In what ways has technology ended the physical and intellectual isolation of Americans - Research Paper Example

Introduction During the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, technology was believed to be the governing force in the American society. This belief by the twentieth-century scholars, then referred to as “technological determinism”, more than any other factor has proved over time that changes in technology impact on societies and their processes. According to one contemporary writer who preferred himself as a technocentrist, “technology and Science are the central forces in the modern world; and the more are crucial in defining the patterns and problems of the twentieth-century life compared to national politics, international conflict, differences of class and gender, and the misdistribution of wealth. This he attributed to the fact that technology preceded the other factors”. As such, technological determinism can either be viewed as “soft” or “hard”. The “soft view” perceives technological change as a driver of social change, but is equally affected discriminately by social pressure, while the “hard view” perceives technological development as an autonomous that is unresponsive to social constraints (Roland, 1992). In this paper, we will show how the leaders of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment in their faith and enthusiasm toward technology as a liberating force perceived technological determinism as an intellectual heritage and in addition to conjuring the deterministic thinking believed that technology and science were powerful social change agents. Since people attributed agency to technology as a historical force, the deterministic approach was embraced, and the cooperation between proponents and skeptics alike received utmost attention. Through the celebration of new science was acknowledged by J.T. Desaguliers, James Fergusson, and Voltaire in Diderot’s Encyclopedie, in the memorable verses of Alexanber Pope, in the popular eighteenth-century metaphor of a clockwise universe, and even in the critical perspectives of recent essayists as Thomas Carlyle. Generally, the eighteen-century conception and popular acceptance of the idea of progress was indicative of the deterministic thinking (Marx, 1987). Although, it had originated from Europe, the concept of technological determinism found more fertile ground in the just independent United States primarily because Americans were so taken by the idea of progress. Considered the foremost among the nation’s prophets of progress, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were true believers in humankind’s steady moral and material improvement. For them, the new mechanical technologies of the era provided an opportunity of achieving the virtuous and prosperous republican society that they associated with the goals of the American Revolution. Similarly, progress meant the pursuit of science and technology in the interest of human betterment (moral, intellectual and spiritual) and material prosperity. Without betterment, they believed prosperity was meaningless; instead there ought to be a balance between the two (Marx, 1987). However, Jefferson was skeptic about the eroding nature of the civilizing process through large-scale technology that posed a threat to the moral and political economy. Instead, he esteemed and championed for discovery and invention as a means of achieving a larger social end. Benjamin Franklin on his part refrained from patenting his inventions as he believed that “we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, and we should be grateful for an opportunity to serve others through our inventions, freely and generously”. Primarily, inventions were not considered as a generator of private wealth as well as an additional benefit for all members of society (Smith, 1989). Similarly, Coxe (1755-1824) in his persistence believed that America’s political independence depended on the establishment of economic independence. The political problems facing the country would also be resolved by machine-based manufactures. In reference to the manufacturing under the factory system, Coxe retorted that it would “be the means to our Political Salvation, that would rescue us from the tyranny of foreign fashions, and restore frugality and industry.” Thus, through the acknowledgement by the writer of technological developments, the discovery by cultural historian’s “technological sublime” strengthened the belief that technology shapes the course of human history. The beginning of twentieth century witnessed the dominance of technology in the American culture, in addition to the boost by professional advertising. Through advertising, big businesses imprinted instrumental values and ethos of mass consumption upon the population. As a result, the people were convinced that technology shaped the society through such media as radio, print, and later on television. For instance, the advent of electrical appliances paved way for the public to be assured of the “healthier, happier and more cheerful” lifestyle that was a courtesy of technology on human well-being. Increased advertisements such as in the automotive industry, in addition to offering products as technological fixes offered the public with immediate personal gains, but also social progress. Therefore, the above technological developments presented an opportunity of ending the physical and intellectual isolation of Americans. The significance challenges of ending physical and intellectual isolation Technological change has had numerous effects on human life; socially, economically, and even emotionally. Socially, technological change has prompted cultures to wonder about their intended destination. In the U.S. generations of leaders and pundits have misconstrued technology as an answer instead of a question. Technological innovation artifacts such as automobiles, electric bulbs, and personal computers are here to point to the future and development to which we are headed towards. The future has been predicted as a succession of unimaginable new machines and products according to the numerous advertisements. As such technology represents numerous aspects of national and personal identity in the American culture. However, the scholars of technology and culture are lamenting due to the stubborn tenacity of technological determinism as they cannot understand how something so evidently wrong-headed can continue to sway adherents. As such commences that the issue is not really technology entirely, but rather a curious cultural and political fetishism whereby artifacts represent technology and technology represents national progress. In industrialized societies for instance, technologies might be visible primarily by means of the trappings with which each culture dresses them. Similarly, technology as a lived experience necessitates acquiring a comparative view of how different cultures perceive, define and meet technological challenges and opportunities. On their part, U.S. historians contribute to the task by tracing evolution of the gospel of technological progress and by attempting to uncover ways in which Americans have adopted, explored, or resisted it. According to Roland (1992), a split of technological aspects resulted into conflicting camps; with differences evident in the history of technologies compared to history of other images such as