Geneva county reaper newspaper online

SOCIETY and TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 1 28/11/12 5:52 PM

A Macmillan Higher Education Company WORTH PUBLISHERS

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 2 28/11/12 5:52 PM

this page left intentionally blank

Pitzer College

SOCIETY and TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE S E V E N T H E D I T I O N

Rudi Vol t i

A Macmillan Higher Education Company WORTH PUBLISHERS

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 3 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Senior Vice President, Editorial and Production: Catherine Woods Acquisitions Editor: Sarah Berger Developmental Editor: Kirk Bomont Executive Marketing Manager: Katherine Nurre Marketing Assistant: Julie Tompkins Director of Print and Digital Development: Tracey Kuehn Associate Managing Editor: Lisa Kinne Photo Research Manager: Ted Szczepanski Photo Editor: Cecilia Varas Art Director: Babs Reingold Cover and Text Designer: Kevin Kall Production Manager: Barbara Seixas Composition: MPS Ltd. Printing and Binding: RR Donnelley Cover Art: ©James Brittain/View/Corbis

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012951470

ISBN-13: 978-1-4292-7897-3 ISBN-10: 1-4292-7897-8

©2014, 2009, 2001, 1995 by Worth Publishers

All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

First printing

Worth Publishers 41 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10010 www.worthpublishers.com

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 4 28/11/12 5:52 PM

http://www.worthpublishers.com
v

C on t en t s

About the Author xiii Preface xv

part one Or i en ta t i on s 1 Chapter 1 The Nature of Technology 3

Defining Technology 3 Technological Advance and the Image of Progress 7 Technology as a Metaphor 10 Technology and Rationality 12 Technological Determinism 15 Living in a Technological Society 17 Questions for Discussion 18 Notes 18

Chapter 2 Winners and Losers: The Differential Effects of Technological Change 21 Technology as a Subversive Force 21 The Luddities 26 Neo-Luddism 28 Whose Technology? 29 What Technology Can Do—And What It Cannot Do 29

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 5 28/11/12 5:52 PM

vi Contents

The Technological Fix 30 Why Technology Can’t Always Fix It 31 The Appeal of Technocracy 33 The Technocrat’s Delusion 36 Questions for Discussion 37 Notes 37

part two The P ro ce s s o f Te chno log i ca l Change 39 Chapter 3 The Sources of Technological Change 41

Technological Change as a Social Process 41 The Great Breakthrough 42 The “D” in R&D 44 All Together Now 45 Push and Pull 48 Belated Demand 51 Market Economies and Technological Advance 52 Noneconomic Sources of Technological Advance 54 Questions for Discussion 57 Notes 58

Chapter 4 Scientific Knowledge and Technological Advance 61 The Historical Separation of Science and Technology 61 Studies of Contemporary Science–Technology Relationships 62 How Technology Differs from Science 64 How Technology Stimulates Scientific Discovery 66 Indirect Effects of Technology on Scientific Advance 69 The Commonalities of Science and Technology 71 The Translation of Science into Technology 74 Questions for Discussion 76 Notes 76

Chapter 5 The Diffusion of Technology 79 The International Diffusion of Technology 79 Clever Copyists 84 Adaptation and Adoption 85 Learning to Make Steel in Old Japan 86

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 6 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Contents vii

Appropriate Technology 87 Business Firms and Technological Diffusion 90 A Risky Business 91 The NIH Syndrome 92 Efforts to Restrict the Diffusion of Technology 93 Patents and the Diffusion of Technology 94 Questions for Discussion 96 Notes 96

part three How Techno logy A f f e c t s t he Hea l t h o f t he Ea r t h and I t s I nhab i t an t s 101

Chapter 6 Technology, Energy, and the Environment 103 Fossil Fuels, Air Pollution, and Climate Change 103 A Planet under Stress 107 Is Technology the Problem or the Solution? 108 Some Technological Fixes of the Past 109 Alternatives to Fossil Fuels 110 Doing More with Less 114 More Miles to the Gallon 116 Economic Systems, Government Policies, and the Environment 118 Questions for Discussion 121 Notes 122

Chapter 7 Medical Technologies 125 New Medical Technologies: Choices and Trade-offs 127 The Case of Kidney Dialysis 127 Replacing Broken Hearts 131 Diagnostic Technologies 135 Medical Technologies and Medical Ethics 137 New Ways of Making and Sustaining Babies 138 When Does Life End? When Should It? 140 Halfway Technologies 140 Questions for Discussion 141 Notes 141

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 7 28/11/12 5:52 PM

viii Contents

Chapter 8 Genetic Technologies 145 The Genetic Fix 145 Discovering Genes and Patenting Them 146 Bioengineering on the Farm 148 Genetic Mapping and Screening 151 Cloning, Present and Future 152 Stem Cells and Future Therapies 155 The Ethics of Genetic Intervention 156 Questions for Discussion 159 Notes 159

part four Techno logy and t he T r ans fo rma t i on o f Wo rk 163

Chapter 9 Work in Nonindustrial Societies 165 Working with the Earliest Tools 165 Work and Leisure in Technologically Primitive Societies 166 Work and the Development of Agriculture 168 Farming Techniques and Patterns of Work 169 The Ironies of Progress 171 Artisan and Craft Work 171 Guild Organization and Technological Change 174 Slavery and the Inhibition of Technological Development 175 The Measurement of Time and Changed Working Patterns 176 The Clock 178 Questions for Discussion 180 Notes 180

Chapter 10 Technology and Jobs: More of One and Less of the Other? 183 The Technological Threat in Historical Perspective 183 A Case for Optimism 184 How Technology Creates Jobs 186 The Indirect Effects of New Technologies on Employment 188

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 8 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Contents ix

The Machines Aren’t Ready to Take Over 189 Technology, Jobs, and the Changing Structure of the Economy 191 Technology and the Distribution of Income 194 Technology, Globalization, and Jobs 196 Rebounding from Job Losses 197 Benefits, but Disruption Too 198 Questions for Discussion 199 Notes 199

Chapter 11 Technological Change and Life on the Job 203 Industrial Production 203 Machine-Paced Labor 205 Is Technology to Blame? 207 Industrial Technology and the Division of Labor 209 Scientific Management Once Again 212 Industrial Work and Recent Technological Developments 213 Technological Change and White-Collar Work 214 Telework 216 Smart Technologies and Dumb Jobs? 217 Questions for Discussion 219 Notes 220

part five Commun i ca t i on 223 Chapter 12 Printing 225

The Printing Revolution 226 Printing and the Expansion of Knowledge 228 Printing and the Rise of Protestantism 229 Printing, Literacy, and Social Change 230 Psychological Effects of Printing 232 Newspapers 233 Circulation Wars and the Shaping of Public Opinion 235 Questions for Discussion 237 Notes 238

