Enframing as Developed by Martin Heidegger - Essay Example

? ENFRAMING AS DEVELOPED BY MARTIN HEIDEGGER Task This piece highlights the concept of enframing as discussed by MartinHeidegger. Firstly, Heidegger defines enframing as the restructuring of natural environment using modern technology. Here, he tackles the issue of modern technology by understanding its essence. Thereafter, he separates the essence of technology into a simpler manner that can easily relate to man. He also compares the old and modern technology together with the dangers and saving powers associated with the technologies. He proceeds by claiming that the truth obtained from poetry, arts, science and logic is the only salvation to technology. According to Heidegger, enframing has turned out to be a seemingly insoluble problem whose solution is attainable through comprehension of the problem. Introduction Enframing refers to the collection of data, and how that information challenge individuals to disclose or bring forth the real meaning, this revealing method possesses a destining personality in the manner of assembling and standing reserves.Therefore, Enframing is the method of revealing represented in the modern technology. From this definition, the use of technology in Enframing equips an individual with a chance to invent or make something. According to Heidegger, Enframing is the manner of restructuring different fundamentals of environment such as rivers, rocks and animals then carve them and modify them into different artificial frames to act as resources. Enframing can also be harmful to the individual’s essential; can lead to unfolding revealing (Decker 2010, p. 165). Martin Heidegger a philosopher from Germany invented the existential phenomenology; thus, being the most innovative Philosopher of 20th century. Among his piece of work, include the essays on “Introduction to Metaphysics” and “The Question concerning Technology”.” In Heidegger’s essay about “The Question concerning Technology”, he tries to explain how technology relates to information by giving clear definition information. Here, Heidegger is much interested in how an individual survives amidst the increasing and changing technology (Feenberg 2011, p. 867). Comparing the rate at which both technology and man changes, Heidegger concludes that contemporary technology is transforming the natural situation as it creates a human World. Heidegger refers to enframing as the process of ordering individuals to comprehend the World as storage of resources that should be put into use. In enframing, manipulation of resources affects both human beings and the universe, thus leading to disclosure of human being and nature as a standing reserve. However, modern technologies respond to enframing by acting as the consequences because they reveal things as existent reserves (Decker 2010, 167) As a means of explaining the effects of modern technology, Heidegger uses the term Enframing to refer to how humans have applied modern technology to reschedule and connect with the World. The manner in which technology exposes and handles different matters is problematic thus leading to challenges in revealing information, which results to standing reserve in nature. Therefore, modern technologies affect enframing and it reveals the existing natural resources by converting everything into standing reserves. Currently, contemporary technology has widely spread thus affecting man’s thinking; imaging and questioning legitimated by scientific and technological successes (Kaplan 2000, p.2). Heidegger asserts that technology will never allow man to overwhelm it; instead, it uses man to restore the surmounting essence of technology. For a good relationship to occur between man and technology, man must first accept the essence of technology At the completion of the current World, the earth’s remains will consist of parts synthetic balls, wires, glasses and steel of different metals due to problems created by enframing. In Heidegger’s discussion on enframing, he insisted that man puts a lot of attention on technology in the everyday sense rather than focusing the attention on technology in its essence. Therefore, it does not incorporate an individual’s attachment to modern technology or denounce it because the understanding of technology differs within individuals. According to Heidegger, there is a difference between technology in everyday sense and technology in its essence. Heidegger suggests that for every individual to relate to modern technology accordingly, there is need for finding its central meaning (El-Bizri 2000, p. 81). In enframing, Heidegger insists that man see matters concerning technology as intricate and requires strict skills. Man tends to understand that technology resulted from human activities and it enhances sufficiency attainment of products. Here, the analysis of modern technology or enframing describes it as an object or composite of the matters and the procedures that tends to be passive but activated by man. Heidegger argues that man is mistaken because technology essentially reveals that enframing is not an instrument that man can control. He asserts it is impossible for an individual to organize something within which he/she is already organized. Because man views enframing as the means to obtain products, therefore, the total product produced by man depends on how he/she