BOOK REVIEW : She’s Singing the Same Old Song About Technology : WHEN TECHNOLOGY WOUNDS: THE HUMAN CONSEQUENCES OF PROGRESS<i> by Chellis Glendinning</i> William Morrow $18.95, 256 pages

Almost all arguments have a familiar form. First, each side states its position. Then one side offers evidence, which the other side pooh-poohs. Then the other side offers its evidence, which the first side pooh-poohs. Then each side restates its position, but louder.

In the end, no one’s mind is changed. Some people like vanilla ice cream and some people like chocolate, and neither can persuade the other. It’s a matter of temperament, which we play out by arguing about things. Of course, it’s better to talk than to fight about them.

I was reminded of this basic structure of argument while reading “When Technology Wounds” by Chellis Glendinning, a book that argues in no uncertain terms that science and technology are bad for us. They’re going to kill us, the author says. To me, this is as wrong as wrong can be.

Glendinning writes: “We live in a world of increasing numbers of health-threatening technologies--and people made sick by technology. Today’s development and use of technology pose danger . . . to life itself: to the essence and survival of the Earth’s waters and soil and air, to your life and mine.”

In support of this sweeping condemnation, Glendinning offers a list of the terrible things that science has done: “Love Canal. PCBs. The Dalkon Shield. Three Mile Island. Chlordane. Asbestos. Times Beach. Savannah River. Red dye No. 2. DES.” And on and on.

But it is a one-sided picture--a very one-sided picture. If you didn’t know better, you’d think that life was getting worse as a result of scientific progress. In fact, exactly the opposite is true.

Life expectancies have increased, not decreased. The quality of life throughout the industrialized world is far better than in the undeveloped world. People from less-developed countries aspire to achieve the standard of living that science and technology offer. Glendinning would have you believe that we and they have all been hoodwinked.

There’s nothing new in Glendinning’s theme. It’s as old as the story of the Garden of Eden. Anyone who eats of the tree of knowledge will lose paradise. The moral is clear. Ignorance is bliss.

The idea recurs throughout history: Prometheus stealing fire and suffering for it; the legend of the golem in medieval Jewish myth, a clay automaton that runs amok and has to be destroyed; the Frankenstein monster, who turns to evil. These stories and many more play on humanity’s apparently deep-seated fear of knowledge, just as Glendinning does.

In her familiar screed against technology (“It is a mechanistic, technological progress we seek, not a social or humanistic one”), Glendinning focuses on its harms and ignores its benefits. She doesn’t explain how she would feed, clothe and house the Earth’s population if her fondest dreams were realized and modern science were abolished. We are holding this tiger by the tail, and we dare not let go.

To be sure, technology is a two-edged sword, as we have discovered repeatedly throughout this century. No one could deny the harms that have been done. Writers like Lewis Mumford and Jacques Ellul (whom Glendinning quotes extensively) have warned of the social dangers of succumbing to the scientific juggernaut.

But by focusing on the harms of science and ignoring its benefits, Glendinning has written a book that will persuade no one but the persuaded. She offers case studies of people who have been hurt by technology (herself included), and she argues that these cases are widespread and inevitable.

As a society, we reject that view. Moreover, we recognize the dangers but believe that the price is worth paying. Each individual’s assessment of that cost-benefit calculation is no doubt heavily influenced by whether one has been harmed--and how much. There’s nothing new in that. What happens to someone else is too bad. What happens to you is a tragedy.

Glendinning contends that “thousands upon thousands of people . . . have endured illness caused by technology’s excesses.” But millions of people--billions of people--have enjoyed the benefits that knowledge brings. This would seem to be a fair trade.

Certainly we should be aware of the dangers, do everything we can to minimize them and help people who have been harmed. But the answer to this complicated problem is not to return to the imagined days of community and good cheer that supposedly existed in some mythical past. We can’t and we shouldn’t. Besides, it was no picnic then, either.

But I don’t expect to convince the Glendinnings of the world. They have their vision, and they’re sticking to it.

Next: Jonathan Kirsch reviews “Adam and Eve and Becoming Human” by Willard Gaylin.