Week 1

My first TWC class started with Prof Shahi showing us a video "Guns, Germs, and Steel", narrating how a Mr Jared Diamond was in Papua New Guinea, feeding his passion for bird-sighting. It was there that Diamond was immersed into a culture with lots of history, backdating to at least 40,000 years ago, much longer than people living in the continents of North & South America. But what dumbfounded Diamond wasn't how the New Guineans so efficiently eyed and caught their game, it was when a native, Yali, posed a question that at first seemed simple to Diamond, but did not have a simple answer.

"Why you White Men have SO MUCH cargo, and we New Guineans have so LITTLE?"

Cargo is a term for material goods first brought to their country by the Westerners, and was regarded by many as evidence of a white man's power. The Westerners would argue that power was determined by race, seeing themselves as superior to the New Guineans, hence being "natural" that they'd own more cargo. But is this really true? That certain civilisations deserve to be less developed cause of the colour of their skin?

Diamond disagreed, and so do i.

The New Guineans are amongst the most culturally diverse and adaptable people in the world, and could easily knock up a shelter in the hardest of environments within a few hours. So why then are they so much less developed than modern day America?

I believe it is due to the factor of accessibility. Or rather, the lack of it for the New Guineans.

It was stated in the video that "All great civilisations have something in common- advanced technology, large populations, and a well-organised workforce". Papua New Guinea sure has a large population, but not one that is trained and skilled to ensure survival in the modern world. Technology has also not found its way to the forests of New Guinea, hence depriving its citizens of the wide world of the Internet, and many other advancements and advantages that technology can bring. Without sufficient resources, no amount of adaptability, intelligence and innovation in them would allow Papua New Guinea to shift to become more technologically advanced. Some people just march faster in the walk of history.

Something interesting that caught my attention was the image that Prof Shahi had in one of his slides, titled The Future of the Human Race?

Much discussion went on about this. Some stating that it is a result of technology that has made life so much more convenient for us, citing examples like being glued to the television or the computer screen playing video games, or simply picking up the phone to dial for our favourite (and very unhealthy) fast-food and pizzas. However, in my opinion, it is really up to the individual. There shouldn't be a direct blame on technology, it is at most a factor that one can choose to make beneficial or detrimental.

Technology has served us humans in ways that have truly made life easier. Some examples would include public transportation instead of getting around by foot, or simply going on Skype to look at loved ones halfway across the world. Relating back to the photo above, technology is not a direct cause of increasing obesity, as treadmills and weighing machines are also part of modern technology that can help us to keep in shape, if only we are willing.

My Key Takeaway for the lesson would be that technology is neutral, and it is up to us on how we choose to use it. This relates to the quote that Prof Shahi wrote on the board- Technology is Easy. People are Hard. This summarizes how technology can be used to spark off new technology. This is when a new idea is being worked on after seeing how a previous idea has helped civilisation, hoping that this new idea would similarly be of benefit as well. On the other hand, people are not as easily-convinced. People tend to stick with what they're familiar with, like a product that they have full knowledge about, and only few would venture into the arena of new products, trying and testing new technologies that have much to offer to us, if only we are willing.

Something I would like for further discussion would be whether we are contented with how Technology has taken away Tradition. One example would be how e-mails have taken the place of snail mail, and have also taken away the sincerity of a letter along with it.

I would rate the session 7 out of a full 10, as I found it informative and thought-provoking.