Essay #1 - Technology
Essay #1 - Technology
David Freiberger
Dr. Sisson
Tech 393
October 15, 2006
Essay #1
The word technology often brings to mind common modern innovations such as the automobile,
television, cellular phone, and even nuclear warfare or space research. It is a word commonly
interpreted to mean the application of scientific research and knowledge for the formation of physical
tools and systems. While this interpretation is partly correct, technology is more than just a result, and
on a higher level it characterizes the systematic means to an end which is guided by continual
interactions within society and restricted only by the limits of technology itself. Because technology is
such a large part of the modern social system, it is important to study its interactions with the system
and its limitations when applied as a fix for either social or scientific problems.
In Robert Pool's essay “How Society Shapes Technology,” an introduction is made to two
differing perspectives on technology. The first view is labeled positivism, and relates to an objective
and highly scientific approach to defining technological solutions. In Pool's words “positivism accepts
as knowledge only those things that have been verified by the scientific method of hypothesis
formation and testing”(17). While this perspective is commonly held when considering the progression
of scientific knowledge, the second, less accepted view of technology as a “social construction” is just
as important when considering how technology interacts within society. To define technology and its
foundations in science wholly under one view is foolish, if not dangerous, for, as Pool states,
“technology combines the physical world with the social, the objective with the subjective, the machine
with the man”(20). Technology is not just an objective enterprise, with engineers creating solutions for
the good of humanity. Rather, its development is motivated out of a mixture of political, economic,
Freiberger 2
religious, and cultural concerns, with an objective approach being applied only partly within
educational and scientific institutions and very rarely in industrial and economic enterprises.
Not only does society affect the development of technology, but it also responds to
technological change. As Mesthene and McDermott argue in their essays, technology impacts society,
having “both positive and negative effects, ... [usually] at the same time and in virtue of each
other”(Mesthene, 95). Although Mesthene lays out the effects of technology as externalities that are
“with us in large measure because it has not been anybody's explicit business to foresee and anticipate
them”(97), McDermott contends that this view leads to the paradigm of technology as a “self
correcting system” in which the “cure for technology's problems, whether positive or negative, is still
more technology”(105). Whether externalities or not, the changes brought upon society by technology
must be dealt with utilizing both social and technological means in tandem with each other. For many
of the problems outlined by Mesthene and McDermott, solutions will only be found by educating the
“masses” to higher levels of scientific knowledge, and by bringing a broader view of technological
impact into scientific institutions and corporate management circles. Through this approach, the
leaders in society will better understand how their decisions affect the society as a whole, and the
general populace will make wiser choices in the consumption and use of technological devices.
In agreement with the concept of balance between social and technological viewpoints is the
reality of technology's limitations when trying to solve social problems. As nice as it may sound, a
“technological fix” to problems created by poor living conditions, corrupt government, ignorance, or
other aspects of societal failure rarely works. Even when a solution appears to have positive results, it
often covers up the root causes of the failure, and generates new problems which may not arise until
years later (Volti 27). As Volti stated, “technological development may make some aspects of our lives
Freiberger 3
better, but it can never substitute for a just and effective political and social system”(30).
The development and dispersion of technology in society is an ongoing process that produces
both positive and negative effects on it. While many people benefit from technology, others will always
“lose out”(30). Thus the goal in studying technology is not to find an ultimate solution or perfect
technological fix, but instead to find ways in which to balance technology within modern society to
create the best situation possible for every person.
Works Cited
McDermott, John. “Technology: The Opiate of the Intellectuals.” Teich 10312.
Mesthene, Emmanuel G. “The Role of Technology in Society.” Teich 93102.
Pool, Robert. “How Society Shapes Technology.” Teich 1320.
Teich, Albert H., ed. Technology & The Future. 10th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2006.
Volti, Rudi. Society and Technological Change. 5th ed. New York: Worth, 2006.