Jshell9's Blog

Chapter 7

jshell9 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:28:56 +0000

In the chapter titled Types of Technology as Objects the author writes about what type of object in this world classifies as a technological object. In the beginning of the chapter the author gives qualifications that makes objects technological like it has to be a fabrication of human hands, specifying what kind of materials used in the making of the object and so on. In keeping with classifying objects of technology he gives a list of what is considered a technological object like tools, structures, and machines just to name a few. As the author continues his argument he goes on to talk about the social aspects of technological objects or the requirement of social impacts in order to be a technological object.

In my opion what are we to say what makes a technological object or not for there are many nonhuman creations that are very technological in their use and function as well as some human creations that according to this lists parameters that do not make it. How can we in our quest to classify technological objects be so blind and negligent to pass up some of the most beautiful creations on earth. For now I understand why past books have claimed the arguments of technological determinism in society for it is people who write books like this that are a shame to us all.

Chapter 5

jshell9 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:26:40 +0000

The Chapter Philosophical Questions about Techne the author argues the distinction of the difference between that of modern technology and that of ancient technology. In his argument on the matter the author says that before the advent of modern technology humanity had a very humanitarian philosophical view of technology. In this modern age we, the author argues, have picked up a very different view of technology and that we should also return to the ways of how our ancestors thought of technology.

In many ways I think humanity has not changed in the way we think of technology and that there is not much of a difference between that of modern technology and that of ancient technology. For they both have their roots in science and also technology now and then was created to help overcome nature or even to emulated it in every way.

Chapter 4

jshell9 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:25:29 +0000

In the chapter entitled Philosophical Questioning of Technology the author discuses the relation of the philosophy of technology and the philosophy of science. Even though we think that science and technology is derived from each other they are in fact quite different in what types of philosophical questions they answer. The philosophy of science delves into the questions dealing with logic and epistemology whereas with the philosophy of technology deals with questions dealing with ethics and practical philosophy.

What makes me wonder is why two views that seem would so correspond with each other are separated so blindly by the author. Science is the derivative of technology and visa versa. There cannot be one without the other so with this way of thinking these philosophies should in theory answer the same questions.

Chapter 3

jshell9 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:23:55 +0000

In the next chapter of the book entitled From Engineering to Humanities Philosophy of Technology. The author compares and contrasts the two different philosophies of technology, the engineering philosophy and the humanities philosophy. In one side of the argument there is the engineering philosophy which argues that technology manifested itself through nature and Humans stumbled on it; or in better sense it is technology is the product of humans in response to nature. The great thinkers use this philosophy to question aspects of humanities culture and morals. On the other side of the argument there is the humanities philosophy which as discussed earlier states that technology is born through human vices and in sense shaped the way humans think and live their lives.

In this debate personally I take the side of the engineering philosophies technology is a indirect product of nature. We as a human race use technology to overcome our natural confines to become a better society.

Chapter 2

jshell9 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:22:32 +0000

In the chapter titled Humanities Philosophy of Technology the author delves into the topic of the Humanities philosophy of technology. In essence Humanities philosophy of technology states that technology receives all of its moralities from the human condition of its creators. Because as the text states it is the human nature that conceives technology not technology that conceives human nature. This idea of the Humanities philosophy of technology is even further cemented in the text with the romantic movement that swept the up the thinkers of the 18^th century. The romantic movement states the science and art owe their birth to our vices but even though they were birthed through our vices. Even though that they are brought about by our vices they still carry with them public virtue.

This whole section of the book is filled with the drunken rambling of a middle age man that has no life and does not know what he is talking about. Technology and art are not formed out of our vices but humanities genius to adapt and survive in a hostile environment as Charles Darwin once said “it is the survival of the fittest” and through technology we as a species are the fittest.

Rationality versus Contingency

jshell9 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:44:02 +0000

In the essay Rationality versus Contingency the author J. M. Staudenmaier describes what it is like to research in the field of technological determinism. In many aspects the author states that the historians that study technology in history do not receive the attention they deserve. The historians that study technology are not take as seriously as those that study the more mainstream fields of research. But the author argues that technology throughout history should be taken more seriously, for it is technology the author states that has had a center role for shaping the future that we live in today.