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 9 28/11/12 5:52 PM

x Contents

Chapter 13 The Electronic Media: From the Telegraph to Television 241 The Invention of Radio 241 The Origins of Commercial Radio 243 The Rise of Television 245 The Federal Government Steps In 246 Problems of Regulation 248 The Television-Viewing Public 249 Violence on Television and Its Consequences 250 Delivering the News 253 Television and Politics 255 Television and Thought 257 Questions for Discussion 258 Notes 259

Chapter 14 The Internet Age 263 The Birth and Growth of the Internet 263 E-Mail and the Network Effect 266 Mobile Communications 267 More Digital Connections: Social Networks 268 Social Media and Social Movements 270 Video Games 272 The Digital Divide 275 Intellectual Property 276 Privacy in the Digital Age 278 The Electronic Media in Modern Society 279 Questions for Discussion 280 Notes 281

part six The Too l s o f Des t r u c t i on 285

Chapter 15 Weapons and Their Consequences 287 Military Technology in the Ancient World 287 Military Technology and the Feudal Order 289 New Weapons and the Decline of Feudalism 290 The Gunpowder Revolution 293

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 10 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Contents xi

War and the Centralized State 296 Technological Change and Naval Culture in the Era of the Battleship 297 Weapons and the Making of the Modern World 298 Questions for Discussion 302 Notes 303

Chapter 16 The Era of Smart Weapons 305 Cruise Missiles 305 Smart Bombs 307 High-Tech Surveillance 308 Drones 309 The Cost of Technological Sophistication 310 Asymmetrical Warfare 311 Technology and Terrorism 313 Cyberterrorism and Cyberattacks 315 Military Technologies in a Changing World 317 Questions for Discussion 319 Notes 320

Chapter 17 How New Weapons Emerge—And How They May Be Contained 323 Action and Reaction 323 Social Structure and the Development of Military Technologies 324 Organizational Interests and the Air Weapon 329 Social Revolution and the Enlargement of War 331 Industrial Technology in the Service of War 333 Controlling Military Technologies 335 Historical Attempts to Limit New Weapons 336 A Successful Example of Arms Control 337 Gun Control in Old Japan 339 The Control of Nuclear Weapons 341 Deterrence, but No More 341 The Perils of Proliferation 342 Questions for Discussion 343 Notes 344

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 11 28/11/12 5:52 PM

part seven The Shap ing and Con t r o l o f Te chno logy 347

Chapter 18 Technology and Its Creators: Who’s in Charge of Whom? 349 Technological Advance and Cultural Lag 349 Technology, Globalization, and Cultural Convergence 351 Experts, Expertise, and the Shaping of Technology 355 Engineers and the Control of Technology 358 Questions for Discussion 363 Notes 364

Chapter 19 Organizations and Technological Change 367 Technology as a Cause of Organizational Structure 367 Technology as a Consequence of Organizational Structure 372 Organizations and New Information Technologies 375 Interorganizational Relations and Technological Development 378 Organizations and Technological Innovation 379 Entrepreneurs and Organizations 381 Questions for Discussion 383 Notes 384

Chapter 20 Governing Technology 387 Government Actions and the Shaping of Technology 387 But Is It Really Necessary? 391 Government Institutions for the Guidance of Technology 392 Processes 394 The Democratic Control of Technology 399 The Challenges of the Future 402 Questions for Discussion 403 Notes 404

Index 407

xii Contents

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 12 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Rudi Volti is Emeritus Professor of Sociology at Pitzer College, where he was a founding member of the program in Science, Technology, and Society of the Claremont Colleges. His books and articles have covered a variety of topics on the interaction of technology and society, including technology transfer to East Asia, the history of the engineering profession, the origin of frozen foods, and the history of automobile engines. His personal encounters with modern technology center on cars, motorcycles, and model railroading.

xiii

A bou t t he Au tho r

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 13 28/11/12 5:52 PM

A Macmillan Higher Education Company WORTH PUBLISHERS

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 2 28/11/12 5:52 PM

this page left intentionally blank

When the first edition of Society and Technological Change came out in 1988, Microsoft’s initial public offering had occurred only two years earlier, tweets were something birds did, and Mark Zuckerberg had not yet entered kindergarten. Since that time, ongoing technological changes and new ways of interpreting the interaction of technology and society have provided new opportunities to revise and expand suc- ceeding editions. Even so, the animating spirit of the book remains the same. This seventh edition of Society and Technological Change continues to explore the many ways in which various technologies have influenced our lives. At the same time, it shows how these technologies have themselves been shaped by social, economic, cultural, and political forces, and that the study of technology is important not just for its own sake but also for what it tells us about the kinds of societies we make for ourselves.

This book is intended to be used in the growing number of courses on tech- nology and society, as well as in other courses that take into account technology’s role in human affairs. It presents perspectives, theories, and facts that should help the reader to understand the consequences of technological changes, as well as the forces that have produced these changes. Many specific examples of the interaction between technological change and other changes are introduced, for general pro- cesses are often best understood through references to particular instances.

The rapid pace of technological change during the opening years of the twenty-first century may have led to an overuse of the word “revolutionary,” but it also provides the basis for significant new discussions of the reciprocal interac- tions of technology and society. In particular, the seventh edition of this book now devotes an entire chapter to the Internet and digital communications media. Chapter 14, “The Internet Age,” discusses mobile communications, social media and social movements, the digital divide, and challenges to intellectual prop- erty and personal privacy. Another new chapter, Chapter 16, “The Era of Smart Weapons,” tracks advances in weaponry amid a changing military and political environment. Among the topics covered are weapons such as cruise missiles, smart bombs, and drones, which are raising remote-control warfare to a new level. Also discussed are cyberattacks, terrorism, the financial costs of technologically sophisticated weaponry, and the psychological distance that new weapons put between those who deploy them and the consequences of their deployment.

xv

P r e f a c e

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 15 28/11/12 5:52 PM

One of modern technology’s strongest influences has been on the development of the cluster of political, cultural, social, and economic changes that are subsumed in the term “globalization.” New material in this edition covers offshoring and tech- nology transfer, appropriate technologies in poor countries, new media and social movements in authoritarian societies, and the extent to which the world’s cultures are converging toward a common pattern.

Some of the most important issues involving technology and society center on health, both the health of humans and the health of the earth. In regard to the latter, the broad issue of sustainability is addressed by expanded coverage of climate change and the use of sources of energy other than fossil fuels. As far as human health is concerned, advances in genetics research are giving rise to new healing technologies. At the same time, however, DNA-based technologies also pose many practical and ethical problems that are noted in an expanded chapter on these technologies. Apart from human health concerns, genetic technologies offer a number of benefits, everything from improved crop yields to ascertaining the guilt or innocence of criminal suspects. These too present a number of concerns that will be explored in this chapter.

