Han and Roman Attitudes Toward Technology Essay

applied science is an important fit in every civilizations, and depending on the particular of entrance looked at the sights vary greatly. Especially when comparing minds of get class and upper class slew, or gender. During the early first centuries of the Han Dynasty and roman letters empire there were a lot of combine feelings toward applied science. Depending on whose whimsey you heard the set would vary between negative and affirmatory candidates. Most popular faiths codmed to turn over been found glum of the following categories, practicality, citizens use, and truelove.Opinions alter depending on the major byplay of the pass of stead and the class they be presbyopiced to. When opinions were weighed on practicality their major apprehension was the efficiency of the engine room and if it was easy to use. wholeness Han organisation gloweringicial wrote to local officials in the early imprimatur century (B. C. E) concerning oversupply prevention ( doc. 1). His opinion was strong meliorate because organism of an upper class and being a politics official meant he was well ameliorate, and in like manner his opinion was of a situation he witnessed and he had trial impression to support his thoughts.His opinion was unbiased and sure because his concerns were non for himself only if for all the throng of the civilization. This is proven when he body politics more shaping is needed in order to hobble on top of issues that affect every ace of the dynasty. He felt applied science was advanced teeming to prevent flooding more expeditiously but there needed to be a greater effort into establishing a greater number of water preservation offices in each district. general he did not believe that engineering was wanting but the organization of the use of engineering was.Huan Tan, an upper-class philosopher in about(predicate) 20 C.E also had an opinion unhurriedness on practicality (doc. 3). Being a philosopher you ses s assume he was well enlightened and so his opinion is educated. Huans point of view was based on practicality because he had a despotic opinion on technology due to the efficiency and usefulness of tools and the fast progression of it. He proves the technology is efficient by stating facts like that the stamp and the mortar were modified and were make sure-footed of allowing the weight of the whole body to be use. Since Huan included these sorts of facts it shows hes well educated in the battlefield of technology. general Huan Tan had a very affirmatory outlook on technology, feeling that it evolved at a steady pace. The ancestry history of the Early Han Dynasty was a brass sponsored artificial lake that comes from the period of about 200 C. E. (doc. 4). This opinion is clearly biased and untrustworthy because its government sponsored and therefore was written to support the government and demand it look successful. This is proven when the regulator of Nanyang, Tu Shui is made to look good by the secernatement that he improved technology because he loved his volume so much he wanted to make life easy as potential for them.Although this point of view is untrustworthy it is alleviate weighed on practicality due to the supposed concern of the efficiency and having technology be near without having to do much thrash. The last opinion formed by practicality was one of a Seneca upper classman philosopher and adviser to Emperor Nero (doc. 7). This point of view again is someone of a higher class with more silver and therefore does not rely on technology as much as someone of a lower class. His opinion of technology was negative he believed tools were invented by unintelligent men.His opinion was based off of practicality and was proven by his statement that new-fangled inventions were not only inefficient but also were useless. He felt inventors no longer, no matter how intelligent, did not telephone outside the box and only tackled around the b end issues that were not of large concern. Overall he felt greater issues needed to be taken on by people of both intelligence and creativity. Other opinions seemed to hire approximately concern with citizens use. When deliberation on this, the point of view was most affected by the knowledge of who used the technology or the convenience of the adit to the technology.A government official by the name if Huan Guan has a negative outlook on technology based off of citizens use (doc. 2). This perspective is from an educated upper class man who therefore does not do much manual of arms stab. Foundry mould and salt simmering were at one succession allowed to be done by workers as long as they followed two conditions, they has to report they were doing so and they had to pay a tax. During the earlier time the tools that were used to do these jobs were made by families and were efficient and well-made.Later on the state forced citizens to only use the weight-lift tools manufacture d by them, which were nonfunctional. This is known as convict labor, and in doing so they also monopolized the salt and iron trades. This issue infuriated Huan Guan because this caused the salt and iron prices to rise and made it so lower class citizens could not afford to buy either. Huan felt technology was being weakened by the government and that making it more difficult for families to bear upon their businesses was not right.An otherwise opinion based off of citizens use was one of a Cicero upper-class roman letters policy-making leader of the first century (B. C. E. ). This opinion comes from an upper class man who does not do any handy-work and therefore cannot state and accurate opinion on technology. He believed there was a fine specify between the difference of a human being and a man. He felt certain jobs were degrading to men, such as manual labor or handy work. He states, Vulgar and unbecoming to a gentleman atomic number 18 all the jobs chartered workers take o n (doc. 5).He feels the work they do is paid by the labor they do and not the skill of their work. In conclusion he doesnt see any importance in the area of technology, also he doesnt ineluctably have a negative nor positive opinion he just doesnt value it, h cares more about his status. The last source weighed on citizens use is one from Frontinus, a Roman general, governor of Britain and water commissioner for the city of capital of Italy (doc. 8). His opinion is biased because he is governor of Britain and therefore feels his civilization is the most advanced and has the greatest technology because he is in charge of it.This is shown when he says that Roman technology exceeds any other including both the Egyptians and the Greeks. Frontinus feels that the works of those two civilizations are useless, he states, Compare such numerous and indispensible structures carrying so much water with the informal pyramids, or the useless but famous works of the Greeks. He feels only Roma n technology has both the beauty aspect while still being efficient. He feels his technology is so successful because the aqueducts were so successful they made it possible for people of any class to have an teemingness of water, which proves his opinion was based on citizens use.Lastly, some opinions were made by the beauty of technology. Very simply this is when the point of view is confirmed by the appearance alternatively than the efficiency or usefulness of the technology. Plutarch, a Greek-born Roman citizen and high official of the second century describes Gaius Gracchus a Roman political leader of the first centurys opinion on technology (doc. 6). This source is unreliable because it is not a special source and therefore is not as reliable because the opinion could have been middling altered by misinterpretation or on purpose.The major concern fit to this source, of Gaius Gracchus was the appearance of everything and not the usefulness of it he wanted everything to be pl easing to the eye. all(prenominal) roads were straight both sides of tie had to be equal and parallel superlative degree with the result that the road for its entire line of reasoning had a level and beautiful appearance. (doc. 6). Overall the appearance was the greatest factor when it came to Gaius Gracchus. over again just as all the other documents the point of view belonged to an upper-class male, we have no opinions from a woman or someone of a lower class. step to the fore of all the documents the point of view missing in order to truly trace the overall attitudes towards Han and Roman technology is the opinion of a lower class soulfulness such as a peasant. solely the documents come from the perspective of an upper-class male. so the ultimate attitude toward the technology of Han and capital of Italy cannot be determined. Each documents perspective varied depending on how they made their opinion, whether it was weighted on practicality, citizens use, or beauty.