The author challenges the history field to study more of the technologies of the past saying that through the study of the technologies of the past we can better understand what went on during that time period and also understand the workings of society in that age. Along with the understanding of the past that can be obtained through the study of past technologies we as a society can fully understand where we are heading in the future. Because if you look at this in a technological deterministic way technology determines the outcome of what we become.

Post-Modern Pessimism

jshell9 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:43:09 +0000

In the essay Post-Modern Pessimism the author Leo Marx delves into the topic of the social viewpoint of technology today. The author states that prior to the mid 20^th century humanity linked technology to progress. Starting with the enlightenment utopian thinkers of that day who came up with a ideological term called progress, throughout the decades technology became synonymously linked with progress. But after World War II humanity began to lose its faith in the idol of technology and as time went by people more and more thought the idea became less appealing. This all cumulated after the events of the Vietnam War where people turned to the less glamorous view of technology called post-modernism which in essence is the view point of technological determinism, because post-modernism expresses the idea of domination of life by large technological systems.

Have we in essence become fearful of the technologies we have created. We as a society once in love with technological advancements that we have made became fearful of what kind of power that have over us. With the ushering in of the nuclear age after World War II and the Cold War there after we saw firsthand the destruction, control, and the sheer power that the technologies we have created have over us. What we saw as a society scared us and a new wave of thinking emerged, one that thought of technology in control. But answer this one question if we are so fearful of technology why do we blindly charge forward with the progress of technology, and does humanity still have a secret love affair with the progress technology bring us.

Political and Feminist Dimensions

jshell9 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:42:11 +0000

In the essay Political and Feminist Dimensions the author R. Williams describes the feminist role or lack thereof in the technological determinist view. In this essay the author divides the sexes into two distinct view points. Males strictly are technological beings because as the author puts it males are much like technology, seeing nature as something to overcome and command. The author uses the dominate nature of man to link the technological determinist view of technology. Whereas on the other end of the spectrum the author takes women and relates them to nature, using the works of other authors the author shows that women have long been associated with nature. Stating that women are uniquely ecological beings and that their instinct to nourish life links them with the rest of the living world.

The author then goes to show that the technological progress of man could not have happened without the cooperation of the women or even some times the participation of women. But as the author stats that it was this exact technological advancement that helped enslave women kind, also these same technologies have become intertwined with them. The author uses this as a fact to prove her final point that technological determinism has become ecological determinism and visa versa for as the author states that for out technologies and our natural world has become intermittingly intertwined with each other and both have a profound effect on us.

Determinism and Pre-Industrial Technology

jshell9 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:14:38 +0000

In the essay Determinism and Pre-Industrial Society the author R.W. Bulliet speaks on how in pre-industrial societies sociocultural factors determined what kinds of technology was being fully adopted and used. He goes on to give examples of certain pre-industrial technologies that failed to have impact on transforming social and economic factors of the day. The main causes that caused in many societies of the pre-industrial age not to adopt some potentially life changing technologies was class, race and lifestyles of the certain cultures of pre-industrial societies.

In essence this essay is stating that in the pre-industrial society technological determinism did not exist. There was only humanity and technology that was invented was controlled by the factors of society itself. Weather a technology lived or died depended upon the societies wealth, needs and lifestyles. What I don’t see is why with our infinite wisdom we see that technology in pre-industrial societies was controlled by society itself but not that it is still that way to this day.

Technological Determinism in Agriarian Societies

jshell9 — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:13:34 +0000

In the essay Technological Determinism in Agrarian Societies the author Peter Perdue turns to technological advancements in agrarian societies to help describe the idea of technological determinism. To do this he describes the effect of technological determinism on the peasant farmer. With the industrial revolution, the agrarian society finds itself under attack by the industrialist to move from the farm to work in the factories, and further more the modern industrialist wants to replace the peasant farmer with the businessman farmer. This in essence shows that technological determinism is at work to change the agrarian society. Through technological improvements it has a direct effect on the social aspects of agrarian society. Also this essay speaks on how certain farming technological advancements improved how people farmed and in effect the economic and social aspects of society.

Even though this author comes across as a genuine technological determinist. He in many instances speaks about environmental determinism an idea that states that it is the effects of nature that cause the farmer to advance his technology and methods of farming. So by this fact it is nature not technology that controls society. But as I have stated before these thinkers of our age still seem to overlook human ingenuity and control of technology that we show every day. Because in the end it is humans that have the decision to do what they want day to day.