The preparation of this new edition also has provided an opportunity to update and extend many pertinent facts and statistics. These include new data on climate change, the costs of medical care, unemployment, the distribution of income, video game sales, the use of various media (including e-mail, mobile phones, and social media), future employment prospects, and government support of research and development.

Also new in this edition are short introductions to related chapter groupings that preview some of the overarching themes of each chapter. In addition, new dis- cussion questions have been added at the end of every chapter, intended to stimu- late further consideration of how particular technologies interact with the societies in which they emerge, are adopted, and mutate.

Although this edition has quite a lot of new material, no pretense is made that it presents an all-encompassing view of technology and society. Much has been left out because of space limitations and my own limitations of time, energy, and expertise. At the same time, systematic study of the interactions between technol- ogy and society is a relatively recent endeavor, and many gaps remain to be filled. It can only be hoped that this book will provide a foundation for thought and future study. If annoyance at the inadequacy of coverage leads the reader to undertake more extensive explorations of some of the topics presented, then this book will have served its purpose.

Acknowledgments Writing can be a lonely activity. While I was putting this book together, some of my loneliness was alleviated by being able to call on a number of colleagues for assistance. I would like to thank the following people for reading portions of the manuscript and making invaluable suggestions: Hugh G. J. Aitken, Newton Copp, David Cressy, Stephen Cutcliffe, Paul Faulstich, Barbara Gutek, Margaret Hamilton,

xvi Preface

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 16 28/11/12 5:52 PM

Lamont Hempel, Christine Ilgen, Sue Mansfield, Meg Mathies, Richard Olsen, Robert Post, Leonard Reich, Kathryn Rogers, Mark Rose, John Truxal, James C. Williams, and Andrew W. Zanella.

I would also like to thank those who have reviewed this and previous editions: Janet Abbate, University of Maryland; Patience Akpan, Arizona State University; Elazar Barnette, North Carolina A&T University; Wenda K. Bauchspies, Pennsylvania State University; Donald Beaver, Williams College; Paul Cesarini, Bowling Green State University; Dave Conz, Arizona State University; Jennifer Croissant, University of Arizona; Adam Driscoll, North Carolina State University; Kerry Dugan, Northeastern University; R. Valentine Dusek, University of New Hampshire; Anna Erwin, Appalachian University; Nora Foust, Alamance Community College; Martin Friedman, SUNY Binghamton; Ted Gaiser, Boston College; Gary Gappert, The University of Akron; James Gerhardt, Southern Methodist University; Kenneth Gould, Northwestern University; James P. Hamilton, Pennsylvania State University; Kurt Helgeson, St. Cloud State University; Robert Hoffman, North Carolina State University; Charles Jaret, Georgia State University; Richard Kahoe, University of Central Missouri; Felix Kaufmann, Eastern Michigan University; Robert Keel, University of Missouri— St. Louis; Mark Kelso, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; David Klein, Metro State College of Denver; Diane N. Long, California Polytechnic University; Carol MacLennan, Michigan Technological University; Toy McEvoy, Wayne State College; Marilyn Mertens, Midwestern State University; Todd Morgan, De Paul University; Karen Oslund, University of Maryland, College Park; Robert S. Paradowski, Rochester Institute of Technology; Karin E. Peterson, NC-Asheville; Dretha M. Phillips, Roanoke College; John Renzelman, Wayne State College; Terry Richardson, Northern State College; Laurel Smith-Doerr, Boston University; Donald Sorsa, DePaul University; James Steele, James Madison University; David Swift, University of Hawaii; L. E. Trachtman, Purdue University; Yung-Mei Tsai, Texas Tech University; Della M. Vanhuss, Tri-County Technical College; Steve Vergara, Wayne State College; Rollin Williams III, East Tennessee State University; and Thomas Zeller, University of Maryland, College Park. Their knowledge and expertise exceed my ability to make complete use of the help they have given me, and they are not responsible for any errors of fact or interpretation that may be found in these pages.

I would also like to thank the editorial and production staffs of Worth Publishers. Sarah Berger and Kirk Bomont have been terrific sources of guidance and encouragement; although I am pleased to see the publication of this new edi- tion, I will miss our regular conferences regarding its style and content. I also appre- ciate the able assistance of Cecilia Varas, Lisa Kinne, Edward Dionne, and Barbara Seixas. Finally, special thanks go to my wife, Ann Stromberg, and our daughter, Kate, for their unfailing support.

Rudi Volti

Preface xvii

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 17 28/11/12 5:52 PM

A Macmillan Higher Education Company WORTH PUBLISHERS

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 2 28/11/12 5:52 PM

this page left intentionally blank

p a r t o n e

1

The ability to create and use a great variety of technologies is one of the distinguishing characteristics of humans, but what exactly is meant by “technology”? The term is a familiar one, but like many words in current circulation it carries with it a multitude of meanings. Chapter 1 offers a definition of technology that is meant to be precise but elastic enough to cover the many connotations of the word. Although technology is often associated with particular items of hardware, the ultimate basis of technology is knowledge, and the chapter delineates the ways of thinking that are associated with technological advance.

Chapter 1 also includes an effort to disentangle technological advance from an even more slippery concept: “progress.” In Chapter 2 the discussion is continued by noting that many technological changes do not necessarily make things better for everyone, as is implied in the word “progress.” To the contrary, they may affect individuals and groups in different ways, leaving some better off while others are left in a worse position. This aspect of technological change is often ignored, making it hard to resist the temptation to seek technological fixes for problems that require more than the introduction of new devices and processes. This chapter describes the kinds of situations where technological fixes are likely to be successful and others where they are doomed to failure.

Orientations

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 1 28/11/12 5:53 PM

A Macmillan Higher Education Company WORTH PUBLISHERS

Volti7e_01_FM_i-xviii_highres.indd 2 28/11/12 5:52 PM

this page left intentionally blank

Today’s technology leaves us both exhilarated and terrified. Recent technological developments have presented us with such marvels as spacecraft leaving the solar system, instant access to billions of Internet Web pages, and diseases cured through gene therapy. At the same time, however, the seemingly inexorable march of technology has produced global pollution, overpopulation, and the threat of nuclear annihilation. On many occasions technological change has also produced social disruptions, as when automation destroys jobs in a particular industry or a new weapon upsets the balance of power between nations. And when technologies fail, some of them do so in a big way, as exemplified by the loss of the Challenger and Columbia space shuttles, the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the catastrophic failure of the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan, and the disastrous breaching of the levees in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Despite all the crises, disruptions, and disasters that have accompanied it, modern technology is still viewed in a favorable light, according to public opinion surveys. Although significant minorities of respondents express their disapproval of certain technologies like nuclear power and genetically modified foods, the positive achievements of technology as a whole are seen to substantially outweigh the negative ones.1 But this support of technology is based more on faith than on understanding. When confronting technology, most of us are poorly informed spectators, seemingly incapable of understanding an esoteric realm of lasers, microprocessors, gene splicing, and nanomaterials.

