blog 4 on the lifeworld

I'm sorry to say it but i find this book really hard to understand... however I was able to draw some meaningful conclusions from the recent reading of Ihde's book on the life world.
Ihde begins by mentioning Heidegger's hammer. He says that tools( aka. technology)correspond to our needs in the world (aka. nature). He seems to even be implying that the world in a sense is a technolgy for human use ever though they are separate from our bodies. Then he goes on to discuss Husserl's galileo. In this discussion he makes a lot of comparisons, namely the world before galileo and the world after him. This world was the prescientific vesus the scientific. In the former we used our bodies to experience the world, bur later we also used the scientific such as geometry and physics to interpret our world. So, in a prescientific world we only had personal experienced wheras after galileo we also had the theoretical. The way we experienced our world changed after galileo, in that the way we experience was no longer just subjective but it was now also objective. But the problem with this as Ihde points out, is how exactly do we analyze color? isn't that open to interpretation since we all experience it in slightly different ways? how do we make something like color objective? So, in a prescientific world we experienced everything at a microperceptive level, but with the birth of science thanks to galileo we now percieve things more on a macroperceptive level.... We have largely today lost our prescientific world. which there are pros and cons. Yes we largely as a society no longer percieve our world as something spiritual and subjective but now we percieve more at a scientific and objective level. Which is better that's up for interpretation. Lastly, we need to talk about the views put forth on this subject by Merleau-Ponty. And the view I seemed to get from reading about him was we and our world are technologies in themselves which we use to percieve both. This is because our bodies are defined to us by the tasks and situations we put them in. essentially, your body is a tool in allowing you to experience the world. Like wise you could also say that the world is a tool to experience and percieve the body. I mean think about it, if we had no world, how could we fully realize and experience our bodies? Both are need to experience both. Also, when we use tools they become part of our bodies which we then use to experience our world. This is very true. When you drive a car, you dont have to think about how to move it, its like it becomes a part of your body. We experience the road through the use of the car which in a sense becomes a part of our bodies. lastly, culture allows us to experience our world. I mean, I'm sure there is a major difference between how native americans viewed their world through their culture than the way we now view our world through our modern american culture. So, really the way one experiences their world and their bodies is really specific to a time and place. The way an amazonian experiences his world in the rainforest will differ dramatically with how an eskimo experiences his world in alaska, again being specific to a time and place. So in conclusion we must expand our definition of technolgy to include even our bodies and their relationship to the world because both are used to experience each other. Technology is used to percieve our world much in the same way we use our bodies to experience our world. so, to make this clear i'll say one thing. We use our bodies to experience the world and we use the world to experience our bodies. likewise, we do the same through our use of technology. So really it is a triangle made up of technology, our bodies, and the world, of course all of which are essentially technologies.