"The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people&aposs ficiency so that everyone has more leisure time."

　　The speaker contends that technology&aposs primary goal should be to increase our ficiency for the purpose of affording us more leisure time. I concede that technology has enhanced our ficiency as we go about our everyday lives. Productivity software helps us plan and coordinate projects; intranets, the Internet, and satellite technology make us more ficient messengers; and technology even helps us prepare our food and access entertainment more ficiently. Beyond this concession, however, I find the speaker&aposs contention indensible from both an empirical and a normative standpoint.

　　The chi reason for my disagreement lies in the empirical proof: with technological advancement comes diminished leisure time. In 1960 the average U.S. family included only one breadwinner, who worked just over 40 hours per week. Since then the average work week has increased steadily to nearly 60 hours today; and in most families there are now two breadwinners. What explains this decline in leisure despite increasing ficiency that new technologies have brought about? I contend that technology itself is the culprit behind the decline. We use the additional free time that technology affords us not for leisure but rather for work. As computer technology enables greater and greater office productivity it also raises our employers&apos expectations--or demands--for production. Further technological advances breed still greater ficiency and, in turn, expectations. Our spiraling work load is only exacerbated by the competitive business environment in which nearly all of us work today. Moreover, every technological advance demands our time and attention in order to learn how to use the new technology. Time devoted to keeping pace with technology depletes time for leisure activities.

　　I disagree with the speaker for another reason as well: the suggestion that technology&aposs chi goal should be to facilitate leisure is simply wrongheaded. There are far more vital concerns that technology can and should address. Advances in bio-technology can help cure and prevent diseases; advances in medical technology can allow for safer, less invasire diagnosis and treatment; advances in genetics can help prevent birth dects; advances in engineering and chemistry can improve the structural integrity of our buildings, roads, bridges and vehicles; information technology enables education while communication technology facilitates global participation in the democratic process. In short, health, safety, education, and freedom--and not leisure--are the proper final objectives of technology. Admittedly, advances in these areas sometimes involve improved ficiency; yet ficiency is merely a means to these more important ends.

　　In sum, I find indensible the speaker&aposs suggestion that technology&aposs value lies chily in the ficiency and resulting leisure time it can afford us. The suggestion runs contrary to the overwhelming evidence that technology diminishes leisure time, and it wrongly places leisure ahead of goals such as health, safety, education, and freedom as technology&aposs ultimate aims.

更多出国留学最新动态，敬请关注澳际教育手机端网站，并可拨打咨询热线：400-601-0022