This inability to understand technology and perceive its effects on our society and on ourselves is one of the greatest, if most subtle, problems of an age that has been so heavily influenced by technological change.2 But ignorance need not be a permanent condition. Although no one can hope to comprehend the inner workings of even a small number of the most significant technologies, it is still possible to come to a better understanding of the major causes and consequences of technological change. All technologies, be they high-definition televisions or reinforced concrete bridges, have some basic features in common. It will be the task of this chapter to show what they are.

Defining Technology Gaining an understanding of the meaning of words is often the beginning of knowledge. Before plunging into a discussion of the nature of technology, it is

3

The Nature of Technology

c h a p t e r o n e

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 3 28/11/12 5:53 PM

4 Orientations

necessary to provide a more precise definition of what is meant when we use the term. The linguistic roots of the word “technology” can be traced to the Indo- European stem tekhn-, which seems to have referred to woodworking. It is the source of the Greek word tekne, which can be variously translated as “art,” “craft,” or “skill.” It is also the root of the Latin word texere, “to weave,” which eventually took on the larger meaning of fabrication or construction. The term “technologist” was occasionally used by Aristotle and others of his time, but in their usage it referred to a grammarian or rhetorician. By the early eighteenth century the word had come close to its present meaning when an English dictionary defined it as “a Description of Arts, especially the Mechanical.” In 1831 Jacob Bigelow published Elements of Technology, the first book in English with the word “technology” in its title. As he defined it, technology consisted of “the principles, processes, and nomenclatures of the more conspicuous arts, particularly those which involve applications of science.”3

Technologies are developed and applied so that we can do things not otherwise possible, or so that we can do them cheaper, faster, and more easily. The capacity of human beings to employ technologies sets us apart from other creatures. To be sure, beavers build dams, otters crack open shellfish with rocks, and chimpanzees use sticks to extract termites from their nests. But no other animal comes close to humans in the ability to create tools and techniques—the first two elements in our definition of technology—and no other creature is so dependent on them. The development of technology is in large measure responsible for the survival and expansion of a species that lacks many of the innate abilities of other animals. Left with only their innate physical capabilities, humans cannot match the speed of a cheetah, the strength of an elephant, or the leaping ability of a kangaroo. They do not possess the eyesight of an eagle or the defensive armament of a porcupine, and they are among the 25 percent of all species that are incapable of flying. All in all, humankind is a physically puny bunch. But compensating for this physical weakness is an intelligence that is the ultimate source of technology. Humans stand apart from all other animals in their ability to gain and transmit knowledge, and to use this knowledge to develop tools and techniques. Without this capacity to invent and use a great variety of technologies, members of the human species would have never been able to establish themselves on virtually every part of the globe.

Reliance on technology is as old as humanity itself. Whatever evils have accompanied the use of particular technologies, it is pointless to indict technology as being somehow “unnatural.” Our past as well as our future as a species is inex- tricably linked to our capacity to shape our existence through the invention and application of implements and techniques that allow us to transcend our meager physical endowments. It is certainly true, as Jacob Bronowski observed, that “to quarrel with technology is to quarrel with the nature of man—just as if we were to quarrel with his upright gait, his symbolic imagination, his faculty for speech, or his unusual sexual posture and appetite.”4

Tools and techniques have been of unquestioned importance in allowing the physical survival of the human species. Still, they are not the whole story.

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 4 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 5

It is necessary to add some elements to our definition of technology that go beyond the usual identification of technology with pieces of hardware and ways of manipulating them. The first of these is organization. This follows from the fact that the development, production, and employment of particular technologies require a group effort. Even a relatively simple technology, such as one centering on the use of earthenware pots, requires a complex network of material suppliers, potters, tool makers, marketing agents, and consumers capable of making good use of the pots. Of course, one person can learn all these skills adequately if not expertly, but the day is not long enough for him or her to do them all on a scale that produces a reasonable degree of efficiency. In the case of a complex technology like a computerized manufacturing system, there is no possibility of a single individual developing even a tiny fraction of the requisite skills. For a technology to be developed and used, the energies and skills of many individuals have to be combined and coordinated through some organizational structure. Organization may be likened to the software that controls and guides a computer; without an operating system and application programs, a computer is a useless arrangement of capacitors, transistors, resistors, and other bits of hardware. In similar fashion, an organizational structure allows the integration of diffuse human and material inputs for the attainment of particular tasks. From this standpoint, there is considerable merit in Lewis Mumford’s assertion that the first “machine” was not a physical object, but the organizational structures that the Egyptian pharaohs employed to build the pyramids.5

When technology is seen as a combination of devices, skills, and organizational structures, it becomes natural to think of it as a system, the next element in our definition. For an individual technology to operate effectively, more is required than the invention of a particular piece of hardware; it has to be supported by other elements that are systematically interconnected. When Thomas Edison began to work on electrical illumination, he realized that this technology would require the development of such a system. The invention of a practical, long- lasting light bulb rested on the development of a serviceable filament and the use of an improved vacuum pump that evacuated the interior of the bulb, thereby preventing the combustion of the filament. But by itself, a light bulb was useless. An effective electrical generator was needed to supply the current that produced the incandescence of the filament. A network of electrical lines had to be strung up between the generator and individual homes, shops, and factories. And metering devices were necessary so that users could be accurately billed for the electricity they used. Edison and his associates worked out all of these problems, and in so doing brought large-scale electrical illumination to the world.6

The development of all the elements of a technological system can be an un- even process, for technological advance often entails the resolution of tensions that are generated when one part of the technological system changes. This process is exemplified by the development of the modern airplane. Early biplanes with their drag-inducing wires and struts could not make effective use of more powerful engines. The availability of these engines became a strong inducement to the design of aerodynamically cleaner aircraft. The faster aircraft that resulted from the marriage of streamlined airframes and powerful engines produced a new problem:

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 5 28/11/12 5:53 PM

6 Orientations

dangerously high landing speeds. This, in turn, stimulated the invention of wing flaps and slots. By the 1940s it had become apparent that improved airframes could achieve still higher speeds if provided with more powerful engines; this possibility gave a strong stimulus to the development of the turbojet.7

For an example of the interplay of devices, skills, and organizational patterns, we can take note of Lewis Mumford’s analysis of the technology of handwriting.8 Two hundred years ago, the standard writing instrument was a goose-quill pen. Based on an organic product and sharpened by the user, it represented the handicraft technologies typical of its time. Cheap and crude, it called for a fair degree of skill if it was to be used effectively. In contrast, the steel-nib pen of the nineteenth century was a typical artifact of the industrial age, the product of a complex manufacturing process. Less adaptable than the quill, it was mass-produced in many different forms in order to meet specialized needs. Although Mumford’s ideas were formulated before the invention of the ballpoint pen in the 1940s, his analysis fits this implement perfectly. Made from a variety of artificial materials and manufactured to close tolerances, the ballpoint pen could only be produced through sophisticated industrial processes. It is completely divorced from the organic world and requires very little skill from its user. Indeed, the technological artistry embodied in the pen itself stands in sharp contrast to the poor quality of the writing that so often comes from the hand that wields it.

