The Importance of Technology in Human Life - Essay Example

Introduction Technology is a core feature of human life and over the years, it has increasingly been integrated with the social economic and political dimensions making it fundamental for the very functioning of most societal elements. One of the definitions of technology is that it is a system based on conceptual knowledge application primarily manifested in physical objects and various organizational formations designed and aligned to facilitate the achievement of predetermined goals. Under this definition is the underlying assumption that technology serves to fulfill a social or organizational need. A contemporary definition posits that technology is a system of knowledge whose manifestation is projected through physical objects or organization form but unlike the previous one this second definition creates and allowance for practical, symbolic or financial reasons. From a modernist point of view which is the most widely shared one in term of understanding technology, it is assumed that technology is inherently progressive and consists of a series of continuous improvements on itself. Today, in many organizations traditional problems and challenges are addresses with technological fixes that Rudi Volti proposes as a scenario in which scientific and/or engineering methods “fixes” are used to solve problems (Volti 2006, p.103). The supposition is that human can always make technology better and more efficient therefore its progression is a unique human endeavor given that technological advancement is assumed to always bring about positive organizational changes. Most of the contemporary discourse on technology has been primarily focused on technological imperatives and the perceived benefits and in some cases the disadvantages that follow the adoption of technology or its effect on organization and individuals (Volti 2006, p.257). However, a critical factors that should considered in the discourse on technology’s general influence on the world, and that is the role of human agents, has been largely been relegated to a secondary position after the technological imperatives. The objective of this paper is to examine technological innovation from a theoretical perspective in the context of its influence and impact on the human agents; to do this it will focus on the perspectives arising from critical theory with allusions to the postmodern and symbolic interpretive theory. Critical perspective Critical theory seeks to transcend the descriptive accounts of the nature of the universe and examine how they come to be the way they are, a critical theorist will be want to know in given scenario whose interests are being served by the status quo and seek to asses possible alternatives that could function in a similar situation in posterity. Geuss (1981, p.2) defined the critical theory as a reflective theory that empowers its agents with sufficient knowledge for them to produce enlightenment and freedom. Ultimately, the critical theory is unique in that as opposed to being predominantly descriptive as most theoretical perspective are, it aspires to actually bring about real and positive change. In response to the issue of the role impact and influence of human agents concerning technology, the critical theory can be instrumental as a lens through which the position of man in in the technological context can be discoursed upon (Outhwaite 1988, p.7). In essence, technical action can be viewed as representing a partial departure from the human condition, the term technical form a function viewpoint applies to a situation where the objects impact is out of proportion in respect to the feedback affecting the agent or actor. Subversion of technology Critical and postmodern theorist hold that contrary to popular opinion, technology is not actually progressive but instead it is subversive of the human agents who invent develop and inculcate it in their lives (Volti 2012, p.20). While conceding that technology to a significant extent brings about positive change, ergo progress, they contest the sustainability of these in the wider scale owing to the ultimate negative effect they often have on people (Jasanoff 1999, p.496). For example, the advent of the technological development, which has become characteristic of most modern civilization today, can be traced back to the early 19th century during the industrial revolution in Britain. The textile industry was one of the sectors where technology came to bear owing to the invention of machines that could make work easier and more cost effective. Nevertheless, the downside of this would be that they would cause thousands of people to lose their jobs, many workers realizing the impact of this “progress” on their livelihood protested the introduction of machines and as a result the Luddite was formed (Volti 2006, p.24). This group of people went around destroying machines their agenda being to ensure they eliminated the competition that was threatening their only source of employment (Palmer 1998, p.103). As a result, there was a lot of industrial agitation, sabotage before the machines could be introduced, and many people did indeed lose their jobs some becoming destitute. This leads one to ask, if technology is supposed to bring about progress, for whose sake is this progress? Obviously, there is nothing progressive about people loosing employment simply so that a new technology can be used since in this instance it appears that seem technology is not only diving mankind on capitalistic basis. Even today, technology that ideally should produce the best results for the lowest price negatively affects human agents who interact and depend on it (Volti 2012, p.91). For example, in recent times there has been ethical issue surrounding several mobile phone manufactures such as Samsung and Apple because of their outsourcing to China where the cost of production and labor is lower. These firms have been accurse of exploiting employee by overworking and underpaying them and sometimes putting them in dangerous conditions that been proven to affect their physical and mental health. Evidently, the pursuit for technological change in some cases such as these ones, it can be perceived as subversive process that results in the destruction or modification or for organizational roles, relationship and ethical values. Another instance that can be used by critical theorist to prove that technology is subversive to humanity is the case of China, today it is one of the fastest growing economies and its level of industrialization is only second to the United States. However, one of the downsides of technological advancement is the fact that the air and water in the country is highly polluted owing to the effluence from the numerous firms that manufacture products therein. Based on these factors one can reasonably assume that technology is actually not human centered but technology centered, given that humans may be the agents behind its progress. Even then, technologic progress only seems to be progress in the sense that technology becomes more complex and not necessarily because it is more effective or helpful to making without forcing them to pay a high price for the benefits they get. Technological solutions bear more problems Critical theorists also oppose that the presupposition