manipulates technology (Heidegger 1993, 312). Heidegger emphasizes that the critiques of enframing have some problems that is inclusive of the supposition they argue against matters concerning enframing but none of them is freely willing to handle that matter because they are incapable of understanding it in essence. Secondly, the knowledge that critiques have concerning enframing matter is not enough to guide them so their knowledge lacks value. This is a challenge because most of the critiques discussions on enframing pay attention on it as an object that determines the ends rather than essence. To refer to anything as an instrument, it means that it is in form of ends and this is in the context of causation. Therefore, the encouraging way to discovering the essence of enframing is through scrutinizing its causation. Heidegger applies the Aristotle’s classic account about main causation factors to describe the enframing examination. These causation factors include; causa materialis, causa formalis, causa finalis and causa effeciens. Heidegger insisted that causation essence should rely on what amalgamates the fours causation factors. According to these causation factors, the caused factor is what comes into presence; therefore, the factors are responsible for conveying it forth (Braham, Hale & Sadar 2007, p. 396). Through the enframing concept, Heidegger trusted that all the views that man presented about modern technology had some correctness. For example, man described technology to be an instrument or object. However, he defines technology to be a revealing mode because it comes in a current situation to reveal or unconceal something. Here, Heidegger intended to explain to man that enframing or technology essence occurs in main realm of familiarity where the truth occurs. Through enframing, it becomes easier to comprehend the directions taken by different subjects such as fine art, modern technology and craftsmanship. The three mentioned subjects have dissimilar intentions that they play in human life and they equip an individual with specific human skills. In ancient times, fine arts and artisanship were relatively in specific fields but with the introduction of modern technology, this has tremendously transformed them into dissimilar fields (Smith 2007, p. 172). According to Heidegger, the applied rules in enframing are very challenging because the nature undergoes suppression with extra demands of providing energy for extraction and storage (Heidegger 1993, p. 315). According to enframing concept by Heidegger, modern technology is the foremost cause of challenges that affect nature unlike before invention of technology whereby nature was always in accord. Due to activities that originate from modern technology there is no re-direction of the nature instead, it is set upon. Here, Heidegger was paying attention to how enframing violates and exploits the atmosphere. He insists that exposing issues caused by modern technology is similar to discovering the dangers brought forward by modern technology (Heidegger 1993, p. 316). Therefore, Heidegger insists that in dealing with the effects of modern technology, man should observe it as a challenging-forth that affects both nature and individuals. He scrutinizes this by asking whether modern technology has a difference with ancient technology. Has the application of modern technology left any significance to the ancient technology? In enframing, Heidegger uses an example of developments that occur in energy sources to show the progress of evolution in the modern World. For example, in the energy sector, the first advancement instigated with capturing energy resources. In describing this, Heidegger compared a windmill to the contemporary hydroelectric power plant. In differentiating the windmill from the modern technology, he clarified how windmill sailed after wind turning it; therefore, it relied on the wind. The old technology windmill did not absorb energy from the air and save it as the modern hydroelectric power plants do. Here, the windmill participates in conveying motion, thus it reveals the energy produced by wind but it is not involved in the absorbing the natures energy for storage (Smith 2007, p. 173). Contrary to the windmill, Heidegger asserts that hydroelectric plant depends on the river to source it with hydraulic pressure, which enhances the rotation of turbines. This rotation puts the plant into motion and this continues as the electric current passes through the cables to dispatch power to the long distance plants. Here, Heidegger views the river as commanded by technology because the construction of the power plant was not in the river as the old technology wooden bridge was. Instead, it was attributable to the organization of the stream into the power plant. Here, Heidegger concludes that the river acts as waterpower supplier but not in the essence of power station. In Heidegger’s argument on the modern power plant, wooden bridge that was in the river during the old technology times symbolized the conservation of the river thus increasing its value. The value of river still exists whereby; people still cross over the river using the wooden bridge as the same bridge allows the river to flow. However, the presence of power plant in the river gives it different perspective as it transforms it into a human value. During the old technology times, the