A technological system does not emerge all at once with every one of its components neatly fitting together. In addition to changes in tools, techniques, and organizational structures, many social, psychological, economic, and political adjustments may be required for the support of a technological system. Technological change is not always a smooth process, and many of the necessary changes may entail considerable pain and disruption. Seeing technology as a system should help us to understand that technological change is closely connected with a variety of associated changes, and that the creation of a technological system may be fraught with tension and discomfort.

Much of what has just been said can be incorporated into a schematic definition of technology: a system created by humans that uses knowledge and organization to produce objects and techniques for the attainment of specific goals.

Useful as it may be, this definition of technology is incomplete and possibly misleading in one important respect. The last part of the definition implies that technological change comes about as a response to existing needs: its purpose is “the attainment of specific goals.” In the first place, one could legitimately ask whose goals are to be attained. This is an important issue, but it is best left for the next chapter. For now, we should note that although it is a human creation, technology does not always respond to existing needs; a new technology may in fact create its own needs. The development of technology on occasion exemplifies a phenomenon that has been dubbed “the law of the hammer”: give a six-year-old a hammer, and to the child everything starts looking like a nail.

The history of technology is replete with examples of inventions looking for problems to solve. One example that illustrates this point is found in almost every medicine chest: a bottle of aspirin. One of the most common uses of aspirin is

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 6 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 7

to suppress fevers that accompany various illnesses. But recent medical research (as well as some ancient practices) has demonstrated that running a fever is a therapeutic process that aids in a patient’s recovery; it is the body’s way of naturally combating infection. Yet since the introduction of aspirin in the early 1900s, fever has been seen as a problem requiring intervention. As one medical researcher has noted, “It’s no surprise that society’s deep worries about fever closely followed the synthesis of aspirin, the first drug that could safely reduce it.”9 In short, a new technology created its own need.

It is also important to note that the goals achieved through the use of a technology do not have to be “practical” ones. Some technologies have been developed so that we can grow more food or construct more comfortable buildings, but others have been developed simply for the challenge and enjoyment of solving technological problems,10 a proclivity that Robert Post has described as “technological enthusiasm.”11 The prodigious efforts that went into the Daedalus Project, a successful attempt to build a human-powered aircraft capable of flying forty miles across the open sea, were certainly not motivated by an effort to produce a new form of transportation. A major reason for creating the aircraft was that its construction posed an intriguing technological challenge to those who designed, built, and flew it.

Flight seems to be a particularly attractive object for this kind of spirit. Immensely expensive technological endeavors such as the supersonic Concorde airliner and manned space exploration programs are hard to justify on practical grounds, although their supporters have made valiant efforts to do so. Their primary purpose seems to be the elevation of national prestige by demonstrating a nation’s collective ability to solve daunting technological problems. At the same time, many other technologies have a dual nature; they serve a practical purpose, but they are not valued only for this reason. An outstanding example is the automobile. It would be hard to justify the enormous resources employed for the building and operation of cars if transportation were the only goal. For many people (the author included), cars are objects of inherent fascination. Technological features like variable valve timing and active suspension systems have little to do with utilitarian transportation. The appeal is at least as much in the sophisticated technologies themselves as in the purposes that they serve.

Technological Advance and the Image of Progress The development of technology is an inherently dynamic and cumulative process. It is dynamic because a technology is never perfect; there is always room for improvement. As Henry Ford said of his firm, “If we have a tradition it is this: Everything can always be done faster and better.”12 It is cumulative, for one advance paves the way for another. The lessons learned in working with an existing technology very often provide materials, tools, and, most importantly, a knowledge base for the next stage of development.

The dynamic and cumulative nature of technological change sets it apart from many other human endeavors. Ignoring for the moment the social consequences

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 7 28/11/12 5:53 PM

8 Orientations

Sometimes we are inclined to look to technology for our salvation, as personified in this tongue-in-cheek rendition of a sanctified Steve Jobs. (© The Economist Newspaper Limited, London)

of technology, the process of technological change is usually one of continuous improvement in the internal workings of a particular technology: as they evolve, engines develop more power and are more efficient, integrated electronic circuits pack more components on a single chip, aircraft fly higher and faster.

The process of technological advance can be graphically portrayed according to the following diagram, in which the horizontal axis represents time and the vertical axis represents just about any aspect of technological advance: the speed of commercial airliners, the production of synthetic materials, or the number of articles in engineering journals. Although there are inevitable fits and starts over time, the general trend can be depicted as a sigmoid, or S-shaped curve:

Note that at first the curve rises rather slowly, inclines steeply in the middle, and then begins to slow down. That is, after an initial period of slow growth, the rate of advance accelerates, reaches a maximum, and then begins to proceed at a slower pace but never completely levels off. Although the rate of increase is smaller as the curve moves toward the right, this rate is applied to an increasingly larger base, so the actual addition is still substantial.

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 8 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 9

Not all human endeavors can be fitted to this sort of curve. While technology tends to be dynamic and cumulative, the same cannot always be said of other manifestations of human creativity. Although there is ample room for debate, a good case can be made that succeeding generations of writers, composers, and painters have not produced works superior to the ones created by Shakespeare, Beethoven, and Vermeer. And while we continue to take great pleasure in the artistic creations of eras long past, few of us would be satisfied with the technologies that were prevalent in those times. We also see few indications that people are more humane than they were centuries ago. The present era certainly provides a multitude of horrifying examples of human cruelty, many of them augmented by enlisting technology in the service of slaughter and destruction.

Still, when judged solely according to internal criteria, technology is one of the best examples of humankind’s largely unrealized dream of continual progress. Technological progress, however, is not the same thing as progress in general. The fact that a society is able to develop and make use of advanced technologies does not guarantee that it will be equally advanced in other areas.13 Nazi Germany produced many technological triumphs, such as the all-conquering Mercedes and Auto Union grand prix racing cars of the late 1930s and the V-2 rocket used during World War II, but in its ideology and treatment of people it can only be described as barbaric. Conversely, many technologically primitive peoples have exhibited a high level of sophistication in their artistic creations, religious beliefs, and social relationships. The term “progress” can be used with some precision when applied to the development of technology per se, although even here problems can crop up because different standards of evaluation may lead to conflicting conclusions. Is it really “progress” when a new medical technology maintains an individual’s life, but does so only at enormous expense while preserving nothing but the maintenance of organic functions? Does maintaining a “life” of this sort justify expenditures that otherwise might be used for expanded prenatal care or other preventative measures? Given all of the value judgments, ambiguities, and complexities surrounding the word “progress,” its use is avoided here unless its meaning is clearly defined.

