issue88 新手习作，求拍砖

czj521UID: 2869962

issue88 88"Technologies not only influence but actually determine social customs and ethics."

I agree insofar with the author's statement. As far as I am concerned, while technologies have played key roles in transforming society customs and ethics, they cannot determine them. In fact, the impact of technologies is limited to some certain respects of social ethics and customs.

Admittedly, technologies, which are defined as the application of knowledge and science, have influenced enormously on our lives, and also our morals and ethics. Reviewing the history, we can find many telling instances. Just before the first Industrial Revolution, women in Britain and some other European countries were not allowed to work outside apart from some comparatively enlightened places. Thanks to the development of technology which was attributed to the first Industrial Revolution, the physical weakness of women was decreased and the social awareness of the advantages of women workers like carefulness and patience was raised. And in this way, traditional industrial proportion of females and males was altered. It is the technology that changed the conventional social idea that women should stay at home to do the housework. Similarly, the second technology revolution contributed to a boom in economy and the burgeoning of awareness of the importance of knowledge. The third wave , came at the 80s of the twentieth century has provided us alternatives to the traditional methods of social communication, bringing to us a novel living and living style, merging us in a pattern of fresh ideas and thoughts. Conclusively, technology can lead to some significant changes in our society.

Nevertheless, when it comes to social disciplines in the moral aspects, technologies could hardly to impact, no to mention determine the way people think. It is our human beings instead that create and determine social customs and values which are difficult to alter. Illustrate the technology of clone as an example. After several successful incidences of cloning animals such as sheep and cows, the credibility of this technology has been proved and accepted widely by most people, including those opponents in the scientific community. These opponents argue against it because it challenges the morality in conventional social disciplines. They believe this technology will cause ethical problems and results in unpredicted consequences if it is applied to human beings. As a result, cloning people is proscribed globally. In this aspect, it is as clear as daylight that the development of technologies is determined by the social criteria rather than the reverse relationship.

Moreover, no matter how advanced the technologies have developed, they won't have the ability to determine people's religious beliefs. As we all know, many great scientists such as Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein who made the major contribution to the advancement of technologies still believed the god. They were the creators of many vital technologies, but their religious beliefs were not altered by them. Then, we can imagine how hard it is for technologies to shift other ordinary people’s religious beliefs. And we can see from our everyday lives. Numerous Christians still go to churches every week even after technologies have demonstrated that there is no god many years ago. This phenomenon, however, is easy to be understood. Simply put, people's religious beliefs have been ingrained in mind in generations. They are established with experiences and determined by imperceptible and mental factors. Hence, technologies could hardly have any effect on them.  

In sum, despite the fact that some social customs and ethics have shifted a lot by the advancement of technologies, there are some respects of them have been affected or determined little, if any, by technologies.

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

Numerous Christians still go to churches every week even after technologies have demonstrated that there is no god many years ago.

Really? Like how?

I guess this assay is much better in terms of logic and depth of discussion. But I think the religion part  need carefully reviewed, religion is sensitive topic, but you talk it arrogantly,people who are religious may feel insulted by your words.