This is http://www.essayz.com/a9402221.htm Previous-Essay <== This-Essay ==> Following-Essay Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words. {Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.} ========================================================== %TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT WISDOM REFLEXIVE OBJECTIVE+940222 %PLATO ARISTOTLE SCHOLAR QUESTION DIALOGUE EMPHASIS+940222 %SCIENCE EXPERIMENT EXISTENTIAL THEOLOGY EXPERIENCE+940222 %DOMINATE SELF OTHER TRUE EXPERT COLLUDE GAME ROLE+940222 %EXCLUSIVE REVOLUTION LACK ABSENCE DILEMMA PROBLEM 940222 Plato and Aristotle led the way in the early development of scholarly questioning and dialogue; yet they placed inadequate emphasis upon objective experimentation and existentially being true to self and others about reflexive experiences. Within their paradigm of scholarly work there is a tendency for experts to dominate the dialogue which is not fully grounded in objective experimentation and in existentially being true to self and others about reflexive experiences. Within their paradigm it is relatively easy for experts to dominate in playing collusive games of mutual self deception---in the manner of addicts and their codependent supporters. Authority and reputations play more dominant roles than do experimentation and reflexive openness and honesty. The scientific revolution has constituted a correction to the inadequate emphasis upon objective experimentation within the paradigm of Plato and Aristotle; but in the correction there has been a tendency to over-correct and to place an exclusive emphasis upon objective experimentation, measurement, computation, manipulation, prediction, control, analysis, and quantitative considerations. The scientific revolution not only has not corrected for the lack of an adequate emphasis upon existentially being true to self and others about reflexive experiences; through exclusivity it has made it even harder for people to be existentially true to self and others about their reflexive experiences. Personal and communal integrity have not been emphasized or well served by science. Some scientists have come to recognize the need for technology assessment because they have recognized that exclusively technocratic preoccupations have lead to tragic consequences. Scientists who continue to operate within the traditional scientific paradigm look upon technology assessment from within the framework of that paradigm: with all its implicit ideals, values, attitudes, assumptions, convictions, technologies, traditions, and organizational structures. They find it difficult to recognize that the process of evaluating the consequences of an exclusive technology---cannot be wisely fulfilled while still dedicated to the exclusive paradigm which motivates and guides the technology. We need to find ways towards wiser technology assessment; seeking them within our integrative persons and communities. Evaluation is a reflexive process. There is no way in which exclusive objectivity can lead the way in a reflexive process such as the evaluation required in wise technology assessment; for evaluation has to do with values, ideals, reflection, and ultimate concerns. Thus scientists need to transcend their exclusively objective paradigm to wisely fulfill our needs for open and honest technology assessment. This is not a technical problem with a technical solution; it is a dilemma which has no technical solution. Our dilemma is that the scientific paradigm does not contain within it the key to its own transcendence--- because, like the paradigm of Plato and Aristotle, the scientific paradigm places an inadequate emphasis upon being existentially true to self and others about personal reflexive experiences in intimate relationships, spirituality and prayer. Scientists usually place an inadequate emphasis upon personal and communal integrity---as two connected aspects of one essential reality. (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================