What are the Merits and demerits of technology in teaching and learning process?

Answer 1

Since is the systematic collection of information about the universe through the observation of natural phenomena. So it's really just a disciplined accumulation of knowledge.

The advantages of having more knowledge? We have greater understanding and can make more accurate predictions about how things in the natural universe work.

Through advances in science we can build machines that fly, that allow us to see objects too small or far away to be detected by the naked eye. We can transport water great distances to fertilize crops and make certain areas liveable that weren't before. We can cure diseases that once we couldn't. We can explore under the sea and upon the surface of the moon.

The disadvantages- certainly we develop technologies faster than we develop socially. So we wind up with the ability to do things, but not necessarily the wisdom required to make a good decision about whether or not we should.

Also as our knowledge increases, we are forced to re-evaluate our existing beliefs- very often those beliefs are long-standing and held by many within society. Not so long ago, people thought the earth was flat and the sun revolved around us. We thought the flu was caused by evil spirits and thunderstorms meant the gods were angry. Now we've discovered that the world is round, that we are but one of many planets orbiting our sun, and that diseases and weather shifts are natural phenomena, whose causes we didn't understand before.

But the more we know, the less mystery there is to life. It's often more fun not knowing, being free to speculate and use our imaginations. Certainly a world with Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and monsters living under the bed is a more exciting place for a child. Shining a flashlight under the bed which allows us to explore and discover nothing but dust and shoes- that's what science does. It replaces belief with evidence.

In many cases individuals and organizations owe their livelihood and status within society to the continuation of those beliefs, so they must fight any findings that contradict those beliefs for their own economic survival. Individuals often place such great personal significance upon those beliefs that scientific advancement is unwelcome, like the person who was having a pleasant dream being awakened by a splash of cold water.

• 1 year ago It is helpful to us because it allows us to build a better civilization to live in. It is useful to us because it reminds us of our place in the universe, and may foster reverence for other living things. because we take the time to understand them, rather than merely dominating them (as religion would suggest we do).

  It is also dangerous to us because it occasionally puts in our hands much greater powers than we can ethically and sensibly use.... such as weapons.

  It is not going away any time soon, much to the chagrin of those who fear it. It is a sense that humans have developed over millenia, and is the emblem of our particular consciousness. merits & demerits? sounds like a badge contest (from boy or girl scouts of America - or elsewhere). is this an essay question? hum. sure sounds like one. well, since we all live in a very science-filled world and one that is very physical at that, i think you can answer it all by yourself. you are a grown person, now aren't you? Science has merit in that it helps us understand our world and increases our enjoyment of it. A huge demerit is that many attempt to use science to exclude God. The way I see it, science is our way of explaining God's creation. We cannot have one without the other. Science is a useful 'tool' and that is about it.

  Science can solve physical problems. The basis of all science is called the 'Scientific Method': 1. Observation, 2. Hypothesis, 3. Experimentation, 4. Conclusion (and there are several variations on this). So Science is a useful tool to solve the physical problems of the universe. Science is made up of: mathematics, physics, and chemistry AND science is therefore EXACT.

  Science is EXACT in that it can reproduce its findings over and over again anywhere in the known universe. Example: 1+1=2 always. On the Earth, Moon, or Mars, 1+1 will always = 2. Same with physical 'laws' or chemical equations, they will always be exact.

  Any discipline that ends in "-ology" is NOT a science, but a 'study'. Biology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, archeology, are NOT science but they 'use' science to help them solve problems. Same with Economics. Economics and the practice of Medicine are not sciences, but they use science to accomplish their goals.

  The PROBLEM with science is that it is TOO EXACT and is not flexible enough to handle the fuzzy or grey areas of human behaviour or human actions. That takes ART.

  Science and Art are not the same. War is an 'art' not a science. Gambling is an 'art' and not a science. Economics is an art and not a science. Because you cannot exactly predict their outcomes.

  It is the probability involved in gambling that is of interest to the Economist. How do you systematically call the winner of a war, a roullette game or a card game or the stock market in an EXACT manner? You can't! But by using the tool of science you can lower the rate of failure more than guessing.

  Science cannot predict the winner of a war, card game, or the Stock Market. But a general, a gambler, or an economist uses Science to help him decide the best decision to make as close to exact as possible. Mathematics is used to help lower the number of mistakes. Probability and statistics are used by economists, generals, and gamblers to help make the most intelligent decision.

  So Science is a tool like a hammer or screwdriver. But 'how' you use that tool is art.

  Science is NOT art; BUT 'how' you use science is art.

