I have recently come across a story featured on The Nature
of Things about an exciting new technological development called
Nanotechnology, also named the Nano Revolution. It is difficult to define and
after searching the web for more information I am still a little hazy but it is
basically a technology that has been developed to control and produce matter at
a scale of one to one-hundred-billionths of a meter. With this new ability
scientists are able to create revolutionary material, automate routine lab tests,
and some believe that this new technology will be the answer to our
environmental problems.
I found this very intriguing so I dove a bit deeper into the
subject.
What I found was the overwhelming agreement amongst
scientists that this Nanotechnology is going to enhance technology in the same
way that electricity did. In other words, this new phenomena will develop into the
third Industrial Revolution!
You might think, so what? How does this concern our class?
Well my feminist friends if we look back at the last
Industrial Revolution we will note that with each revolution came a forever
change in social and economic norms. Furthermore, professionals on this topic
are convinced that there will be no aspect of our daily lives that will not be
touched by nanotechnology. As a result there has been tons of research on how
nanotechnology will affect the economy and the environment. Specifically, I
looked at one article written by Steven E. Holley that discussed these specific
risks. However, I found little about how this revolution will affect us
socially.
I couldn’t stop asking myself -How is this going to affect
the lives of marginalized groups?
Or
Who is designing this technology and who are they designing
it for? Who will be the primary beneficiary of this revolution?
If we look at this issue through the theories of Nancy Baym
we will see how this could develop into technological determinism. Baym states
that “technologies change history by transferring ‘their essential qualities’
to their users, imprinting themselves on users’ individual and collective
psyches”, this could be an explanation of what nanotechnology will eventually
do to us. Thus, it is important to discuss who is creating this technologies
characteristics and how is it going to eventually shape our society.
Also, Baym writes “direct effects of technology may be
strongest when a technology is new because people do not yet understand it.”
This is an important concept to consider because what Holley noted in his
survey was that the majority of the American public do not understand nanotech
but they are optimistic about its abilities. Therefore, our unknowing society
today is at a perfect point for nanotechnology to ‘imprint’ us before we even
realize it.
Furthermore, there have been projects working towards
introducing this technology into the school system from K-12 grades. This way
they can develop skills early on to further the advancement (Yet another reason
why gender studies should be introduced to children at a young age).
My conclusion is that we need to get in on the development
of this new technology. If nanotechnology is going to shape our future then
feminists need to start demanding inclusions. Right now we are living in a
society that has already been developed and we are constantly trying to unlearn
and deconstruct aspects of it. Imagine though, what if we were part of the
design process for this new world?
How could this revolution effect social norms?
Would it improve the lives of the oppressed?
Or would it only further the digital divide?
Hmmm…
socialmediawithjill 
Hi Jill,
I liked your blog post. Your topic of nanotechnology is very interesting. I briefly did some of my own research to further my understanding about this new revolutionary technological advancement. I didn’t come across anything about nanotechnology impacting environmental problems; however I did find some information on this technology improving cancer treatments and possibly curing some cancers. The video below is a short video about how nanotechnology can be used in diagnosing and treating cancer patients and how this new invention will dramatically improve the care of cancer patients in the future.
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jqQxuVncmc]
After reading your blog, watching this video and completing some research, I agree with you that society views nanotechnology within a technological determinist mindset. This new technology is still developing and being tested. As a result, there is a slight uncertainty of how it will truly impact people. In agreement with what you mentioned earlier, most scientists and engineers are very optimistic about the effects nanotechnology will have on our society. The way I interpret the discussion about nanotechnology is scientists think once humans produce this technology the impact it will have on humans will be out of human control. This type of understanding is coming from a technological determinist viewpoint.
In regards to your question about how nanotechnology will impact social norms, I feel this is a difficult question to answer. I think if this new technology can improve cancer diagnosis and treatment that more individuals will survive from cancer. As a result, the number of deaths per year may decrease and the average life expectancy will increase.
My hypotheses above are discussing the possible effects it will have in developed countries not in developing countries. As usual technological advancements first impact developed countries that produce this new technology and as it becomes more domesticated in the developed country it will slowly impact developing countries. Why? There a number of reasons for this unjust reality. One of the reasons is that often these technologies have a copyright attached. Thus, people in developing countries cannot produce a duplicate version of their own; they must purchase this expensive technology from the developed country. In the beginning, the new technology is too expensive for the developing countries to buy; however, as time passes this technology becomes more affordable and it slowly is introduced into developing countries. For instance, in the past several decades electricity has been domesticated in developed countries, where as many places in developing countries don’t have electricity because they cannot afford the infrastructure to carry this technology.
In regards to your other questions, I don’t believe nanotechnology will improve the lives of the oppressed because individuals from developed countries will benefit from this new technology and individuals from developing countries will not be able to afford this technology. In addition, developed countries that don’t have government paid healthcare programs, will have the wealthy individuals benefiting from nanotechnology in healthcare treatments and low-income level families will be oppressed and not benefit from this improved treatment. Individuals from low-income families will not be able to afford this better healthcare practice. Thus, nanotechnology will ultimately further the digital divide on a national and global scale because individuals and communities who cannot afford this new technology will be left in the dark and the wealthy individuals and communities will just continue to advance.
Let me know what you think of my answers to your questions 🙂
Rebecca