construction of wooden bridge across the river was advantageous because it allows it to flow without any obstruction or impairment. This is contrary to the hydroelectric plant because it affects the river negatively by obstructing impairing and re-directing it. The challenges faced by the river resulting from power plant seem to be directives from human beings (Bijker & Law 1994, p.43). The power plants absorb energy from the river and store it into a non-sensuous system with a noticeable value to human being thus making transferring a different impression of the river to individuals. According to Heidegger, introduction of modern technology such as hydroelectric power plants bring the modern World into a standing reserve. He explain that these occurs because when a power plant runs, it unlocks energy from nature, transforms it, store it, distributes and switches it within different power stations and he considers these as methods of revealing. In enframing, Heidegger thinks that the main implication of modern technology was to reveal life and nature that human life dwells and he refers to this as the teacher and keeper of all lives. Modern technologies highlight the phenomena that underline life and nature and how human beings interrupt with nature and permanently change it. Currently, technology is being a challenge to nature because it alters different things that nature holds thus bringing about standing reserve. To back on how technology affects the environment, Heidegger gives an example of how human propel crude oil from underground, transfer it to fineries for extraction, then turn it into explosive constituent, which are later, transported to various gas stations around the globe. Applications of such technologies have affected the nature’s active mode causing standing mode to everything. For example, in the modern World, a river to many individuals means a source of hydro electronic power, for supply of water rather than being a river. Heidegger asserts that in the old technology, human beings utilized other objects to come up with their products unlike in the modern technology whereby they challenge nature through revealing objects without considering the value of such objects (Kaplan 2000, p. 4). As a means of understanding the concept of enframing, one should understand technology as a process that is evolving in the World and possesses a large proportion to the market. Heidegger used the Germany word Ge-stell constructed from Gebirg and Gemuet to refer to enframing. Secondly, technology in enframing should also refer to the factor affecting human life currently and it has been in existence since ancient times. Here, enframing refers to the survival of human being within the ordinary World and effect of technology on it. In enframing, human is not capable of controlling technology because it shapes an individual in the same manner as evolution of mountains. Technology possesses many risks to human life because enframing puts human life into different types of challenges and thus causing man’s surrounding environment to be in a standing mode. In addition, it improves the destiny of challenges affecting an individual thus resulting to standing reserves. In enframing, destining of enlightening is very harmful to human life and it shows up in two behaviors. Firstly, when something viewed as obvious do not appear to human being as an object but as a standing reserve, this will lead to that individual taking a standing reserve. Secondly, man tends to overrule the World, this implies that, everything encountered in the World are from the actions of man, therefore, man encounters himself universally and permanently (Feenberg 2011, p. 880). Martin Heidegger also defines the association that exists between enframing and physics whereby he explains how enframing and physics restricts nature to be in a self-serving manner. He insists that the physics theory applied to the nature is due to the introduction of modern technology, which covers the real essence of what modern technology causes. Hence, he terminates that technology is the main essence of enframing. In addition Heidegger, discusses how contemporary physics is negatively affected by the way nature undergoes a standing reserve due to enframing. Consequently, physics will not afford to repudiate that nature undergoes control as an information system. In addition, the quintessence of the contemporary physics lies in enframing, so to solve this problem; modern technology should consider using physical science. By illustrating this, many individuals will know that modern technology refers to physical science. Heidegger says that most human beings undergo many challenges due to enframing because they try to reveal destining which finally complete sway over them. However, human beings have failed to understand that enframing or modern technology do not favor them, instead they belong to destining of enlightening. Therefore, man should not just pay attention to what enframing reveals because all the enframing revelation goes out openly to every individual. Heidegger asserts that freedom creates the territory of destining which leads to revealing, nonetheless, freedom also occurs in the essence of current technology. On contrary, most individuals trust that freedom reveals the more facts on modern technology therefore resulting to standing reserve on