Editorial

Population, well-being and
technology

José Marcos Pinto da Cunha
IFCH/NEPO/UNICAMP

This issue of the MultiScience Journal deals with a highly relevant theme for the comprehension of our society, whether past or present. The discussion involving population, technology and well-being can contemplate an enormous gamut of analytical dimensions. It can also generate a non-consensual discussion regarding the effects of technological advances and demographic tendencies, not only on the population’s living conditions but also on aspects relative to norms, to relations and to social conflicts.

Although more evident and rapid from the 20th century on, technological advancement is not exclusive to our more recent history. Over the years, it is possible to identify moments in which this dimension was decisive for structural changes in the societies. Without regressing far, we can recall the repercussion that the invention of the steam engine had on the productive system, territorial mobility and, obviously, on social relations, in particular on the relationship between capital and work. Focusing on another field closely related to demographic tendencies, further along in the 20th century, the technological advances in the field of health were not less important, with decisive repercussions on the so-called “demographic and epidemiological transition”.

The five texts presented in this edition of MultiScience, in distinct manners – and many times complementary – cover important aspects of reflection that are necessary when one seeks to relate the population’s living conditions and the functioning of society with the technological advances.

As Decol indicates, if, on the one hand, “the advance of instrumental rationalization (...) implies in the generalization of technical rationality as a cultural form (...) with the consequent increase of efficiency, on the other hand, “(...) it reduces the qualitative wealth of the traditional social world and exposes social reality to the manipulation of the technique (...)”.

In this way, according to the same author, technological innovations, little by little, are disseminated throughout society until they eventually become socially institutionalized, their non-use being considered as something irrational.

In reality, one could think that this manner of considering this phenomenon begins with the principal that these techniques are always conceived for and directed to the improvement of living conditions or, in a more ample manner, to the human development of society. However, we have an infinity of examples in which the scientific and technological advances do not have the human being as their priority and are not destined to attend human necessities.

The enormous inequalities, misery and hunger existing in the world - not only the incredible advances in technological areas – Engineering, Medicine, Computer Science – but also and principally in the field of agricultural production, with the progressive increase in productivity and the continual advance over land that in the past was inadequate for cultivation.

As Alves demonstrates, in the controversy generated by Malthus at the end of the 18th century by his theory on the impossibility of the means of subsistence to accompany demographic growth – substituted today by a “modern” version that relates demographic growth and poverty – the question of technology emerges as an important element in the debate, as well as the preoccupation with the population’s well-being. In the first case, the author shows that there are divergent visions regarding its impact, while, in the second case, it is also evident that, since the beginning of the academic discussions, the form in which the relation among population size of the development and well-being was perceived was not consensual either.

Another interesting approach to the theme of this Journal is developed in the work of Diniz. With great clarity, the article reflects the impacts that technology can have, not only on the life of people but, above all, on the social organization. While discussing the current situation of legislative debate concerning reproductive technologies, the author emphasizes the unobvious affects of this process on women, families and family relations, aside from the institutional conflicts and resistance, especially those that encompass the moral dimension.

In a completely distinct historic and social context, and dealing with a theme that relates in no way to the previous article, Dwyer offers us an equally productive reflection on the impact of a technological change, apparently simple today, on the productive process in the English coal mines and, consequently, on the social relations, especially with regard to capital and work. Based on the invention of the Davy lamp, the author discusses, in an objective manner, the implications of this advance in the area of Safety Engineering.

From another perspective, Decol’s article, mentioned above, also makes considerations on the impacts of technology in the cities, especially large urban agglomerations. The author alerts readers on the consequences that technological development and the standard of consumption – not always sustainable – can have on cities – and suggests the need for “new strategies of survival and a new model of development”. However, he does not deny the necessity of an advance of this nature that, according to him, exercises an important role in the improvement of working conditions, transportation, medical care, etc.

Although Fagnani’s text does not deal specifically with the technological question, it discusses the conditionants of one of the great social bottlenecks existing in Brazil: the policy for the production of popular housing. As a central element for the understanding the production of urban space and citizenship, the housing problem, together with access to the work market, has been one of the important sources of inequality, sociospatial segregation and deterioration of living conditions of the resident population, especially in large cities. In his quite critical analysis, between 1964 and 2002 Fagnani identifies four distinct periods in terms of habitational policies, always seeing in them, however, a common characteristic: “the regressive and excludent character” of the sources of financing to face the question of popular housing, whose priority has been undermined by what the author calls “macroeconomic strategy”.

In this sense, Decol makes the following affirmations: “(...) to live in the city in the current technological conditions requires an investment in infrastructure and construction; the more complex the cities, the greater the investment (...)” and that “(...) it is therefore impossible to separate the habitational question from a more ample context that involves political, ideological, economic, urban planning, public administration plans, etc. (...)”. Such reasoning leads us to imagine how such enormous negligence of a dimension so fundamental impacted the quality of life and well-being of the Brazilian population, despite the advances and lower prices of constructive technical materials.

Obviously the works that are brought together here are not capable of covering the multifaceted and complex questions that surround the theme of “Population, Technology and Well-Being”. Important dimensions such as transportation, the development of areas of Food Safety, Medicine, etc. could also be present in this space.

However, the texts permit a group of reflections that will bead us to process a bit better the sense of something that has already become a part of our day-by-day life – technological innovation – and that, exactly for this reason, does not always lead us to reflect on their significance and implications, particularly with regard to that which everyone should pursue: most equality and, consequently, a better quality of life for all of the population.

up