Hmmm... in number one, I would change the last clause from economic to survival. Simpler societies do not have "economics" in quite the same way we do now. But I agree otherwise.
I am not sure about 2. I don't think consistency is shown in most world ethical systems. But I may not completely understand what you're saying here. In fact, I am certain I don't understand what you are saying here. Which includes #3 by extension.
#4 - I agree. New technology tends to first be antagonistic to existing ethical structures, as they serve as part of a society's stability. Eventually they must transform to include the new technology in their ethical system's regulations, or band together to cast out the new technology. But casting out the new technology never really sticks, especially if a neighboring tribe/nation whose ethical system does not preclude the use of such technology adopts the new technology and shows prosperity or wartime superiority as a result of using the new technology.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2003-11-05 08:25 am (UTC)I am not sure about 2. I don't think consistency is shown in most world ethical systems. But I may not completely understand what you're saying here. In fact, I am certain I don't understand what you are saying here. Which includes #3 by extension.
#4 - I agree. New technology tends to first be antagonistic to existing ethical structures, as they serve as part of a society's stability. Eventually they must transform to include the new technology in their ethical system's regulations, or band together to cast out the new technology. But casting out the new technology never really sticks, especially if a neighboring tribe/nation whose ethical system does not preclude the use of such technology adopts the new technology and shows prosperity or wartime superiority as a result of using the new technology.