that technology is panacea for all the world problem is actually delusional since in essence many of the problems technology solves result in other problem that will require even more technology to solve. Consequently, humankind is forced to consistently keep advancing technology not necessarily, because they need the new changes but because they need to solve the successive problems resulting from its application (Lindlof and Taylor 2002, p.52). For example, technology gave weapons such as guns; they increased the magnitude of destruction that can occur in conflict and this brought about the need for more advance weapons such as nuclear warheads. Therefore, technology may seem to be evolving to a direction destructive to humanity, but human agents are at the same time responsible for developing it. From a critical point of view, it is apparent that technology covertly subjugates and endangers humanity in myriad of ways yet it continues to have its way irrespective of the cost on human values, health and life. Symbolic interpretive perspective The Symbolic Interpretive Approaches views technology as socially determined concept in which changes are generally socially engineered with all human including organizational relationships being determined by cultural and social relationships rather than technology. Owing to the social construction that construes symbolic interactions, technology can be perceived by symbolic Interpretivists as a combination or words images metaphase and other symbols that mediate the relationship between man and technology that can cause or form culture (Borgmann 2006, p.352). This theory is focused on the expansion of the study between the social and technical interface which driven developments and invention in computer, as well as special interest in new technologies. Contrary to modernist and critical assumptions that technology is the determinant of organizational design and operates on an autonomous universal law, the social constructivist theory holds that technology is subject to the needs of a society. This is evidenced in the definition of technology according to social constructivist in which they propose that it is not a purely applied science but rather a result of social, cultural and economic co-determinants (Hatch and Cunliffe 2006, p.155). Social cultural associations of technology In the context of SCOT, technology means different things to different people based on their retrospective culture or socialization, the invention of the rubber bicycle tire for example brought about conflict among several circles based on their perception of the invention (Russell 1986, p.331). This difference is brought about by a concept known as interpretative flexibility, for some , the new tire signified a more convenient mode of transport while other saw it as a nuisance especially because of the then considered poor aesthetics. Likewise, the interaction between human agents and technology is determined by the way the relevant groups perceive certain technological developments; nonetheless, the most basic grouping is between the produces and users in any give instance. Several subgroups can be delineated based on social or economic status and interest; these groups can be distinguished based on their collective or deviating understandings of the technology in question (Sismondo 1993, p.521). For example, when a piece of technology in invented, such as the previously mentioned machines that are designed to increase productivity while reducing employment , there are people who will be involved such as politicians, civil societies and journalist who play no role in the production or even consumption of technology. Nonetheless, each of them will react to the development in a manner determined by their societal position in relation to its perceived effect, for example, civil societies may seek to have it withdrawn to safeguard the interests of the workers who stand to lose their jobs. It has also been proposed that apart from producers, users and other revenant groups who either use of produce technology, “salespeople” should be included in this categorization since they also play and active apart in bring technology to the people by bridging the user and producer gap (Pinch 2003, p.251). Because of many different interpretations there are often conflicts arising between which is the most suitable or valid criteria since the issue in question cannot be resolved technologically (Wajcman, 2002, p.354). While liberals found the bicycle to be a convenient and cheap means of transport, conservative and traditionalist groups found it to be immodest since women could not be expected to look decent while riding it in a dress or skirt. In the case of the cycle, anti-cyclist lobbying called for it to be banned since their interpretation of the technology in question was that it was immodest. Conclusion Ultimately, while conceding that the importance of technology and the roles it plays in human life cannot be overstated there is need for humans to be excise caution while developing and applying it. Despite the belief that humanity is a master technology, critical and modernist approaches reveal that there is every possibly that humans are actually manipulated and controlled by technology which has actually been proven to be covertly subversive in some cases (Feenberg 1992, p.3). Therefore, it is imperative that different understandings and interpretations of technological invention are taken to account, hence the social constructivist theory so that the human agent in technology does not become just another of its elements, but a master capable of controlling and limiting it when needful. References Borgmann, A. 2006. Technology as a Cultural Force: For Alena and Griffin. The Canadian Journal of Sociology 31 (3): 351–360. Feenberg, A, 1992. Subversive Rationalization Technology, Power, and Democracy. Inquiry, vol. 35, nos. 3-4. Geuss, R. 1981. The Idea of a Critical Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hatch, M. J. and Cunliffe, A.L. 2006 . Organisation Theory. Cambridge: Oxford University Press. Jasanoff, S., 1999. A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmodernist Myths about Science. Science, Technology & Human Values, 24(4), pp. 495-500. Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. 2002. Qualitative Communication Research Methods, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Outhwaite, W. 1988. Habermas: Key Contemporary Thinkers 2nd Edition (2009). California Stanford Unvirsity Press. Palmer, R, 1998, The Sound of History: Songs and Social Comment. Cambridge. Oxford University Press. Pinch, T. 2003. Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch, ed. How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press. Russell, S. 1986. The Social Construction of Artefacts: Response to Pinch and Bijker. Social Studies of Science Vol; 16 (May 1986): 331-346. Sismondo, S, 1993. Some Social Constructions. Social Studies of Science, 23: 515-53. Volti, R.2006. Society and Technological Change, Fifth Edition, Worth, New York, 287-295 Volti, R. 2012. An Introduction to the Sociology of Work and Occupations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp.77-94. Wajcman, J. 2002. “Addressing Technological Change: The Challenge to Social Theory”, Current Sociology, 50:347, pp.347-362. 2) Read More