The Importance Of Technology In Society

If you read a dystopia, whichever one, you will realize that the population it portrays follows the order of the government and doesn’t thing beyond those boundaries in fear of the consequences. Without technology and science, a society cannot flourish and will remain frozen in time. Technology is a fundamental factor in the growth of a nation and society. Dystopian literature generally provides the reader with a negative image of technology. It describes a life in which technology does not exist and is not necessary to sustain the society it portrays.

A doctor may have to operate even in the absence of consent, to save the life of the patient. It is possible that even with such an intervention, the patient may not survive. Assuming that the doctor is competent and has exercised due care and diligence, the doctor cannot be held responsible for a patient's death, as the doctor has acted in good faith and in the best interest of the patient. Maintaining a good Doctor patient relationship often works better than the best informed consent! The informed consent issue as discussed is very much driven not by the medical procedure or research being done or what could arise from it.

This is because it gives the government the power to raise and keep an army during peacetime. I’m concerned because if the people do potentially become a threat due to the the Constitution, by rebelling, the government could use the army to suppress the people. The Constitution give the government the power to tax citizens. The national government’s laws are superior to the laws made by the states due to the supremacy clause, and it will only be a matter of time until the state governments are destroyed. The proper and necessary clause in the Constitution is too general, and is dangerous due to the fact that it doesn't list all the powers of government in order to put clear limits on them.

The democratic government in the past and until recently has been missing this key point and offer a simple minded, ineffective solution to a problem that is much bigger than just the use of guns. In America, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution says that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be broken. This poses a problem for the American democratic government as well because banning guns would conflict with the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. This another a clear example of how flawed their ideology is and America should instead concentrate on the bigger picture of terrorism and restricting access to

Introduction Technology and war are closely related as it shapes the strategies adopted by nations and also influence the outcome of the war . Technological advancements are also driven by war due to the perceived needs to stay ahead and stay relevant in the new era so as to provide a technological edge against potential adversaries2. Although technology employed during war does provide an advantage against potential adversaries, however, it does not always result in a decisive advantage or victory in war. As demonstrated during the Vietnam War in the 1960s, the US who are armed with far superior technology advantages over the Viet Cong (VC) forces had failed to capitalise on it to win a decisive war. As a result, the US fought a long and costly

59) As Michel Foucault says, “Freedom of conscience entails more dangers than authority and despotism.” Besides enforcing censorship through incineration, the government also enacted ways of preventing an ability to desire further knowledge. After all, a naïveté enough group of people don’t warrant much physical power when being used for their ignorance.

At a first glance, employment might not seem as controversial as topics such as abortion or gun control; however, when given the variable of criminal history, much discourse is created. There is a plethora of employers that are convinced if an applicant has any criminal record, they are automatically unfit for the work force. While conversely, there is a margin of employers who disregard criminal history and choose not to conduct background checks on the applicants. With the rise of technology, privacy of any person’s criminal background is easily bypassed due to the increase of background screening businesses. Angela Preston in her article, Ban the Box Has Turned Into a Big Employer Problem, maintains the belief that “no two versions of

Hitler’s descriptions and ideas could potentially cause some other(s) hatred/discriminating groups to basically recreate the holocaust but instead of the Jews, with the people of their choice. The Holocaust was a very dark time and it shouldn’t have ever happened but it did and we have to do whatever we can to prevent it from happening again. If the Holocaust were to reoccur it could be much worse than it was because nowadays we have more advanced technology and weaponry. Even though MeinKampf would tell many people a lot about the history of the Holocaust and it tells the story from the perspective of the leader, it should still be banned. The Holocaust happened once and it doesn’t need to cause more chaos than it already has in the past.

A common argument in favor of bystanders’ inaction is that they would have been in greater danger and put more lives in jeopardy if they became rescuers. However, this is not a valid claim. Clearly, there is striking evidence that proves if a group strongly opposes legislation or perpetrators, then it would be harder to control the protesting group. In the reading, “From Bystanders to Resisters,” people who were originally bystanders created a strong group that opposed the Nazis. After the ordinary Germans citizens combined in a joint effort to “[consider] ways of fighting the Nazis and building a new Germany after the war,” they “placed a briefcase containing explosives under a massive table around which Hitler and his staff were scheduled to meet later that day” (“From Bystanders to Resisters” 374).

The stories have similar main characters and depict government control nicely. However, “Harrison Bergeron” shows more ways that the government could attempt to make society equal. Having a mental handicapper impedes their minds, which is extreme. Also, the sash weights that they are forced to wear are more crippling than the jobs that people in Anthem are forced to do. The conditions in Anthem are wrong and morally incorrect, but they do not meet the same level of unfairness that they do in “Harrison Bergeron”.