Science Compiled
Science Compiled
“Creature” is a
normative or
evaluative as
well as
descriptive
category.
Human Flourishing in the socio-
psychological perspective
Albert Borgmann, "Technology," A Companion to Heidegger Ed. Dreyfus and Wrathall (Blackwell
Publishing, 2005), 428.
Why is technology a mode of
revealing?
• Technology, according to Heidegger must be
understood as “a way of revealing”. “Revealing” is
one of the terms Heidegger developed himself in
order to make it possible to think what, according to
him, is not thought anymore.
• How can technology be ‘a way of revealing’?
“Reality” is not something absolute that human
beings can ever know once and for all; it is relative in
the most literal sense of the word – it exists only in
relations. Reality ‘in itself’, therefore, is inaccessible
for human beings. As soon as we perceive or try to
understand it, it is not ‘in itself’ anymore, but ‘reality
for us.’
Social Media
• Social Media platforms allow users to have
conversations, share information, and
create web content. There are many forms
of social media, including blogs, micro-
blogs, wikis, social networking sites, photo-
sharing sites, instant messaging, video-
sharing sites, podcasts, widgets, virtual
worlds, and more.
• A digital tool that allows users to quickly
create and share content with the public.
Social media encompasses a wide range of
websites and apps. Some, like Twitter,
specialize in sharing links and short written
messages. Others, like Instagram and
TikTok, are built to optimize the sharing of
photos and videos.
• Most influential technological applications
of this century.
Types of Social Media
1. Social Networks - specialize
in connecting and exchanging
thoughts, ideas, and content
with other users
Module 5
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015,
provides a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.
Hickel’s De-development
Given all the fanfare, one might think the SDGs are about to offer a fresh plan for how to save the world,
but beneath all the hype, it’s business as usual. The main strategy for eradicating poverty is the same:
growth.
Growth has been the main object of development for the past 70 years, despite the fact that it’s not
working. Since 1980, the global economy has grown by 380%, but the number of people living in poverty
on less than $5 (£3.20) a day has increased by more than 1.1 billion. That’s 17 times the population of
Britain. So much for the trickle-down effect.
Orthodox economists insist that all we need is yet more growth. More progressive types tell us that we
need to shift some of the yields of growth from the richer segments of the population to the poorer ones,
evening things out a bit. Neither approach is adequate. Why? Because even at current levels of average
global consumption, we’re overshooting our planet’s bio-capacity by more than 50% each year.
In other words, growth isn’t an option any more – we’ve already grown too much. Scientists are now
telling us that we’re blowing past planetary boundaries at breakneck speed. And the hard truth is that this
global crisis is due almost entirely to overconsumption in rich countries.
MODULE 5
IDI
Right now, our planet only has enough resources for each of us to consume 1.8 “global hectares” annually – a
standardised unit that measures resource use and waste. This figure is roughly what the average person in Ghana or
Guatemala consumes. By contrast, people in the US and Canada consume about 8 hectares per person, while Europeans
consume 4.7 hectares – many times their fair share.
What does this mean for our theory of development? Economist Peter Edward argues that instead of pushing poorer
countries to “catch up” with rich ones, we should be thinking of ways to get rich countries to “catch down” to more
appropriate levels of development. We should look at societies where people live long and happy lives at relatively low
levels of income and consumption not as basket cases that need to be developed towards western models, but as
exemplars of efficient living.
In light of this, perhaps we should regard such countries not as underdeveloped, but rather as appropriately developed.
And maybe we need to start calling on rich countries to justify their excesses.
The idea of “de-developing” rich countries might prove to be a strong rallying cry in the global south, but it will be tricky
to sell to westerners. Tricky, but not impossible. According to recent consumer research, 70% of people in middle- and
high-income countries believe overconsumption is putting our planet and society at risk. A similar majority also believe
we should strive to buy and own less, and that doing so would not compromise our happiness. People sense there is
something wrong with the dominant model of economic progress and they are hungry for an alternative narrative.
