Suchergebnisse

Technological determinism as a theory of social change has been thoroughly tarnished in social theory, science and technology studies, and the discipline of International Relations. If once claims to an ahistorical development of technology (e.g. Cohen, 1978) were treated with significant respect, this is no longer the case. Indeed, it is by now a ritual to disclaim any notion of technological determinism in theories of international relations and the non-human world (Peoples, 2010; Herrera, 2006; McCarthy, 2011). Yet we must be careful of not throwing out the power of technological determinations with the teleological bathwater. This article attempts to develop a sociological account of technological determinism as dependent upon 'the International'. I will argue that technological determinism operates due to the presence of multiple political communities. Technological determinism is thereby reconceptualised as a distinct form of power in international politics.

Abstract
The work of Jacques Ellul is useful in understanding and evaluating the implications of rapidly changing technologies for human values and democracy. Ellul developed three powerful theses about technology: technological autonomy, technological determinism, and technological bluff. In this essay, the authors explicate these views of technology, and place the work of Ellul in dialogue with the ides of other important theorists of technology (including Max Weber, Herbert Marcuse, Lewis Mumford, Langdon Winner, and Hans Jonas). Ellul's too-often overlooked theses about technology are relevant to our present technological society

Technological determinism: contours of a conceptTechnological determinism, which in essence is the concept meaning that 'technology determines history', has its roots in eighteenth-century Enlightenment. It has manifested itself against various political backgrounds as the idea of the development of human power in overcoming nature and anti-revolutionary forces, as well as a view of technology as a method of political salvation. The approaches of various thinkers are categorized by Bimber as being either normative (corresponding to a soft determinism), nomological or one of unforseen consequences. During the twentieth century a number of writers (among them Ellul) have expounded pessimistic and even fatalistic views on the effects of technology. Ironically, they have thus done much to enhance the image of technology as a force in society. Both those who view technology positively and those who are intensely sceptical about its influence accord it an active, even autonomous role in the development of society. However, a third view is both possible and imperative, namely that technology and its development are part of both our freedom and our responsibility, and that it must therefore be controlled and utilized as part of our stewardship of God's creation.

AbstractThis article analyzes crisis as part of deeper trends determined in historical development from the perspective of two important theoretical streams: firstly, Analytical Marxism, and secondly, the Critical Theory of Society (the Frankfurt School). It shows both general determinants of historical development and pathological determinants of historical development. Examining Analytical Marxism and its theory of technological determinism, the article explains crisis in respect of situations of systemic changes mainly from the perspective of the relationship between forces of production and relations of production. Examining the Critical Theory, the article clarifies the role of the pathological determinants of instrumental rationality in human history in relation to efforts at human emancipation. In the article, crisis is seen as the superficial appearance of the historical developmental trends where there are inherent permanent tendencies to crisis. Crisis is a temporary eruption of the deeper contradictory development of the capitalist mode of production and other systems within the history of human civilization. The article discusses an issue of determinism as a necessary framework for the interpretation of crisis, and offers an interpretation of the preconditions of crisis not only from the economic point of view, but also, on a deeper level, in a civilizational sense.

Abstract
In this paper, I argue that philosophy's potential to influence technological change is impeded by the presence of two common and influential myths surrounding technology—the myth of progress and the myth of technological determinism. Such myths, I suggest, hinder philosophy's influence by presenting a distorted image of technology—respectively, as an unqualified good, and as an entity with its own autonomous logic. Steven Pinker and Martin Heidegger are selected as influential advocates for progress and technological determinism respectively, and their work is explored in turn. The work of John Gray and of Herbert Marcuse is then employed to demythologise technology by articulating an alternative image of technology that is not just more accurate, but also more conducive to philosophical influence. Finally, the work of Hans Jonas and Luciano Floridi is used to ground the conclusion that, should philosophy wish to influence technological change, an effective method of doing so could be the articulation of ethical maxims and the supervision of their translation into a real world setting.

