Cultural Impact of Technology Transfer :: Exemplification Essays

Social Impact of Technology Transfer Mankind's history has exhibited that the progression of data is inescapable; societies over the world have been exchanging thoughts for a large number of years. Dick Teresi claims, nonetheless, that an innovation advances inside a culture and its specific requests and distractions, interweaved with that society’s specific environment.† (Teresi, 356) While this announcement remains constant for some developments, not all advances are immediate results of the way of life utilizing them. As human interchanges expanded, innovations were every now and again created in one culture and moved to another. The way of life that obtained advances from outside sources intermittently used them in manners initially not expected. Did these outside advancements have positive or negative consequences for the way of life that acknowledged them? The outcomes of embedded advances shift from case to case contingent upon various elements, including natural and way of life contrasts between the two networks. To feature the systems administration of these variables and gauge the impacts of moving advances, I will analyze two situations: the European’s presentation of weapons into Inuit culture and the bringing of ponies to the Native Americans by the Spaniards. The tale of European little arms starts with the gun. The gun, first utilized in the 1346 Battle of Cressey, was step by step decreased in size throughout the following three centuries until a gun sufficiently little to connect as far as possible of a stick rose (Ferris, 3). This advancement brought forth the weapon, a development that revolutionalized European fighting. Since the weapon was concocted for essentially military purposes, Europeans utilized it more in front lines than on chasing grounds, where bows bolts despite everything ruled (Ferris, 3). At the point when the Europeans brought little arms into Inuit culture, be that as it may, they became instruments of seal chasing. The Inuit’s unique seal chasing strategies included harpooning the creatures through an opening in the ice. Seal body recovery was troublesome, so the Inuit planned their spears explicitly for effective recuperation of seal bodies. Their designing was effective to the point that just one seal bod y sunk out of each twenty (Ehrlich, 216). In contrast to the spear, be that as it may, the weapon was not uniquely intended for seal chasing. Subsequently, when the Inuit procured rifles from the Hudson’s Bay Company and began shooting seals, the bodies would sink before they could be speared and recovered. Chasing productivity plunged significantly; nineteen out of each twenty seals chased with firearms sank (Ehrlich 216). After a short time, Inuit chasing started exhausting seal populaces. The presentation of little arms managed a hit to both the Inuit people group, whose chasing proficiency diminished, and their condition, which endured lost mass quantities of creatures.