MODULE 5
Negative formulations won’t get us anywhere. The idea of “steady-state” economics is a step in the right direction and is growing in
popularity, but it still doesn’t get the framing right. We need to reorient ourselves toward a positive future, a truer form of
progress. One that is geared toward quality instead of quantity. One that is more sophisticated than just accumulating ever
increasing amounts of stuff, which doesn’t make anyone happier anyway. What is certain is that GDP as a measure is not going to
get us there and we need to get rid of it.
Either we slow down voluntarily or climate change will do it for us. We can’t
go on ignoring the laws of nature. But rethinking our theory of progress is not
only an ecological imperative, it is also a development one. If we do not act
soon, all our hard-won gains against poverty will
evaporate, as food systems collapse and mass
famine re-emerges to an extent not seen since the
19th century.
Hickel’s De-development
Global economic growth is making a stronger than expected comeback. It is likely to accelerate to as much as 4% in 2018 from 3.2% in
2016. This is good news on many fronts, but can we expect this stronger growth to relieve the frustrations about rising inequality and
economic insecurity that have rocked the political establishments of many countries? That has been the implicit assumption behind the
standard “growth model” of recent decades: a rising tide of GDP promoted particularly by supply side reforms and increased incentives
for private capital investment and export-oriented production will ultimately lift all boats.
But recent political developments around the world suggest that in many countries most citizens lack confidence in this. And ever since
the financial crisis, political leaders have been voicing similar skepticism, calling repeatedly in G20 communiques and UN declarations for
new and more deliberate efforts to make economic growth more socially inclusive.
Despite this new consensus that broad socioeconomic progress should be prioritized much more strongly in economic policy, GDP growth
statistics continue to be the primary way national economic performance is tracked by governments and reported in the media. Since
what gets measured tends to get managed, the primacy of GDP statistics tends to reinforce the imbalance of attention and resources
applied to macroeconomic and financial stability policies, which influence the overall level of economic activity, relative to the strength
and equity of institutions and policy incentives in such structural policy areas as skills development, labour markets, competition,
investor and corporate governance, social protection, infrastructure and basic services, which play an important role in shaping
the pattern of economic activity and particularly the breadth of social participation in the process and benefits of growth.
This is surely part of the reason the consensus on inclusive growth has yet to progress from collective aspiration to concerted action –
into a change in the standard model that underpins the mindset of most economic policymakers and the priorities they set.
This week at the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting in Davos, the Forum’s Shaping the Future of Economic Progress Initiative is
publishing such a broader measure of national economic performance, the Inclusive Development Index (IDI). The IDI is based on the
notion that most citizens evaluate their countries' economic progress not by the amount of goods and services produced in their
economy (GDP) but by their household's standard of living — a multidimensional phenomenon that encompasses income, employment
opportunity, economic security and quality of life.
MODULE 5
Hickel’s De-development
GDP growth is best understood as a top-line measure of national economic performance— it is a means (albeit a crucially important one)
to the bottom-line societal measure of success: broad-based progress in living standards. Accordingly, policymakers and citizens alike
would benefit from having an alternative, or at least complementary, bottom-line metric that measures the level and rate of
improvement in shared socioeconomic progress.
The IDI provides this bottom-line report card for 103 countries. It is based on a wider dashboard of 12 indicators in three areas: growth
and development; inclusion; and intergenerational equity and sustainability.
The Index’s comparative data provide striking evidence that relatively strong GDP growth cannot in and of itself be relied upon to
generate inclusive socioeconomic progress and a rising median standard of living. GDP per capita growth is rather weakly correlated with
performance on three-quarters of IDI indicators, including those pertaining to employment, income inequality, wealth inequality, median
household income, public indebtedness and carbon intensity.
This finding is even clearer when IDI trends over the past five years are considered. All but three advanced countries have seen GDP
expand over this period, but only 10 of 29 have registered clear progress on the IDI’s Inclusion pillar. A majority, 16 of 29, have seen
Inclusion deteriorate, and the remaining three have remained stable. This pattern is repeated in the relationship between performance
on GDP growth and the Index’s Intergenerational Equity and Sustainability pillar, and it holds even for the group of countries with the
strongest growth performance.