A number of different theories have been proposed to explain the relationship between technological development and social change, including: technological determinism, symptomatic development and social constructionism. A popular and influential theory describing this relationship is technological determinism. An examination of the history of the computer's graphical user interface reveals that the original inventors of this technology were influenced by theorists associated with the determinist perspective. However, when creating their actual interfaces, early designers Douglas Engelbart and Alan Kay utilized methods that support a social constructionist view of technology development. Moreover, as new social interfaces emerge that incorporate software agents into the process of computer interaction, these new designs continue to support a constructionist approach. This article will describe the relationship between theories of technological determinism and the development of graphical user interfaces to argue that a social constructionist approach bridges the gap between theory and invention.

Friends and enemies of Marx have caricatured his economic interpretation of history. They think that his celebrated preface of 1859 applies to universal history; we argue that it does not. With historical examples we show how Marx used his economic variables-technology, productive forces, and mode of production-in understanding the evolution of society. Was Marx a technological determinist? What does it mean to say that the economic base explains the superstructure "in the last analysis"? Does Marx's model of economic change help us to understand the history of ancient classical civilization? Is the materialist conception of history a theory or a method? These are some of the questions we consider.

In 1997 War and History published my article, "Catapults Are Not Atomic Bombs: Towards a Redefinition of 'Effectiveness' in Premodern Military Technology." The title was hyperbolic as the article discussed neither catapults nor atomic bombs, but that hyperbole was to serve a purpose: to have military historians, primarily historians of military technology rethink their notions of military technological determinism, especially in interpreting premodern military history. In that article I used three examples: the chariot, the longbow, and gunpowder weaponry, suggesting that the use of these technologies by modern historians as determining catastrophe, invincibility, and revolution, respectively, was overstating their effects on history. After 22 years I was asked to revisit my original thoughts and here use the various chroniclers' descriptions at the battle of Crécy (1346) and the function of the English longbows (and longbowmen) to explore how the premodern world thought about technology in war. Ultimately, I reaffirm the importance of humans over technology in any military situation, even if the technologies are either characteristic or central to any particular engagement.

The year 2000 (Y2K) computer software problem is framed as a technological boundary and cultural object. The author documents and analyzes three subcultures' constructions of Y2K. The three subcultures are millennial (Evangelical-Charismatic-Pentecostal) Christians, militia-patriot survivalists, and computer professionals. Each subculture interpreted, received, comprehended, and explained the cultural object of Y2K. Combining the data from content analysis and interviews, the author creates a detailed picture of each subculture's response to Y2K. She compares and contrasts the three subcultures. Each subculture created a subcultural filter based on previously held value and belief systems, attitudes toward technology and computers, and interpretations of social environments to create a unique picture of Y2K. She examines how each of the subcultures framed technology through the framing of it as a technological object. Each response was located within the technological determinism versus social determinism debate and juxtaposed with its place in the technology as utopian or dystopian.

Since the original publication of Playing God? in 1996, three developments in genetic technology have moved to the center of the public conversation about the ethics of human bioengineering. Cloning, the completion of the human genome project, and, most recently, the controversy over stem cell research have all sparked lively debates among religious thinkers and the makers of public policy. In this updated edition, Ted Peters illuminates the key issues in these debates and continues to make deft connections between our questions about God and our efforts to manage technological innovations wi

With this article we aim to propose an analytical alternative to what we could call the substitution and condemnation of the spectator as an element of the new technological apparatuses. Actually, what we see in many of the current reflections on new media is that while the spectator is being accused of ultimate passivity, he is also being mobilized to emancipated action as an empowered user. Through the critique of an online application available on RTP's website, the state-owned television network, called O Meu Telejornal, we will try to demonstrate that we actually need to develop a spectator theory to critically understand the political position of the citizen within our changing contemporary media environment. ; Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia ...

This study examines the work patterns of middle and young journalists in the newspaper industry. Journalists work patterns seen from the process of selecting news, researching news, and writing news. With the advent of the digital era, these three processes can be seen by the consumption patterns of digital media for middle and young journalists. This study was conducted using a study case with in-depth interviews with journalists of the Suara Merdeka newspaper. The results showed that the presence of digital media is used by middle and young journalists in the local newspape for personal needs outside of journalistic duties. The reason for this is the pattern of digital media consumption of young and middle journalists who are included in the categories of "joiners" and "conversationalists". In other words they are connoisseurs and spectators. For news development and idea searches, they rely more on news sources in the form of press releases, local government, e-mail and emergency services rather than internet research. This is related to the company's principles which try to minimize legal problems from published news.