Cultural Impact of Technology Transfer :: Exemplification Essays

Social Impact of Technology Transfer Mankind's history has shown that the progression of data is unavoidable; societies over the world have been exchanging thoughts for a great many years. Dick Teresi claims, notwithstanding, that an innovation develops inside a culture and its specific requests and distractions, interlaced with that society’s specific environment.† (Teresi, 356) While this announcement remains constant for some advancements, not all advances are immediate results of the way of life utilizing them. As human interchanges expanded, advances were as often as possible designed in one culture and moved to another. The way of life that gained innovations from outside sources generally used them in manners initially not planned. Did these outer advances have positive or negative consequences for the way of life that acknowledged them? The results of embedded innovations change from case to case contingent upon various elements, including ecological and way of life contrasts between the two network s. To feature the systems administration of these variables and gauge the impacts of moving advances, I will think about two situations: the European’s presentation of firearms into Inuit culture and the bringing of ponies to the Native Americans by the Spaniards. The account of European little arms starts with the gun. The gun, first utilized in the 1346 Battle of Cressey, was step by step diminished in size throughout the following three centuries until a gun sufficiently little to join as far as possible of a stick developed (Ferris, 3). This advancement brought forth the weapon, a development that revolutionalized European fighting. Since the firearm was imagined for essentially military purposes, Europeans utilized it more in front lines than on chasing grounds, where bows bolts despite everything overwhelmed (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 cadaver recovery was troublesome, so the Inuit planned their spears explicitly for effective recuperation of seal bodies. Their building was fruitful to the point that just one seal body sunk out of each twenty (Ehrlich, 216). In contrast to the spear, be that as it may, the weapon was not exceptionally intended for seal chasing. Accordingly, when the Inuit procured rifles from the Hudson’s Bay Company and began shooting seals, the bodies would sink before they could be skewered and recovered. Chasing productivity dove drastically; nineteen out of each twenty seals chased with weapons sank (Ehrlich 216). After a short time, Inuit chasing started draining seal populaces. The presentation of little arms managed a hit to both the Inuit people group, whose chasing productivity diminished, and their condition, which endured lost mass quantities of creatures.