INTODUCTION

Jason Hickel is an anthropologist who introduced the concept of “Forget ‘Developing’ poor
countries, it’s time to ‘De-develop’ rich countries”. It was published on September 2015. The article
purposes are to inform the masses that Growth isn’t an option anymore. It focuses in the shifting of the
idea of development into economic growth that instead of pushing poor countries to catch up with the
rich one, the article says that we should be thinking ways to bring rich countries to catch down.

According to Jason hickel the focus of the article is to aid the poverty by using de development
concept. He stated that the overall objective of the SDG is to end poverty in 2030 through the use of
growth. That has been the main objective of development for past 70 years and has been proven to be
ineffective. The author argues that we must think that growth is no longer an option since we’ve already
grown because we exceeded our planet bio capacity by 50% each years, and instead of focusing on the
traditional development model of poor countries, Economist Peter Edward suggest that instead of the
poor countries catching up, we should more focus on strategies to encourage rich countries to lower
their development standards to more suitable levels. This does not imply making a rich country poor.
But rather reducing their resource usage. Hickel also stated that in order to De-develop rich countries
we should encourage them to buy more and own less; having a low GDP can also help to sustain the
highest life expectancy and indicates happiness and having a high gdp does not necessarily mean
happiness. Indeed, De-development doesn’t really mean that we are being miserable and it’s not a
hindrance to learn something, progress as an individual and mowing towards positive life. It’s not about
giving up anything but rather understanding the way we live in this world and gives rise to a sustainable
and equitable form of progress

In the article, Jason hickel clearly state the purpose of his article, which is a big deal to clearly
understand the importance of it by calling for the reduction of a resource usage in rich countries to get
back within planetary boundaries and to allow the poor countries to catch up with them he also state
that we must first de-grow and de-develop a low-income countries to raise their living standards and
reducer global inequality. It was also evident that he used some key point such as the overconsumption
of countries and how it can effect to the life of lower class. The way the authors constructed his
thoughts about thinking ways in shaping the sustainable development pathways and the way he points
out that once we admit that we don’t need more growth anymore so that we can now focus more on
building an economy that can deliver high quality of life for all and meet the ecological needs of planet
he manage to collect relevant and useful information that can help make the masses understand the
concept of the article he has a clear writing about on his thought, having a well-researched arguments
and the ability to provoke critical thinking . The part that I like the most in the article is when the author
imposing that we should learn from the other societies where they live long and happy even though
they aren’t over consuming high capital and use only the relatively low-income and makes it out as way
of efficient living like the Cuba and Costa Rica. However, the problem with this article is that we can’t
guarantee that the rich countries are willing to change their policies and make their way to slow down
just to give way to the poor countries to catch up. And many argument that merely reducing the GDP of
developed countries would no significant impact on the worlds overall material footprint, also it does
not provide a way to help out poor countries. As well as there’s a lack of consideration for the opposing
viewpoints.

CONCLUSION

Overall, this article seems straightforward and can be easily understood by others because it has clarity
of writing and compelling arguments but In order to have more people be interested in this work, it
needs to present more ideas and information that are reliable
INTRODUCTION

In Heidegger’s exploration of human flourishing in the context of science and technology does not
provide a clear definition of technology or its essence. He believes that the essence of technology
cannot be summed up through example or mechanism. He suggests that the best approach is to have
free relations that open up our human existence to the essence of technology. He uses ancient Greeks
ideas to understand the essence of technology focusing on the process of revealing and allowing
something to appear. As well as, he stated that “true” does not mean “correct” and existence is more
nuanced than just correct or incorrect. In fact, for him the truth is not correctness, it is “Aletheia” which
means revealing or unconcealing.

One of the strength of Heidegger’s analysis is that he emphasis on questioning the underlying
assumption of technological progress where he offer some of ways just to prove or to get the essence of
technology, of what it means and what is the relation to human existence. He argues that modern
technology is not just a series of tools, but also shapes our understanding to outlook and sets up
relationship with surroundings. He also broadens the meaning of technology and its consequences that
urging us to reflect on what’s impact could be caused to human existence not only to them but also to
the natural world. Moreover, Heidegger’s concept has influenced other thinkers, writers and artist
particularly in his critique in technology and the emphasis of language and understanding. However
Heidegger’s work has a limited direct impact to the masses because of its complexity and obscurity
which can make it difficult for many readers to understand and limiting the direct accessibility to the
masses. His work is primarily studied and can understand by academics related in fields. Additionally,
some of the critics argue that he focused only to the metaphysical concept that may seem disconnected
from the practical concerns of everyday life, making it less relevant to the masses. I suggest that

Overall,