Since is the systematic collection of information about the universe through the observation of natural phenomena. So it's really just a disciplined accumulation of knowledge.

The advantages of having more knowledge? We have greater understanding and can make more accurate predictions about how things in the natural universe work.

Through advances in science we can build machines that fly, that allow us to see objects too small or far away to be detected by the naked eye. We can transport water great distances to fertilize crops and make certain areas liveable that weren't before. We can cure diseases that once we couldn't. We can explore under the sea and upon the surface of the moon.

The disadvantages- certainly we develop technologies faster than we develop socially. So we wind up with the ability to do things, but not necessarily the wisdom required to make a good decision about whether or not we should.

Also as our knowledge increases, we are forced to re-evaluate our existing beliefs- very often those beliefs are long-standing and held by many within society. Not so long ago, people thought the earth was flat and the sun revolved around us. We thought the flu was caused by evil spirits and thunderstorms meant the gods were angry. Now we've discovered that the world is round, that we are but one of many planets orbiting our sun, and that diseases and weather shifts are natural phenomena, whose causes we didn't understand before.

But the more we know, the less mystery there is to life. It's often more fun not knowing, being free to speculate and use our imaginations. Certainly a world with Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and monsters living under the bed is a more exciting place for a child. Shining a flashlight under the bed which allows us to explore and discover nothing but dust and shoes- that's what science does. It replaces belief with evidence.

In many cases individuals and organizations owe their livelihood and status within society to the continuation of those beliefs, so they must fight any findings that contradict those beliefs for their own economic survival. Individuals often place such great personal significance upon those beliefs that scientific advancement is unwelcome, like the person who was having a pleasant dream being awakened by a splash of cold water.

• 1 year ago It is helpful to us because it allows us to build a better civilization to live in. It is useful to us because it reminds us of our place in the universe, and may foster reverence for other living things. because we take the time to understand them, rather than merely dominating them (as religion would suggest we do).

  It is also dangerous to us because it occasionally puts in our hands much greater powers than we can ethically and sensibly use.... such as weapons.

  It is not going away any time soon, much to the chagrin of those who fear it. It is a sense that humans have developed over millenia, and is the emblem of our particular consciousness. merits & demerits? sounds like a badge contest (from boy or girl scouts of America - or elsewhere). is this an essay question? hum. sure sounds like one. well, since we all live in a very science-filled world and one that is very physical at that, i think you can answer it all by yourself. you are a grown person, now aren't you? Science has merit in that it helps us understand our world and increases our enjoyment of it. A huge demerit is that many attempt to use science to exclude God. The way I see it, science is our way of explaining God's creation. We cannot have one without the other. Science is a useful 'tool' and that is about it.

  Science can solve physical problems. The basis of all science is called the 'Scientific Method': 1. Observation, 2. Hypothesis, 3. Experimentation, 4. Conclusion (and there are several variations on this). So Science is a useful tool to solve the physical problems of the universe. Science is made up of: mathematics, physics, and chemistry AND science is therefore EXACT.

  Science is EXACT in that it can reproduce its findings over and over again anywhere in the known universe. Example: 1+1=2 always. On the Earth, Moon, or Mars, 1+1 will always = 2. Same with physical 'laws' or chemical equations, they will always be exact.

  Any discipline that ends in "-ology" is NOT a science, but a 'study'. Biology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, archeology, are NOT science but they 'use' science to help them solve problems. Same with Economics. Economics and the practice of Medicine are not sciences, but they use science to accomplish their goals.

  The PROBLEM with science is that it is TOO EXACT and is not flexible enough to handle the fuzzy or grey areas of human behaviour or human actions. That takes ART.

  Science and Art are not the same. War is an 'art' not a science. Gambling is an 'art' and not a science. Economics is an art and not a science. Because you cannot exactly predict their outcomes.

  It is the probability involved in gambling that is of interest to the Economist. How do you systematically call the winner of a war, a roullette game or a card game or the stock market in an EXACT manner? You can't! But by using the tool of science you can lower the rate of failure more than guessing.

  Science cannot predict the winner of a war, card game, or the stock market. But a general, a gambler, or an economist uses Science to help him decide the best decision to make as close to exact as possible. Mathematics is used to help lower the number of mistakes. Probability and statistics are used by economists, generals, and gamblers to help make the most intelligent decision.

  So Science is a tool like a hammer or screwdriver. But 'how' you use that tool is art.

  Science is NOT art; BUT 'how' you use science is art.

Answer 2

well there r alot of merits and demerits of technlogy in education field, some are as follow :

MERITS:

no merits hahahaha

demerits

papapapapapapapapalalalalala