This alliance of science, business and government is founded on the assumption that these two goals are absolute goods. Everything in our society is oriented toward these goods and they are never questioned (except, possibly, in certain environmentalist circles, which have their own decreationist malformations). Our educational system has as its express purpose the formation and orientation of individuals toward these two goals and these goals alone.

Marco seems to be questioning whether these two goals are, in fact, ultimate goods. Ian presumes, quite unreflectively, that they are. He does not ask the question of whether, for instance, it might not be better for the state to make the primary purpose of its educational system the inculcation of character formation. Perhaps technology, while important, is of secondary importance to this.

Moreover, Marco might want to ask, in regard to business and science, if science does not, indeed, have a hand in the vulgar consumerism of the age.

Marco’s seems to be saying, in sum, that it is Ian’s tendency to absolutize technological society that is problematic. As the Patriarch of Athens said last year, to paraphrase, “We in Greece may not have the fine roads and technological niceties that Americans have, but we don’t consider technology to be the sign of civilization. Rather, it is charity that marks a civilization and it is that which we strive for.”

Of course, the globalization that Ian unwittingly supports will eventually run like a corrosive acid over Greece just as it has everywhere else. If it hasn’t already…