humans and their technology

It is tempting to isolate the term “technology” within the historical confines of recent developments in, say, the past century citing the introduction of the telephone, television, computers, cellphones, internet,  and other familiar inventions that are so integrated into our daily lives and are , in truth, “invisible technology” (Thurlow, C., Lengel, L, Tomic, A., 2004, p. 37). The focus of computer mediated communication (CMC) is on the interactive technology of the internet which is, in light of history, a technological infant. But if we view technology in a comprehensive sense as “how people modify the natural world to suit their own purposes” (2004, p. 25), we will then embrace the vast scope of original creations that began popping on the human scene since the beginning and continue to the present moment.  It seems true that “technological possibilities are irresistible to man” (Chandler, 2002).

Dan Chandler uses the example of a knife to discuss the non-neutrality of technology and its simplicity might facilitate understanding the dynamic movement of technology. The knife surely originated in response to a clear need for a tool to protect and provide. Within the cultural context, men crafted a tool that served to “extend human abilities” (2004, p. 25). The tool, in turn, changed the culture. It expanded the abilities of the people to hunt, protect themselves, build dwellings, and prepare food.

When I studied graphic design in the late 60s and early 70s, we set our own type, used press type, hand-inked acetate pages for animation, and carefully hand-painted every project.  In recent years I have taught digital imaging classes using Photoshop software. The changes in technology are dramatic.  Graphic design is a different animal today. When the program opens there is list of scores of technicians who developed this incredible tool that is used by individuals, graphic designers, students, matt painters, and artists. It is a technology that was generated by the demands of a culture. It is a superior technology and is impacting the culture and in many venues has become “invisible”.

Are scientists and engineers responsible to the culture for their discoveries?

An assumption exists that technology is “unstoppable” (Chandler, 2002). Inherent in this is a sense of an unthinking phenomenon that has no choice but to press on. It suggests there is no room for ethics or moral reasoning. To offset this, Dan Chandler offers the example of the Chinese who developed gunpowder but elected to stop at that point and not create the gun. The gun was created by others, but not by the Chinese. They exercised choice in the face of the unstop-ability of technology (2002).  

In contrast, Media Ecologist, Marshall McLuhan states in response to this matter of a technological imperative:

“Moralistic resistance is futile. On a moving highway, the vehicle that backs up is accelerating in relation to the highway situation. Such would be the ironical status of the cultural reactionary. When the trend is one way, his resistance insures a greater speed of change” (Griffin, 2009).

In reflecting on the example of the Chinese intentional limitations with gunpowder, though I think that this resistance may seem futile in the larger picture, it illustrates the possibility of a moral or ethical capability of humans to refuse to succumb to the pressure of the technological imperative. Is that refusal to press forward to be equated with backing up or is there a time to realistically assess and not always assume that moving “forward” is the only solution? It seems that the custodians of technological advances---those who originate and create---are also responsible to use that same creative brilliance to imagine the  varied consequences of sending this technology into the world.

References

Chandler, D. (2002, October 29). Technological or Media Determinism. Retrieved March 18, 2011, from Media and Communications Study: http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tdet01.html

Griffin, E. (2009). A first look at communication theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L, Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication. London, England: Sage Publications.