Technological Determinism - Essay Example

Technological Determinism Technological determinism is a theory that holds that technology is an independent force that can change and does change society. It is a reductionist theory that argues that technology drives and controls the development of cultural values and social structure of different societies (Slack and Wise, 2005). The term technological determinism was coined by a 20th century American sociologist Thorstein Veblem when he stated that “technology marches in seven-league boots from one ruthless, revolutionary conquest to another, tearing down old factories and industries, flinging up new processes with terrifying rapidity” (Macionis and Plummer, 2006). This statement means that technology has the ability to determine major aspects of human history. Those who support this theory do not see technology as a part of the larger human existence and activity, instead they consider it to be a basis for all human activity. Determinism in this context opposes the doctrine of free will by insisting that technology influences human behavior and culture. It also opposes the idea that technologies and social structures co-develop in emergent patterns that are unpredictable (Goguen, 2009). Technology determinism has been used in the analysis of developments and changes within the social-economic context. Despite the strong arguments presented by technological determinists about technology influencing and even controlling society, critiques have faulted these claims on the ground that technology cannot solely be responsible for human evolution and society also plays a huge role on the development of the said technology. This paper looks at the arguments given for and against technological determinism. Supporters of Technological Determinism There two forms of technological determinism that forms popular sociological discourse: hard and soft determinism. Soft technological determinism holds that technology is part of a wider network of factors which influence human activity. On the other hand, hard technological determinism is more radical, insisting that technology is the only factor that causes change in human activity. A number of technological determinism adherents view the relationship between technology and culture as that of cause and effect. Slack and Wise (2005) show how technology has played a central role on the advancement of modern culture. They focus on the western culture where they argue that technological determinism plays the role of organizing the way in which people understand and act in the context of the technology-culture relationship. The authors hold that technology is important in the definition of culture. They point out that in popular discussions, there are many times when In technology determinism, the significance of any type of technology is determined by the effects they have or are likely to have on people’s lives. These effects are considered to be the primary determining factors of cultural change (Winner, 2006). According to Winner, technological determinism relies upon two main hypotheses: one is the belief that the fundamental factor affecting societal existence patterns is the society’s technical base; another is the belief that a society’s single most important cause of change is technological change. This view espouses that the characteristic definition of what being human means is pegged on technology. Winner continues to argue that technology is autonomous, that is, it develops irreversibly and independently in an outward expansion. Some supporters of Technological determinism point out that statements pertaining to technological determinism are commonly uttered in various contexts of human interactions. They give the example of Marx’s statement that “the hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the stream mill society with the industrial capitalist” (McLellan, 2000). Many technological determinants argue that Marx statement supported the idea that technology had a huge role in controlling society and culture. They interpret Marx’s statement to mean sequence matters. One of the most influential forms of technologies is media technology (Macionis and Plummer, 2006). Technological determinism have used the influence that media has on people’s lives to justify their arguments that technological determinism controls society and culture. The point that Marx could have made was that there are some types of technology which could not have happened without others in the same way that certain levels of social development could not have been possible without some kinds of technology (Morrison, 2006). Clarence Ayers, a renowned sociologist maintains the importance of sequence and as espoused by Marx as it pertains to technological determinism. His statement that considering the “shipbuilding and navigation skills in existence in 1492, America was bound to be discovered in a decade or two” is very much similar to Marx’s statement about the hand mill (Johnson, 1999). The point that emerges here is that some level or kind of technology is necessary for other technological or social development. This point highlights the technological deterministic argument that technology is essentially progressive. However, this view of technological determinism is somewhat vague as it does not specify whether or not technology is autonomous as many technological determinists believe it is. A notable technological determinist is Marshall McLuhan who sees technology’s deterministic value to be pegged on the communication field, especially modern day media. According to McLuhan, the extent to which evolves and eventually advances determines how human life is shaped and also how different cultures change. McLuhan’s idea emerged in the 1960s, at a time when television was quickly finding its way into many Americans’ homes. During this time, television played a big role in highlighting the hardships that Southern African Americans were going through. Without the media attention these troubles got, few Americans would have been aware of the. McLuhan argues that the dominant media determines societal organization bases, just television did in the U.S. during the Civil Movement period. Technology has completely changed the face of communication, which has affected human lifestyles. These effects of technology are in line with the beliefs of many technological determinists. Critiques of Technological Determinism Many sociologists have opposed the tenets of technological determinism. The most vocal criticism of technological determinism comes from those who support social determinism and social constructivist concepts (Webster, 2006). One of the rejections of technological determinism is based on the idea that technological development is