nature. Finally, Heidegger says that enframing cannot harm the bond among man and other objects; instead, it equips man with skills of revealing by allowing the presences to come forth. In enframing concept, Heidegger discusses how lethal machines and modern technology are not harmful even though the threats that technology can negatively affect man have distressed individuals in his essence. Enframing scares man because it leads to assumptions that, it denies him the power of revelation thus not being able to access the current information on time (Decker 2010, p. 167). Though enframing acts as a barrier to destining revelation, it is beneficial to human beings because it equip them with basic requirements that they are incapable of making. Since enframing reveals most human being views to encompass saving power meaning that, they can grant revelation. For example, it is easy for man to enquire on the evolution of technology rather than its products and view revealing process not in terms of standing reserves but how it reveal objects. In this concept, Heidegger insists that for one to appreciate the advantages brought by the modern technology, he/she should analyze the extreme dangers associated with such technologies. For example, individuals should analyze the essence presence in technology, destining revealing and its effects on human freedom. The essence of enframing is a pattern of revelation that brings about the truth. In addition, Heidegger suggests to individuals on searching for a more perceptible way of salvation such as application of art because it is a method of revealing true as beautiful (Heidegger 1993, p. 317). Furthermore, as discussed above, human beings are the directors of technology; therefore, it is their responsibility to care for nature. Here, Heidegger argues on how the contemporary environment works by referring to the nature and everything supported by it. He insists that nature and its beings need care from themselves. Concerning this issue, Heidegger brought about some arguments, which include; firstly, most human being tend to assume that introduction of modern technology was like implementing an instrument that gets their work done faster and easily. This shows how human beings lack the real essence of technology thus thinking that advancing technology is similar to reducing problems around the globe. Secondly, Heidegger insists that individuals have differing knowledge on the causality issue. Some understand it to be the process through which new thing come into existence in the World, while others understand that causality and essence of technology are the reasons to why human beings exist. Therefore, it will be necessary for every man to understand that technology contributes a lot to the revelation of the World (El-Bizri 2000, p. 81). Thirdly, human directions in the World are similar to enframing because they take all objects to be standing reserves by making them to be sources of raw objects. Finally, enframing is the fundamental aspect of modern technology; it is ambiguous because it has both constructive and off-putting effects. Firstly, the negative effects are that enframing results to some dangers that expose man to destruction together with bringing about challenges that leads to barriers in revelation therefore resulting lack of truth and standing reserves. Secondly, enframing positively affects human beings because they act as saving powers as well as sources of different opportunities. Enframing clearly describes specific work that individuals should undertake, it tries to show how human beings are not only part of the World but the World is in need of their care to enhance essence of truth (Bijker & Law 1994, p. 43). Conclusion It is imperative for every individual to note that enframing predetermines him or her to enframe. On contrary, individuals act to have conclusive task of scheming the World, which results to creation of many standing reserves. Nevertheless, when these standing reserves turn out to affect man negatively, afterwards he/she becomes interested in protecting them without understanding enframing to be a revealing method. This affects the revelation capacity of an individual making all objects to appear as standing reserves thus losing the essence in humans because they come in form of revelation. In addition, when an individual loses the essence of revelation, he/she now gets exposure of different challenges thus resulting to standing reserves in life. Reference list Bijker, W & Law, J 1994, ‘General introduction’ Shaping Technology Building Society, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press Braham, W, Hale, J & Sadar, J 2007, Rethinking Technology: A reader in architectural theory, London, Taylor & Francis Decker, k 2010, Star Wars and Philosophy: More Powerful Than You Can Possibly Imagine, Cheltenham, Elgar Publishing El-Bizri, N 2000, The Phenomenological quest: between Avicenna and Heidegger, New York, NY, Global Academic Publishing Feenberg, A 2011, Modernity, Technology and The Forms of Rationality, Journal of Philosophy Compass, vol 6, is 12, pp. 865-874. Heidegger, M 1993, ‘The question concerning Technology’ Basic writings, London, Routledge Kaplan, D 2009, Reading in the philosophy of Technology, West Sussex, Rowman & Littlefield Smith, G 2007, Martin Heidegger: paths taken, paths opened, West Sussex, Rowman & Littlefield. Read More