The speech started with the concept of importance of science and technological fix and scientific approach which in turn leads to technological advancements . Angela Saini proceeded on explaining Manhattan project and a brief history on the scientist responsible for the project Alvin Weinberg which as well as the responsibility of that project had a much greater duty of unveiling the importance of science and technology for the general public of his times ( 50’s ) which until that time had a very ambiguous understanding of science . Weinberg introduced the concept of ” Technological Fix ” which raised the awareness about science and its importance and how useful and in touch it can be for everyday life . He started his work with the basic unit of societies which are the households that in large are the building blocks of every society . When the households started realizing the importance of science that meant the building blocks are aware and that leads to a society united on one issue which was the concept that Weinberg unveiled . Today we all know how close technology is to us and in some instances it might be even more familiar and have more information of our behaviors than people who are biologically related to us or share the environment for a long time .
Later in the presentation some potentially heroic act of technology were discussed . Although some are in the experimental stage but still their importance is not to be underlined . Genetically Engineered Food and Nuclear Fusion can be two prime examples as were mentioned in the presentation. Although they are not strictly at research level nowadays and we have seen some of its aspects even in our 21st century life but we will certainly hear more and more about it in very near future and every day every step that science takes will determine our livelihood for the millions of years that our species have in front of them . I take this opportunity to wish good luck and safe journey for my genes .
Matthew Taylor gave an impressive and engaging speech in our lecture series discussing the gap between what we want and how we live. Taylor suggests the reason we can’t any social structural related problem is because we find different.
solution to a whole different problem. In order to solve the problem first we have to understand how our social structure works which has 3 separate elements of administration. According to Taylor’s findings we function with the instinct of survival which
can interpret as individualism, instinct for collaboration as solidarity and the instinct to lead and follow as hierarchy. Mankind saw some great days when these needs met perfectly but in modern society we lost the sense in control which made us lose faith
in hierarchy, the reason we don’t trust authority anymore. We also lost the trust in people which led us to lose our sense of community and we became more independent persona which means we don’t share or create identities anymore to give us our sense of solidarity
back. Moreover we grew as individuals and it led us to lead a materialist individualistic, greedy life. The only way to survive in 21st century if we can develop our empathy and eradicate the hole in the society. To resolve the conflict we need to release
our creativity and to think about thinking possibility of breaking off.
Anna Minton talked about security and privacy in the cities as the cause of fear. She said people want more security because the more security we have the more security we need. Even though the crime is going down progressively since 1995 the level of fear remains. Police calls this paradox ‘the success gap’. The main problem here is not the crime itself but the fear of crime. It undermines the unconscious interaction between people, dilutes trust and removes personal and collective responsibility.
The level of feeling or thinking about danger is even increased by the security. It is seemed that people who live in London, a city where the CCTV cameras are set up everywhere are less happy than those whom locate in cities that CCTV is not admitted thus there are not seen in streets.
It is claimed that either the chance of crimes to be committed or people to be safer or at least feel safer is not raised by CCTV cameras. The CCTVs footage is not watched by policemen constantly and this is only the case when the crime has been already done. This is going to end with several questions in mind ‘what this observation is really for and who is observing our behaviour?’ Moreover, this would affect the level of privacy and also diminish anonymity. In addition, it is considered even as a worst scenario because we feel that we are observed as potential criminals.
It was so interesting before he go any further he start by telling how to stick to the brief and he told us the importance of the brief to get pay which is important.
Main thing he was trying to say was to expand our general knowledge to different subjects like politic economy science … , because the employer doesn’t want just my design also inform opinion point of view which is based on my knowledge and reading. And the main point which I took away from this was the fact that we should be participating in designing the future, With new technology come new platforms and new ways, in which we will have to adapt at an even faster pace than before.
He is concerned about running out of engineering resources and vision. He doesn’t think we should worry about running out of our natural resources – we have always been running out. He said: “don’t ignore the environmentalism fight it”
The second lecture was amazing and I was so curries about it, I’ve learned lots of details about British and world economies which is so useful. The only thing was he tried a lot to give lots of praises to Britain as he learned in BBC. But at the end in a really small detail he mention that Britain is shooting his foot and its falling down
I really liked the way he explained economical revelation he was dominated to the subject and he was using fact to describe the subject which was interesting.
Also In the lecture a question came to my mind and it’s this: Which countries are better to invest in? The developed ones which is safer or the third world countries which is developing and there is more profit in it?
This lecture was interesting for me because the way she was looking at the world was different then I and you could see she is anti-capitalism from her subconscious, I really liked it when she was contradiction about how politician using lie and apologies to go forward on their way, but it is what politic is , it’s not something based on trust and truth, apology is kind of diplomacy and its good if its in the right time. And also same for the advertising it is kind of art how to play with people minds and how to attract them to buy stuff and it’s kind of success in a way I do agree with her ideas of fake authenticity and camera obscure for example the video she showed to us when queen travel with public transfer to say she is same as ordinary people and there is also camera man recording the whole journey.