What Is the Technological Imperative - Research Paper Example

Philosophy and Technology What is "the technological imperative? The “technological imperative” can be described as the attraction of always trying to achieve perfection in technology, or taking on complicated and difficult task (s) whichever is readily available (Pacey 1983, p. 79). John Von Neumann, the renowned mathematician wrote with apprehension that man just cannot resist technological challenges or what are considered: technological impossibilities (in Mumford 1971, p. 186). Jacques Soustelle said that since the making of the atomic bomb was a considerable challenge, but possible, it had was absolutely necessary, (in Ellul 1964, p. 99).It has been ominously declared since there is no way to stop the progress of technology, we should learn to be comfortable and live with it. Doomsayers predict that since with the technology we possess we can destroy the planet, “we eventually will”. The self-sufficiency of technological leads to the oft quoted inference that technological events that cause change are usually irreversible. To support this contention, a lot of intellectuals who hold or expound theories usually quote similar inventions isolated in different geographic regions. “Technological determinism” is basically associated or compared with the general aspect of inexorableness or predictability, and is also referred to as the “the technological imperative. The overriding principle of the technological is that when a specific technology poses a difficult challenge, which is doable, then this specific action must be done because it is a challenge, but technically possible (moral imperative) and must (as an operational requirement) it will eventually be undertaken, even if just for the sheer challenge of doing what is difficult but practically possible (Hasan Ozbekhan 1968). Why is it important? Due to the accelerated progression of technology, Donald Cardwell makes us remember that technological modernization and improvement is not created out of nothingness, but results from the victorious and dominant communication and contact that ushers in social changes, development in science and political acumen. In a comprehensive review of the tools and machines that humans have made and used throughout history, Cardwell not only emphasizes the motorized, perfunctory procedures, but also explores the fundamental, general tendencies, movement, or direction that have resulted in periods of great and even revolutionary changes and upheavals. Specifically, he pin points the eighteenth century as the cut-off point in the contemporary history of technology, describing how the progression in physics and chemistry accelerated and provided inducement for the mechanical ideas and methods for the Industrial Revolution. Starting with the steam engine to the invention of electricity to nuclear powered energy that drives today’s world of electronics and computers. Technology in eighteenth century Britain was vastly different from what we see today, and their workings were also in a very different context. The eighteenth century was the period which gave birth to civil engineering an individual and diverse discipline. Most of the famous people who we would refer to as engineers today, such as James Watt, John Smeaton, Willian Jessop regarded themselves as scientific philosophers, who were trained in and adhered to the Newtonian educational institutional convention that was considered the prevailing archetype for both mechanics and the study of motion and change producing forces. The Philosophy of technology shows the ways and means to understand technology that could shape public policies. It also goes a long way to arrive at a concept or generalization as a result of things seen, experienced, or believed and addresses the inception of new fields of information and to follow a line of investigation. Philosophy of technology also has a great part for dissimilar and underdeveloped learning processes, which helps greatly both in teaching and learning about technology (Peters, et. al 2008). In the introductory foreword of the book of Philosophy and Technology: 5 Questions (2007) both Berg Olsen and Evan Selinger emphasize that technology is a completely different branch of learning which is compatible with other philosophical class of arguments used as a source of proofs in formal reasoning. Adherents to the philosophy of technology substantiate their line of reasoning with a request to active and fundamental alignments the real meaning of being human, and depict various ways that humans and non-humans can co-exist and be compatible for each other. Usually, futuristic mechanisms are in attendance indicating far-sightedness or the ability to anticipate possible future events and developments, and matters relating to involvement and communal governance are seriously considered and looked into (Chandler,2000). What is wrong with it? With the help of science, man has made very powerful instruments that have significantly increased the distance between the comprehension and amalgamation of principles, standards and limits filling lives with noise and extreme anger without purpose. Science is multifaceted, and makes ways to both heal and kill. Science decreases individual mortality rates, but manufactures weapons for mass slaughter as in armed or chemical conflicts. Science does increase humanity’s store of knowledge, but philosophy endows wisdom, but wisdom acquired through philosophy indicates the time to kill or heal. Philosophy also helps people make imperative decisions about the best and most useful aspects of technology such as in bioengineering, or the principles of stem cells. People habitually seek religious comfort, but there is the possibility that religious answers may not address public perceptions because religious texts were written at a time when hi tech was not even a distant dream. Religion is tethered to the past whereas philosophy progresses physically, biologically and geologically with recent and the most scientific knowledge. Major