Te ch

no lo

gi ca

l a dv

an ce

Time

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 9 28/11/12 5:53 PM

10 Orientations

Built with slave labor, the V-2 rocket exemplified the technological advances achieved in Nazi Germany. (Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

Technology as a Metaphor Despite these qualifications, it is evident that beginning in the late eighteenth century and continuing today, technology’s stunning advances have fueled a belief

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 10 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 11

in generalized human progress. In this way, technology has operated as a metaphor— the transference of an idea from one area to another. Technology has provided many other metaphors that have affected our way of looking at ourselves and the world, as when human thought is made analogous to the operation of a digital computer.

A further example of the power of a technology to shape our way of thinking comes from the late eighteenth century. At that time the designers of windmills and steam engines discovered the important principle of feedback, which the great twentieth-century mathematician Norbert Wiener defined as “a method of controlling a system by reinserting in it the results of its past performance.”14 When a steam engine begins to rotate too rapidly, a feedback device such as a flyball governor closes the valve that admits the steam, thereby bringing the engine back into its proper operating range. When it slows down, the reverse happens, and the governor opens the valve to admit more steam.

A steam engine with a flyball governor. Changes in the rotational speed of the vertical shaft at the top of the engine causes the two balls to move up or down, controlling the linkage that opens and closes the throttle. (Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS)

Flyball governor

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 11 28/11/12 5:53 PM

12 Orientations

During the late eighteenth century the feedback principle offered a suggestive metaphor for the workings of the economic system: instead of being guided by a centralized authority, an economy might best be organized through the operation of a self-regulating market, with the actions of independent buyers and sellers providing the feedback. Thus, when buyers wanted a particular commodity, its price would be high, motivating sellers to produce more of it. If the price were low, less would be produced. In similar fashion, an increase in production would cause the price of a commodity to fall, so more of it would be purchased, while a drop in production would cause the price to rise, leading to a reduction of purchases. In this way, the actions of buyers and sellers in the market provide a feedback mechanism through which supply and demand are supposedly brought into equilibrium. It is probably no coincidence that the Scottish economist Adam Smith developed this basic concept at the same time that the steam engine was being put into service.15 Today, the widespread use of the feedback principle makes its apparent applicability to the economic system even more appealing, even though the real-world economy is hardly a neat closed system like a steam engine. Laws and regulations as well as a host of other extraneous elements may strongly affect individual feedback loops, thereby preventing a complex economy from operating solely on the basis of supply-and-demand signals. Technological development has supplied a useful metaphor in the feedback principle, but like all metaphors it cannot be taken as a literal depiction of reality.

Technology and Rationality The development of technology has stimulated a belief that progress is a natural part of human life. At the same time, the progressive development of technology has itself been the product of a distinctive set of cultural values and mental processes that are characterized by a rational approach to the world and how it is to be controlled. Technological development is more than the random accumulation of tools, techniques, and organizational forms. Underlying the process is a set of attitudes and orientations that are collectively described as “rational.”

What makes a technologically progressive society different from others is that its methods of problem solving are oriented toward an objective scrutiny of the problem at hand, coupled with a systematic, empirically based examination of possible solutions and a logical selection of the most appropriate ones. Beyond this approach to the solution of problems lies another cultural attribute: the belief that solutions are possible and that constant changes are necessary in order to realize them. A society imbued with a rational ethos is dynamic and essentially optimistic, and it exhibits the confidence necessary to alter existing ways of doing things in order to gain particular benefits.

These abstract concepts may be illustrated through a simple example. All societies are faced with the problem of coping with the capriciousness of the weather. A great deal of human suffering has been the result of the vagaries of rainfall, and history provides many examples of the tragic consequences of drought. A number of responses are possible when people are confronted with this problem. The simplest is to succumb to despair, and perhaps try to find meaning in it by

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 12 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 13

attributing the drought to fate or God’s will. A more active approach might be to offer prayers, perform a special ceremony, or sacrifice a member of the community. These latter activities are not likely to meet with success. There is no logical or empirically verifiable connection between them and the circumstances that produced the drought, a fact that could be demonstrated by a systematic inquiry into the long-term connection between prayers, ceremonies, or human sacrifices and the incidence of rainfall.

Attitudes and behaviors of this sort stand in sharp contrast with rational ones. Through the use of logic and empirical observation, it is possible to develop ways of dealing with problems like drought that are both more effective and more closely connected to the way the world actually works. A systematic and empirical observation of weather patterns might allow the prediction of a drought so that necessary steps can be taken to alter farming practices and conserve water. Other solutions could be the development of drought-resistant crops, improved methods of conserving water, and the distillation of sea water. It might also be possible to artificially stimulate rainfall through cloud seeding. In short, a rational approach to problem solving is continuously concerned with identifying and developing appropriate means for achieving particular ends.

These remarks are not meant to convey the ethnocentric belief that modern Western culture is superior to all others. The intention here is not to ridicule the beliefs and practices of people and societies that use nonrational approaches to problem solving. There is no reason to believe that rationality has been and always will be the special attribute of a particular group of people. Moreover, modern societies often manifest behaviors and patterns of thought that are anything but rational, as when large numbers of people continue to find value in astrology, numerology, and the predictions of supposed psychics.

It is also important to recognize that rational ways of thinking do not confer moral superiority. To the contrary, the rigorous development and use of rational procedures can be accompanied by major moral and ethical transgressions. The rational method of problem solving, with its overarching concern for devising appropriate means for attaining particular ends, makes no distinction concerning the ends being pursued. There is nothing in the rational approach to the world that prevents the use of logically and empirically derived means in the service of goals that are neither rational nor ethically justifiable. We can take note of the words of Captain Ahab, the main figure in Herman Melville’s novel Moby Dick: “All my means are sane, my motive and subject mad.” Nazi Germany provides many ghastly historical examples of human destruction ensuing from rational thinking and its resultant technologies. As Albert Speer, Hitler’s Minister of Armaments, ruefully noted, “The criminal events of these years were not only an outgrowth of Hitler’s personality. The extent of the crimes was also due to the fact that Hitler was the first to be able to employ the implements of technology to multiply crime.”16

Even when rationality is not used for manifestly immoral purposes, it can still leave a dubious spiritual legacy. The very strength of rationality and the scientific and technological accomplishments that flow from it lie in their matter-of-fact

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 13 28/11/12 5:53 PM

14 Orientations

approach to the world. A rational approach to things is often accompanied by a reluctance to admit there are any forces incapable of withstanding logical and empirical scrutiny. As the great German sociologist Max Weber put it, the world defined by rational thought processes had become “disenchanted,” for it was bereft of the gods, genies, and spiritual forces that people not imbued with the spirit of rationality used to explain their world.17 But “disenchantment” is a two-edged sword, as the everyday meaning of the word makes clear. To be disenchanted is to lose the sense of awe, commitment, and loyalty that is a necessary part of a meaningful existence. Weber’s melancholy analysis of a world that has lost its enchantment is summarized by the French sociologist Julian Freund:18

With the progress of science and technology, man has stopped believing in magic powers, in spirits and demons; he has lost his sense of prophecy and, above all, his sense of the sacred. Reality has become dreary, flat and utilitarian, leaving a great void in the souls of men which they seek to fill by furious activity and through various devices and substitutes.