the American nation’s debate. Two centuries ago, the split affected the American nation’s debate on systems of weights and measure; with on contention whether or not to adopt a system alien to that of hated British oppressors. Eventually, the English system was adopted having been deemed more democratic, and more accessible to mechanics and merchants who could not afford weighing and measuring equipment. Subdivisions such as pound, quarts, and others like yards and inches, allowed for ease during trading. Similarly, the corridors of power witnessed technological determinism via the nation’s political and corporate leaders. Unlike the history of the above images, the history of technology is very different. For instance the techniques and media for the representation of technology have transformed numerously; the Chatauquas and mechanics’ fairs and lithographs of the 19th century have paved way for mass-market advertising, globally broadcast lunar expeditions, personal computer networks, and the universalization of video. Two images of American landscapes that demonstrate some ways in which the depiction of change itself has transformed include one from just after the Civil War, and one from early in the post-War II era. The 1868 famous lithograph “Across the Continent: Westward the Course of Empire Takes Its Way” by Currier and Ives depicts a simple landscape that was a grid on which Victorian-era Americans could locate emblems and direction of their nation’s progress. While a railroad crosses lower right to the upper left, the foreground left of the rail shows settlers busy constructing a town. Homes, a public school and cleared forests are also shown; with Indians on horseback ponder the scene on the other side of the tracks (Weart, 1988). The appearance of the lithograph, in 1868 railroad crews from opposite ends of the continents were gearing towards each other prior to the opening of the first transcontinental railroad. The image, thus captures both the frontier mythology with state-of-the-art technology; combining the moment prior to the disappearance of the frontier mythology and when technology could still be depicted as an extension of existing social patterns and norms. As a matter of fact, that moment was destined to allow for different interpretations of technology and society. The railroad representing the progress of the empire in 1868 was soon a contested terrain. The railroad workers struggled to stop the erosion of their autonomy against the new industrial order through the Great Upheaval of 1877 and the Pullman strike of 1894. A mere reference to space technologies and nuclear power in 1952 carried with it impending wonders, but it was difficult to avoid the disparities between the images and their social possibilities. Even despite of representing it as a clean, abstract celestial form, the atom reminded twentieth-century Americans that visualizing the unimaginable had acquired a troubling underside. Uncertainties associated with the nuclear age conjured visions of technology with an implied acknowledgement that certain new unveilings might be less welcome than new-model cars. But unexpectedly, in the 1952 were the subtler threats awaiting the triumvirate of technologies of the future. President Eisenhower in 1953 told the United Nations that a new “atoms for peace” program would transform the “greatest of destructive forces” into “a great boon for the benefit of all mankind.” The following year witnessed a “radioactive wand” that broke ground for the nation’s first commercial power plant at Shippingport, Pennsylvania (Smith, 1989). In spite of the increased challenges to unexamined optimism, Americans have been reluctant to discard the vision of technology-as-progress. Although the citizens have been closed out access to decision-making, their role as consumers has remained within reach, unable to view gradations of social possibilities for technology. In addition to denied calls of circumspect technological assessments, the feelings and technological vision of the consumers seem utterly clouded by cultural preconceptions (Winner, 1977)). The question as to whether or not “machines make history” in the 1967 Technology and culture journal received numerous attention from scholars. This was aimed at examining the idea of technological determinism as a powerful tool of history; specifically the history of large-scale socioeconomic transformations; the change from feudalism to capitalism and the transformation of capitalism throughout its stages. Machines (referring to both individual mechanisms and general level of technological development) make history by changing the materials conditions of human existence, primarily by determining the kind of life that we live in (Misa, 1988). Although machines make history, the challenge becomes demonstrating that technology exerts its effects in general ways. In order for technological determinism to become a useful overlay of history origination, it has to explain the connection between “machinery” and “history” that exhibits law-like properties. Changes in technological background in this social order are registered in changes of the price system pointing to the direction that economic activity can move and form. Hence, maximizing force field allows us to denote the making of history by machines, in spite of obeying a common economic imperative (Weart, 1988). Conclusion Technology was considered the governing force in the American society since the Industrial revolution. This “technological determinism” incorporated technology and science in impacting the society and its processes; thus widely accepted by progress-oriented Americans. Believers of humankind’s steady moral and material improvement such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin championed the pursuit of science and technology for human betterment. The twentieth century commenced with the advent of professional advertising associated with dominance of technology. Challenges were however unavoidable especially with the social, economic and emotional effects that technological change posed on human life. While adherents were constantly swayed by its dynamism, scholars of technology and culture wondered how something so evidently wrong-headed attracted so much attention. It is therefore evident that the leaders of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment in their faith and enthusiasm toward technology as a liberating force perceived technological determinism as an intellectual heritage. Additionally, the proponents and skeptics in addition to conjuring the deterministic thinking both believed that technology and science were powerful social change agents. References Smith, M. R. & Marx, L. (1994). Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism. Cambridge: MIT Press. Winner, L. (1977). Autonomous Technology: Technics-Out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought. Cambridge: MIT Press. Roland, A. (1992). “Theories and Models of Technological Change: Semantics and Substance.” Science, Technology and Human Values, 17: 90-92. Misa, J. M. (1988). “How machines make history, and how historians (and others) help them do so.” Science, Technology and Human Values, 13:308-331. Marx, L. (1987). “Does improved technology mean progress?” Technology Review,33-41. Weart, S. (1988). Nuclear Fear: A history of images. Harvard University Press: New York. Read More