There are some fundamental assumptions that leaders frequently make and hold that exercise the collective conscience of leaders to the point where they encourage spontaneous development. This is because the leader is supported by the leader. Although development is generally high, it does not always reflect a civilized culture. This kind of technological advancement sets a bad example for other societies that are worried about threats to their sovereignty. They are also being pressured to create war-ready technology.
In the context of the development of civilization, this mode of development is neither admirable nor morally justifiable. Since it cannot be morally justified, it is socially irresponsible. The latter is the root of the issue, as discovered by a thorough inspection of the installation. A logical conclusion can never be drawn from the third and final premise, which is derived from the first two. It demonstrates that you reached your conclusion with mixed feelings.
People have developed a sense of undeniable and unchallenged superiority in a society that advances based on premises, particularly illogical conclusions. Human behavior has always been influenced by emotional intensity. It is impossible to practice egalitarianism, whether in voluntary or involuntary associations, due to the superiority complex, which affects those in charge and those under their command. Another society that does not share the same emotions and passions, according to expected logic, becomes a potential or actual enemy, facing conflict on every conceivable front.
Naturally, the majority of what we learn about the modern world through various channels of communication focuses primarily on modern technologies. It has been argued on many occasions that these societies have made the most progress in this area. They can also use technology to simplify and broaden our perspective on life and nature. The previous connections between life and nature, which were often mysterious and uncertain, tend to be eliminated as much as possible in this direction.
The use of technology is an obvious option if humans do not wish to live according to the whims of the natural environment—which is, of course, a way of life fraught with uncertainty but rather at their own pace. Because of satisfaction, human thought rarely regresses or, in most cases, slows down after a major technological advancement, it is possible that the equilibrium principle chosen by society Y is only valid for a limited amount of time or is more fictitious than real. Progress in technology must be accelerated without delay. An insult to the curious mind is any gradual regression. This way of thinking reveals the dark side of the mind and its mystery. Additionally, the role of ethics is crucial if the objective is to understand how a particular technology currently functions and be able to use it in any way the mind desires.
Is it morally acceptable to use this kind of technology to make this kind of product, and is it wrong to use this kind of merchandise? The impression that it has a negative impact not only on people but also on the surrounding environment. And if, as I stated, the goal of technology is to make life better, then technology should not be used to make products that are bad for people and the natural environment. It not only defeats the purpose but also casts doubt on the assertion that humans are rational. In addition, the level of sophistication attained by the human intellect suggests that it is incapable of comprehending the essence or reason for a worthy existence; otherwise, it would have abandoned peaceful coexistence with the natural world at this point. Because of the widespread nature of this corruption, the human mind is in some ways contaminated with beliefs and ideas that do not make sense in many ways.