Similar misgivings were voiced by the eighteenth-century political philosopher Edmund Burke. Burke’s primary concern was the destruction of traditional authority by modern mass movements, as exemplified by the French Revolution. Burke attributed much of the demonic energy of that movement to the spread of rational modes of thought that left no room for the traditional attitudes, values, and political structures that had long sustained European civilization. Burke’s comment on the downfall of the queen of France, Marie Antoinette, thus contains a sharp indictment of the bearers of rational values who, in his estimation, were leading Europe to its doom:19

Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fallen upon her in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers. I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators, has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever.

Rationality also implies objectivity; coolness and detachment are part of the rational approach to understanding and changing the world. Guided by a rational outlook, scientific inquiry and technological application are usually based on the abstraction or isolation of the part of the natural world that is being studied or manipulated. This isn’t always a good thing, for it can produce a sharp separation between the individual and the rest of the world. The scientist or technologist stands apart from the system that is being studied and manipulated, resulting in a kind of tunnel vision that all too often ignores the larger consequences of gaining and applying knowledge.20 For example, in discovering a genetic marker for a serious disease, a researcher might not consider potential abuses of that discovery, such as insurance companies refusing coverage of people with that marker.

It also may be argued that a logical, detached, and dispassionate approach to the world is suffused with a “masculine” approach to understanding and interacting

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 14 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 15

with the world. Some technologies have largely been a male domain, but throughout history women also have made significant contributions to technological advance.21 The complex relationship of gender and technology is illustrated by the history of the technological artifact most strongly associated with the present era, the digital computer. Its development has generally been viewed as the product of hyper-rational male engineers, mathematicians, scientists, and technicians. In reality, many of the programmers of first-generation computers were women whose accomplishments have often been passed over in standard histories.22 More recently, the development of computer technology has depended on thought processes that are relentlessly rational, objective, and logical, but at the same time has required an intuitive, interactive, and generally less structured approach.23 This is not to say that either style is the exclusive province of men or women, only that technological advance often requires both approaches. Equally important, although these modes of thinking may be described in gender terms, they need not reflect the cognitive approaches of individual men and women.

Technological Determinism Nothing worthwhile in life comes without some costs attached. So it is with technology; while it has expanded human power and made our lives materially richer, the advance of technology has created many problems—environmental degradation, alienation, and the threat of nuclear annihilation, to name only the most obvious ones. And, most bothersome of all, there looms the possibility that technology is out of control. If this is so, what began more than a million years ago as a human creation has taken on a life of its own, with technology advancing according to its own inner dynamic, unrestrained by social arrangements, systems of governance, culture, and thought.24 The belief that technology acts as an independent force in our life, unaffected by social forces, is known as “technological determinism,” and if it is true, we have become the servant of technology instead of its master.

There can be little question that technology exerts a great influence on social, political, and economic relationships. Everything from antibiotics to zippers has affected our lives to some degree; many of these influences will be explored in subse- quent portions of this book. But that is not the end of the story. As will be explored at greater length in Chapter 3, students of technology have given extensive consid- eration to the opposite possibility, that instead of operating as an independent force, technology is shaped by social arrangements. According to social constructivists (adherents of the Social Construction of Technology approach), the emergence of particular technologies, choices between competing technologies, and the way these technologies are actually used owe a great deal to socially grounded forces like political power, social class, gender, and organizational dynamics.

Asserting the supremacy of either technological determinism or social constructivism is not a very useful activity. Such straightforward cause-and-effect relationships can be found in some realms—Newtonian physics, for example—but technological and social change is better understood in terms of probabilities, reciprocal interactions, and feedback loops. Even William F. Ogburn, a sociologist

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 15 28/11/12 5:53 PM

16 Orientations

who is often characterized as a technological determinist, on occasion took a more nuanced view of the subject: “The whole interconnected mass [i.e., social institutions, customs, technology, and science] is in motion. When each part is in motion and banging up against some other part, the question of origins seems artificial and unrealistic. If one pushes the question to the extreme, origins are lost in a maze of causative factors.”25

The wondrously complicated interactions of technology and society often result in unimagined consequences when new technologies emerge. To take one example, when the first digital computers appeared in the mid-1940s, they elicited modest expectations about their future applications. Today, the world as we know it is almost unimaginable without computers, as everything from air travel to the mapping of genomes is totally dependent on the storage, retrieval, and manipulation of information performed by computers. Accordingly, the history of the computer would seem to lend credence to technological determinism. Nobody saw it coming in the 1940s, but within a few decades the computer had become a universal and essential part of contemporary life.

This is the story from a technological determinist standpoint, but social constructivists would challenge it by noting that the technical development of the computer in the 1950s and 1960s was heavily supported by military expenditures, just as one of today’s major computer applications, the Internet, was initially a creation of the U.S. Department of Defense. Someone taking a social constructivist approach might also point out that the expansion of the market for computers was also powerfully stimulated by commercial enterprises like banks and insurance companies, and that this huge market supported the research and development that rapidly advanced computer technology.

A similar story could be repeated for most successful technologies. New technologies bring changes to many aspects of society, while at the same time social forces do much to stimulate and shape these technologies. To try to assign primacy to one or the other is to ignore a crucial feature of technological and social change. Both are dynamic processes characterized by the reciprocal interaction of a host of factors, some of them narrowly technical in nature, others not. No reasonable person could deny that technology has been a major force in making the world we live in, but it is important to always keep in mind that technology has not operated as an agent independent of the society in which it is imbedded.