Flaws of Technology: Despite the numerous advantages, technology too can go wrong and develop major flaws either in the manufacturing stage, or can be manipulated to be used for some other purpose apart from its basic utility. A prime example of a serious technological flaw was made by a British company that manufactured and sold hacking software to governments that subjugated the susceptibility through a counterfeit revision to iTunes, Apple’s media player, the software of which has been loaded on more than 250 million machines all over the world. The hacking software is used to survey and locate computers by British agencies. Later records showed that it had also been offered to Egypt’s secret police. Although Apple had been alerted to this anomaly in 2008, it took them more than three years to rectify this incongruity. This raises serious doubts about the fact as to whether Apple was aware of what was happening, and its delay to rectify a serious technological flaw. The company responsible for this security flaw Gamma International is inconspicuously silent on the matter. The delicacy of the matter lies in the fact that this company offers “zero days” security and is one of the companies that sell computer hacking services to government which are extremely secret, so any attempt to subvert such systems is never brought to the notice of the general public. This can seriously compromise the security of government agencies, or other companies or agencies that buy and rely upon this software to afford them the desired protection, and produce results that it is manufactured for. This is an ample demonstration of a serious security which cannot be overlooked because of the serious consequences that it could evoke. It could very well wreck the lives of people whose privacy has been invaded and compromised. What is 'mechanism?' Mechanism has different meanings for different subjects, such as in engineering it means inflexible structures that is connected with components for the purpose of implementing the required power fir conduction. In biology mechanism envisages the creation of any organism whereas philosophy states that all inherent occurrences can be described physically. In biology mechanisms explains the creation of any feature or thing, while mechanism in philosophy states that all normal phenomena can be explained by physical causes. In sociology mechanism envisages that all social occurrences relate to the doctrine or belief that everything, including every human act, is caused by something and that there is no real free will. It is compared to a computer that performs a logical step-by-step procedure for solving a mathematical problem in a finite number of steps, often involving repetition of the same basic operation, never deviates from the programmed functions and then repeats the function identically from the starting point to its conclusion (Donald, 2011). Is a "mechanical universe" a fact, a myth or an inquiry? Frequently there appears to be a close resemblance between stores that are not true or real, but existing only in somebody's imagination, and a facet, phase, or part of a whole of realism. Upon close examination of the a series of natural occurrences that produce change or development in the context of a a cell, usually consisting of a cell body, axon, and dendrites, that transmits nerve impulses and is the basic functional unit of the nervous system, and propose a hypothesis that would make clearer the functions of so called fabrication that is connected to the unseen facet, phase, or part of a whole and realism. Fiction is sprinkled with typical objects that exist as or a perceived as a single separate entity and exchanges that function to uncover out of sight series of actions connected to the human psyche. The imagination in myths seems to be real, that is myths are created with such vividness that they seem more real than the actual facts or truth. Indeed while something that can be justified may be twisted, genuine myth hardly ever is. Clarification of proceedings by conventional usually spiced with mythic subjects of a discourse, discussion, piece of writing, and artistic composition (Tripathi 2008). Is mechanism something to fear and reject, or something to know and accept? There is no logical answer to this question, because some fears might be irrational because when you start to think about them reasonable you will come to the conclusion that that particular aspect of fear is just not tangible and most probably a figment of your imagination. Some fears can be accepted and overcome such as a person might be afraid to travel in an aero plane, but would like to see the world. That is one fear that can be easily overcome. Actually the person whose life in controlled by fear will miss out on many good things in life because he/she is too scared to try (Justarius, 2007). Is anything non-mechanical or merely unknown? Everything known is mechanical in the context that it is driven by some form of energy or emotion. However, what is unknown can be known by investigation in physical or chemical laboratories so that there are no doubts about the properties or aspects of that thing. This basically leaves no space for doubt, half-truths or falsehoods. The search for absolute is entirely possible, provided of course that the right methods and material are used (Anderson 1990). Works Cited Chandler. Daniel Technological or Media Determinism.( Last modified: April 11, 2000) Cardwell, Donald. Wheels, Clocks and Rockets: A History of Technology. The gates notes: (August 30, 2011) < http://www.thegatesnotes.com/Books/Personal/Wheels-Clocks-and-Rocket> Jacob, Margaret C. “Scientific Culture and the Origins of the First Industrial Revolution”. UCLA Justarius. “Why is Philosophy so important? philoscifi (February 15, 2007)”. Tripathi, Arun Kumar. “Dimension of Philosophy Critical Theory and Democratization of Technologies”. An ACM Publication. (June 2008) Williams, Christopher. ‘Apple iTunes flaw 'allowed government spying for 3 years'. The Telegraph: (Marchi 03, 2012). Read More