Reflection on Gibbson's paper

Emmm....really impressed by the wide reading horizion of Dr. Gibbson

His paper makes a distinction between scientific and technological purpose of human activities. Before I read this paper, I seldom have a careful thought about how to distinguish and combine the two.

I think any argument that try to answer which profession is better or higher is like the argument of “which is easier between theory and practice”, though scientists do not just deal with the theory and technologists do not only involve in practice. The thinking models are different. Science deals with "understanding" in nature world while technology deals with "doing" with the man-made world. This doesn’t mean they are unrelated. Actually they are mutually independent and sustaining. Scientists do take part in experiment practice and technologists need to understand the foundations and principles of their practice as well. Technology should not be regarded as an auxiliary or supporting aspect of science or simply taken as “applied science. It is the study of ways people develop and use technical means tools and machines. It tells us how to control the natural and human-made world and how to utilize technical means to transport, manufacture, construct, and communicate.

QUE: When a technologist is working on something but has not succeeded, we usually call him a technologist, but when he managed to create something influential, we call him a scientist.
Is it that whether a person is a technologist or scientist also depends on the result of their work, that is,how their research influences the life of people?

I also have an impression on this paper that the difference between a scientist and a technologist can be compared as the distinction between figuring out how to make a key and finding a key to open the door. The problems or unknow knowledge is like the door. Scientists try to find out the shape of a key that can match the door hole while technologist try to find out a key the shape of which may already exist to open the door. (Hehe, I could be wrong)

The following is a citation I found about "good science" and "good technology".

Good Science - usually involves the development of an hypothesis, the testing of that hypothesis by controlled experimentation or observation, the collection and analysis of data to produce results and the drawing of valid conclusions based on those results.

Good Technology - usually involves the design and development of a solution to a problem and yields a product, process or environment that serves a real need.