Social constructivism therefore offers the possibility for more human agency than technological determinism, but it is not likely that the ability to influence the course of technological change will be evenly distributed among the population as a whole. To the contrary, social constructivist analyses have often shown how differences in power and access to resources have shaped technological change. Particular technologies may be devised, selected, and disseminated because they serve the interests of a particular group, possibly in opposition to the interests of other groups. Technology confers power, but this power is not wielded over only the nonhuman universe. As C. S. Lewis has reminded us, “Man’s power over nature is really the power of some men over others with nature as their instrument.”26

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 16 28/11/12 5:53 PM

The Nature of Technology 17

Living in a Technological Society The development and application of technologies that are suited to our needs requires the informed participation of a wide range of people. Unfortunately, the very nature of modern technology places severe limits on popular understanding. The sophistication and complexity of contemporary technologies preclude direct involvement by all but those immediately concerned with them. The rest of us are passive consumers, content to reap the benefits of rationally derived knowledge but woefully ignorant of it. This creates the fundamental paradox of modern society: technology has generated massive powers available to human society, while as individuals we exert very little of that power. We have access to a wide range of powerful technologies, yet our inability to understand them often leaves us with feelings of impotence and frustration, as anyone who has experienced a computer crash will attest.27

As has been noted, the application of rationality for the solution of human problems is both the consequence and the cause of optimism and a willingness to accept constant change. Yet one cannot help but wonder if these characteristics can be sustained in an environment that sharply limits participation and inculcates wide- spread feelings of having little or no power over the process of technological change.

Strange notions can emerge when feelings of powerlessness are coupled with an extravagant faith in technology. The consequences of this combination are sometimes exhibited by fervent believers in alien spacecraft or UFOs (unidentified flying objects). Although convincing evidence of UFOs is lacking, a belief in their existence does not necessarily make one a crackpot. In some cases, however, a strident belief in the existence of UFOs takes on the characteristics of membership in a religious cult where the deities are superior beings who have produced an advanced technology. Alien space ships represent a level of technical sophistication not attained on Earth, and some UFO enthusiasts entertain the hope that the aliens that created them will take over this planet and solve its problems. Faith in a higher technology may be combined with a mistrust of the “establishment,” as a fair number of UFO adherents claim that their government is engaged in a massive conspiracy to prevent the general public from being aware of the existence of UFOs. There is no denying that on occasion governments lie to their citizens, but a cover-up of the required magnitude would be impossible for even the most well-organized government to pull off. Still, conspiracy theories strike a resonant chord with people who feel that they have been excluded from decision making, both political and technological. A quasi-religious belief in UFOs may therefore combine an excessive confidence in technology in general with a distrust of the people and organizations that control it in actual practice.

Distrust flourishes when people have no ability to participate in decisions that shape their lives, and the inability to affect the course of technological change can produce a mixture of naïve hope and paranoid reaction. A realistic sense of control, including a sense of having some control over technology, is essential for an individual’s mental health. No less important, widespread participation in the shaping of technology is essential for democracy. Technology’s benefits cannot be separated from its costs, and thus it becomes necessary to determine if the former justify the latter. If a society is truly democratic, such decisions will be made with

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 17 28/11/12 5:53 PM

18 Orientations

as much citizen participation as possible. Moreover, the benefits and costs of technology are not shared equally, and once again the apportioning of costs and benefits should be done in as participatory a manner as possible. We will return to these themes in Chapter 17, but first we will take a closer look at how technology can affect people and groups in different ways.

Questions for Discussion 1. In your opinion, which recent technology has produced the greatest benefit?

Which has produced the most harm? Are there any harmful elements to the beneficial technology, and has anything good come from the harmful one?

2. Do all technologies require material artifacts of some sort? Does it make any sense to speak of bureaucracy as a kind of technology?

3. Are technologies “gendered”? Are some technologies identified with women and others with men? On what bases do we make these distinctions? Will this situation necessarily continue in the years to come?

4. Can you think of any technologies that were developed simply because of the technical challenges involved? How can these “impractical” technologies be justified?

5. How do you feel when a technological device upon which you depend malfunctions? What do these feelings tell you about your attitude toward tech- nology in general?

6. It is sometimes asserted that the development and use of oral contraceptives were responsible for the sexual revolution that began in the 1960s. Is there a simple cause-and-effect relationship of the two? Have there been any other forces that contributed to changing sexual mores?

Notes 1. National Science Foundation, “Science and Engineering Indicators: 2010,” accessed on

January 3, 2012, at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/c7/c7i.htm. 2. James D. Carroll, “Participatory Technology,” in Thomas J. Kuehn and Alan L. Porter

(Eds.), Science, Technology, and National Policy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981), p. 416.

3. This paragraph is derived from Carl Mitcham, Thinking Through Technology: The Path Between Engineering and Technology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), pp. 117–134.

4. Jacob Bronowski, “Technology and Culture in Evolution,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 1, 3 (1971): 199.

5. Lewis Mumford, “Technics and the Nature of Man,” Technology and Culture 7, 3 (July 1966): 303–317.

6. Thomas P. Hughes, Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880–1930 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983).

7. John B. Rae, Climb to Greatness: The American Aircraft Industry, 1920–1960 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1968), p. 74; Edward Constant, Origins of the Turbojet Revolution (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980).

8. Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1934), p. 110.

9. Edwin Kiester, Jr., “A Little Fever Is Good for You,” Science 84 5, 9 (November 1984): 172.

Volti7e_02_ch01_001-020_highres.indd 18 28/11/12 5:53 PM

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/c7/c7i.htm
The Nature of Technology 19

10. Daedalus of New Scientist, “Pure Technology,” Technology Review 72, 7 (June 1970): 38–45.

11. Robert C. Post, “Technological Enthusiasm,” in Rudi Volti (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Society, vol. 3 (New York: Facts on File, 1999), pp. 999–1001.

12. Quoted in Edward Constant, op. cit., p. 12. 13. Michael Adas, Machines as the Measure of Man: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of

Western Domination (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1989). 14. Otto Mayr, “The Origins of Feedback Control,” Scientific American 223, 4 (October 1970):

110–118. 15. Otto Mayr, “Adam Smith and the Concept of the Feedback System,” Technology and

Culture 12, 1 (1971). 16. Albert Speer, Inside the Third Reich (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p. 212. 17. This concept is explored by Weber in “Science as a Vocation,” in H. H. Gerth and

C. Wright Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1958), pp. 129–156.

18. Julian Freund, The Sociology of Max Weber (New York: Pantheon, 1968), p. 24. 19. Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (New York: Holt, Rinehart and

Winston, 1959), p. 91. 20. Richard Schlegel, “Why Can Science Lead to a Malevolent Technology?” Centennial

Review 21, 1 (Winter 1977): 14. 21. For a narrative of the historical processes that have led to the perception that technology

is “men’s work,” see Ruth Oldenziel, Making Technology Masculine: Men, Women, and Machines in America, 1870–1945 (Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam Press, 1999).

22. Jennifer Light, “Programming,” in Nina E. Lehrman, Ruth Oldenziel, and Arwin Mohun (Eds.), Gender and Technology: A Reader (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003)