"Enemies of Promise" group work

OK so clearly I got confused about how my group was going to post, here is some information I wrote up from our "Enemies of Promise" group work. I am in a group with Cole, Candice, Chuck and Rick.

Assumption 1: Technology breeds laziness.

Does technology in our everyday life create laziness or enhance the quality of life? We live with a constant stream of information, and the ability to access that information almost anywhere at any time. The way we communicate has changed as well, we are far more likely to text or talk online with each other, rather than see other people face to face and interact with them. Some people would say that this has limited our communication. However, now we have the ability to talk to people around the world. Technology has opened up the possibilities of communication, while still limiting our ability to relate organically to one another.

Assumption 2: Technology creates additional waste and adds to pollution.

Is waste a necessary evil? Does it have to be? How does it effect our environment? Is that a trade we're willing to make? The creation of waste and how to properly dispose of that waste is a problem we've been facing and looking at for years now as global warming and other weather anomalies begin to worsen. Technology plays a real part in this: not only by becoming actual waste itself once it (swiftly) becomes outdated, but also by using the packaging made possible through the use of technology. Packaging may allow us to keep fresher orange juice, whiter sneakers, scratch free screens etcetera, but it is also something that is only useful to us for a short amount of time, and is quickly discarded. Plastic and other forms of packaging are also, by nature, not easy broken down and sit in landfills for long periods of time.

Assumption 3: Science and technology are part of human evolution.

If science and technology stopped evolving, could we continue to evolve with out? Could we abandon modern technology today and surive? Could we strike a balance between the evolution of humanity and technology or will we get to a point where the importance of technology outweighs the importance of human life? There are several moral questions attached to this assumption, as well, such as: Where does life support fit in to technology? Is it ethical to keep someone terminally ill alive using technology?