounded in the previous chapters, man has constantly struggled with the external world in order
to reach human flourishing. History has given birth to different schools of thought, all of which aim for
the good and happy life.

Materialism

The first materialists were the atomists in Ancient Greece. Democritus and Leucippus led a
school whose primary belief is that the world is made up of and is controlled by the tiny indivisible units
in the world called atomos or seeds. For Democritus and his disciples, the world including human
beings, is made up of matter, There is no need to posit immaterial entities as sources of purpose,
Atomos simply comes together randomly to form the things in the world. As such, only material entities
WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
matter. In terms of human flourishing matter is what makes us attain happiness. We see this at work
with most people who are clinging On to material wealth as the primary source of the meaning of their
existence.

Hedonism

The hedonists, for their part, see the end goal of life in acquiring pleasure. Pleasure has always
been the priority of hedonists. For them, life is about obtaining and indulging in pleasure because life
is limited. The mantra of this school of thought is the famous, "Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow
we die." Led by Epicurus, this school of thought also does not buy any notion of afterlife just like the
materialists.

Stoicism

Another school of thought led by Epicurus, the stoics espoused the idea that to generate
happiness, one must learn to distance oneself and be apathetic. The original term, apatheia, precisely
means to be indifferent. For the stoics, happiness can only be attained by a careful practice of apathy.
We should, in this worldview, adopt the fact that some things are not within our control. The sooner we
realize this, the happier we can become.

Theism

Most people find the meaning of their lives using God as a fulcrum of their existence. The
Philippines, as a predominantly Catholic country, is Witness to how people base their life goals on
beliefs that hinged on some form of supernatural reality called heaven. The ultimate basis of happiness
for theists is the communion with God. The world where we are in is only just a temporary reality where
we have to maneuver around while waiting for the ultimate return to the hands of God.

Humanism

Humanism as another school of thought espouses the freedom of man to carve his own destiny
and to legislate his own laws, free from the shackles of a God that monitors and controls. For humanists,
man is literally the captain of his own ship. Inspired by the enlightenment in seventeenth century,
humanists see themselves not merely as stewards of the creation but as individuals who are in control
of themselves and the world outside them. This is the spirit of most scientists who thought that the
world is a place and space for freely unearthing the world in seeking for ways on how to improve the
lives of its inhabitants.

As a result of the motivation of the humanist current, scientists eventually turned to technology
in order to ease the difficulty of life as illustrated in the previous lessons. Scientists of today meanwhile
are ready to confront more sophisticated attempts at altering the world for the benefit of humanity.
Some people now are willing to tamper with time and space in the name of technology. Social media,
as an example, has been so far a very effective way of employing technology in purging time and space.
Not very long ago, communication between two people from two continents in the planet will involve
months of waiting for a mail to arrive. Now, communication between two people wherever they are, is
not Just possible but easy. The Internet and smart phones made a time communication possible not
just between two people, but even with multiple people simultaneously.
WESTMEAD INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL
Technology allowed us to tinker with our sexuality. Biologically male individuals can now undergo
medical operation if they so wish for sexual reassignment. Breast implants are now available and can
be done. With relative convenience if anyone wishes to have one. Hormones may also be injected in
order to alter the sexual chemicals in the body.

Whether or not we agree with these technological advancements, these are all undertaken in
the hopes of attaining the good life. The balance, however, between the good life, ethics, and
technology has to be attained.

V. SUMMARY

Man is constantly in pursuit of the good life. Every person has his perspective when it comes to
what comprises the good life. Throughout history, man has worked hard in pointing out what amounts
to a good, happy life. Some people like the classical theorists thought that happiness has to do with the
insides of the human person. The soul, as the seat of our humanity, has been the focus of attention of
this end goal. The soul has to attain a certain balance in order to have a good life, a life of flourishing.
It was only until the seventeenth century that happiness became a centrepiece in the lives of people,
even becoming a fullblown ethical foundation in John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism. At present, we see
multitudes of schools of thought that all promise their own key to finding happiness. Science and
technology has been, for the most part, at the forefront of man's attempts at finding this happiness. The
only question at the end of the day is whether science is taking the right path toward attaining what it
really means to live a good life.

VI. SELF-ASSESSMENT 1.9

THINK ABOUT THESE QUESTION

1. What is the Good Life?

2. What is the relationship between the good life and science?

3. Does technology always lead us to the good life? How and why?