Developing country data show a similar disconnect between GDP growth and Inclusion. Of the 30 countries in the top two quintiles of
GDP growth performance during the past five years, only 6 have scored similarly well on a majority of the Inclusion indicators, while 13
have been no better than mediocre and 11 have registered outright poor performances.
MODULE 5
Hickel’s De-development
GDP growth is a necessary but not sufficient condition for achievement of the broad-based progress in living standards on
which citizens ultimately judge their countries’ economic success. This message is important to bear in mind at a time
when global economic growth is finally rebounding to a more robust level. Political and business leaders should not expect
higher growth to be a panacea for the social frustrations that have roiled the politics of many countries in recent years.
Rather, a new growth model is needed that places people and living standards at the centre of national economic policy
and international economic integration. In fact, many countries have significant unexploited potential to simultaneously
increase economic growth and social inclusion. But activating the virtuous circle of inclusive growth more fully will require
them to:
• Reimagine structural economic reform as an effort to strengthen the ecosystem of institutions and structural policies in
an economy that play an important role in driving both broad-based progress in living standards and higher growth;
and
• Adopt a broader metric of national economic success that corresponds better to and incentivizes policymaker
performance against society’s bottom-line measure of economic progress: broad and sustained improvement in living
standards.
The implicit income distribution system within many countries is in fact severely underperforming or relatively
underdeveloped, but this is due to a lack of attention to and investment in key areas of policy rather than an iron law of
capitalism. Inequality is largely an endogenous rather than exogenous challenge for policymakers and needs to be
recognized, prioritized and measured as such in order to sustain public confidence in the capacity of technological
progress and international economic integration to support rising living standards for all.
MODULE 5
Key Points:
https://www.theweek.in/columns/sadhguru/a-good-planet-a-good-life.html
• The good life is a term for the life that one would like
to live, or for happiness
https://www.google.com/search?q=good+life++images&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi7wLim6O_pAhUMbJQKHbSx
C98Q2-cCegQIABAA&oq=good+life++images&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzICCAAyAg
“if… we take the characteristic activity of a human
being to be a certain kind of life; and if we take this
kind of life to be activity of the soul and actions in
accordance with reason… and a characteristic activity
to be accomplished well when it is accomplished in
accordance with the appropriate virtue; then if this is
so, human good turns out to be activity of the soul in
accordance with virtue.”
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics
(http://www.mcat.com/blog/aristotles-secret-happiness/)
https://www.google.com/search?q=aristotle+Nicomachean+ethics+images&tbm=isch&ved=2
ahUKEwikz6ab6-_pAhWTA6YKHfJCBLgQ2-
cCegQIABAA&oq=aristotle+Nicomachean+ethics+images&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQA1CyohBY7cQQY
PzH
• According to Aristotle, happiness is the ultimate
end of human action (McNamara, D., et. al., 2018)
https://www.google.com/search?q=happiness+images&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwizgvmd7O_pAhVG1ZQKHedDDpkQ2-
cCegQIABAA&oq=happiness+images&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADI
Happiness/Well-Being
Eudaimonia Hedonia
Eudaimonia Hedonia
google.com/search?q=+world+happiness+day+2019++images&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjgl9GQ_O_p
AhXrGKYKHaNeAsUQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=+world+happiness+day+2019++images&gs_lcp=CgNpb
Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser (2018) -
"Happiness and Life Satisfaction". Published
online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved
from: 'https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-
and-life-satisfaction' [Online Resource]
https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction
Ortiz-Ospina & Roser (2018)
https://www.google.com/search?q=self+reported+world+happiness+day+2019++images&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjyhoqV8u_pAhVqwIsBHZ
VMBwcQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=self+report
Key variable used to explain happiness
differences among countries and through
time
• Income
• Healthy life expectancy
• Social support https://www.google.com/search?q=income+pic&hl=en-
• Life events
• Freedom
• Trust (absence of corruption in business
and government)
Do you agree?
Can you add to the
list?
Pathway to happiness from positive
psychology view: (Peterson, et.al.)
1. pleasure
2. engagement
3. meaning