anon-fixed, non-monotonic trajectory. Many critics argue that technology based change is contingent on other facets of human development. To them, science and technology are closely linked, but science cannot act as the autonomous, non-political basis of technological ideas. They also argue against the idea that technology determines social change. Instead, their arguments emphasize on the contingency of technology on different aspects of human development (Abercrombie, 2004). This means that technology always relies on society for it to be relevant. Other critiques claim that the technological determinist view of technology being progressive is faulty since there are countless instances when technology has led to unprogressive results such as deaths caused by weapons and loss of financial resources when computer systems crush. Goguen (2009) argues that technology is shaped by various social groups as they try to settle different social or technological disagreements or controversies. This means that different aspects in human development leads individuals to seeks technological means of dealing with the new aspects. Some critics of Technological determinism also claim that technology cannot be understood or interpreted in any fixed manner (Fulcher and Scott, 2006). People from different parts of the world have different interpretations of technology depending on its technical content and relative functionality as well as on the people’s social characteristics (Goguen, 2009). This means that technological facts are shaped by the interpretations that different social groups have on some particular technology. Hence, technology in this view is socially constructed and shaped, and not the other way round as espoused by technological determinists. According to Feenberg (2004), technology can never be considered as an autonomous factor affecting human life. He argues that it appears autonomous because technological norms are far removed from “political and ethical discourse”. What Feenberg means by this statement is that technological development is a human enterprise where individuals who develop technology are motivated to do so by norms of effective productivity, norms which essentially are formed by the goals the individuals want to attain. According to Feenberg, other criteria are normally excluded, thus creating a society that is ready to adopt the standards of judgment held by technologists. Social determinists argue that social facets of human development are the only determining factors for which technology is to be adopted and which should be rejected (Webster, 2006). This is a direct rejection of the idea that technology is inevitable, pointed out by Langdon (1996). Feenberg (2004) argues that neither technology nor culture are neutral, a situation which is further compounded by the presence of knowledge which leads to technology being linked to societal processes. The knowledge that controls how technology is created and enhanced is considered to be socially bound. Other critiques against technological determinism are based on the idea that circumstance determines what is right or wrong. Circumstance in this context consists of those things that drive human existence (Fulcher and Scott, 2006). Thus, according to technological determinism critiques, people determine how technology of formed and the direction it takes depending on their own circumstance. Some anti- technological determinists claim that the concept is not a true empirical theory, since it cannot be scientifically validated. They insist that technology has always been a part and product of society (Feenberg, 2004). Therefore, they argue that technology can never be considered to be autonomous. Furthermore, critiques also point out that society and technology are always interacting in one way or another. This means that in the same way technological determinists argue that technology moves society, society also controls the direction technology takes. They do not refute that technology does have some influence on society. However, they do not agree that technological effects on human life should be used as a basis for justification of technological determinism, since society also impacts on technology. Conclusion Technological determinism invokes the assumption that technology controls culture and societal activities. This assumption figures prominently in today’s political and non-political rhetoric. For example, many see technology as the driving force behind economic revolutions. While Technological determinism supporters argue that technology society is technologically determined, critiques argue variously that the opposite is true, that technological aspects are socially determined. Technological determinist concepts may seem quite logical, but unfortunately they do not offer concrete explanations how cultures and society as a whole has developed over time. In the realistic human world, there normally are multiple sources of cultural change and societal development. Technology plays a role in societal development, but it does not act autonomously to cause change. Critiques of technological determinism have argued that the only role that technology has played is to help people develop, that it is not a factor of change per se. this view is not entirely true as some technological factors have been seen to change the way people think and act, making them adopt new lifestyles as a result of their exposure to that technology. For the concept of Technological determinism to gain more acceptance, it has to be integrated with other sources and factors of change. References Abercrombie, N. 2004. Sociology. Oxford: Polity. Feenberg , A. 2004. "Democratic Rationalization" in David M. Kaplan, Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield. Fulcher, J. and Scott, J. 2006. Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Goguen, J. 2009. Against Technological Determinsm. Accessed 17 November, 2011: http://rejon.org/media/cvsbook/cvsbook/src/determinism/determinism-goguen.doc.pdf Johnson, S. (1999) : Interface Culture: How new technology transforms the way we create and communicate. London: Basic Books. Macionis, J. and Plummer, K. 2006. Sociology: A Global Introduction. London: Pearson McLellan, D. (2000): Karl Marx : selected writings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McLuhan, M. (1967). The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects. London: Bantam Books. Morrison, K. 2006. Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought. London: Sage. Slack, J.D. and Wise, J. M. 2007. Culture and Technology: A Primer, London: Peter Lang Publishing Inc. Webster, F. 2006. Theories of the Information Society. London: Routledge. Winner, L. 2006. Autonomous technology: Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More