Technological Determinism

Technological Determinism is a Reductionist theory that assumes that a society's technology progresses by following its own internal logic of efficiency, while determining the development of the social structure and cultural values.

It is the opposite of Technological Constructivism.

Hard Determinism
Hard determinists perceive technology as evolving independently from social considerations. They assert that technology engenders a set of potent forces that regulate our social activities and shape their meaning. According to this deterministic perspective, we organize ourselves to fulfill the demands of technology, and the outcomes of such organization lie beyond our control or the freedom to choose (autonomous technology). Jacques Ellul, a 20th-century French philosopher and social theorist, can be considered a hard determinist and a proponent of autonomous technique (technology). In his seminal work "The Technological Society" (1954), Ellul posits that technology, driven by its efficiency and power, determines the social aspects that are best suited for its own advancement through a process akin to natural selection. Social systems that align their values, morals, and philosophy with the progress of technology gain power and proliferate, overshadowing those social systems whose values are less technology-oriented. While geography, climate, and other "natural" factors predominantly influenced social conditions throughout most of human history, technology has emerged as the primary objective and determining factor, mainly due to the unleashed forces of the industrial revolution.

Soft Determinism
Soft determinism adopts a more passive stance regarding the interaction between technology and socio-political circumstances. Soft determinists acknowledge technology as the guiding force in our evolution but argue that we retain the possibility to make decisions regarding outcomes. This does not imply the existence of free will per se, but rather the recognition that we possess the capacity to roll the dice and witness the resulting consequences. A slightly different variant of soft determinism is the technology-driven theory of social change proposed by William Fielding Ogburn in 1922. According to this perspective, society must adapt to the ramifications of significant inventions but often does so only after a period of cultural lag, where adjustments lag behind the pace of technological progress.

Technology as Neutral
Those who hold a neutral perspective on technology believe that it possesses no inherent moral value and can be neither classified as good nor bad. Instead, they argue that the way we choose to use technology determines its impact. For instance, an example often given is that guns themselves are neutral objects; their ethical nature depends on the intentions and actions of the individuals wielding them. However, some scholars, such as Mackenzie and Wajcman, suggest that technology can only be considered truly neutral when it is completely new or its future applications are unknown. In this hypothetical scenario, the neutrality of technology would exist until society becomes aware of its existence and purpose. However, such a society untouched by prior technological knowledge is purely theoretical. Once technology becomes integrated into our lives and we comprehend its capabilities, it inevitably becomes intertwined with our social and cultural contexts, eroding any notion of neutrality. Lelia Green points out that those who maintain a belief in technological neutrality often overlook the profound influence technology has on shaping our cultural and social conditions. This perspective is sometimes referred to as technological instrumentalism. In one of the most renowned reflections on technology, historian Melvin Kranzberg formulated the first of his six laws of technology, stating that "Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral." This statement encapsulates the idea that technology itself does not possess an inherent moral quality, but its implications and effects are shaped by human choices and societal contexts.

Oversimplification
Some critics, such as scholars in the field of social construction of technology (SCOT), argue that technological determinism oversimplifies complex social phenomena. They contend that it reduces them to simple cause-and-effect relationships while neglecting the intricate interplay between technology, culture, politics, and other social factors that shape and influence technological development.

Ignoring Human Agency
Critics, including scholars like Andrew Feenberg, assert that technological determinism undermines the role of human agency in shaping technology and society. They argue that it downplays the capacity of individuals and communities to actively influence and shape technological trajectories through their choices, values, and actions.

Neglecting Social Context
Scholars in the field of social construction of technology (SCOT) argue that technological determinism often neglects the social and cultural contexts in which technologies emerge and are implemented. They contend that it fails to consider how social, economic, and political forces interact with technology, leading to diverse outcomes in different societies and contexts.

Technological Bias
Critics, such as those influenced by critical theory and postcolonial perspectives, argue that technological determinism exhibits a bias towards emphasizing the autonomous power of technology while neglecting the role of social power structures and inequalities. They contend that it overlooks how technological development and deployment can reinforce or challenge existing social hierarchies and injustices.

Lack of Evidence
Some critics, including researchers in science and technology studies, contend that technological determinism lacks sufficient empirical evidence to support its claims. They argue that it often relies on speculative or anecdotal reasoning rather than rigorous analysis and empirical research.

Cultural Relativity
Critics, influenced by cultural studies and anthropological perspectives, highlight that the impact and interpretation of technology vary across different cultures and societies. They argue that technological determinism tends to overlook the cultural and contextual factors that shape the adoption, use, and meaning of technology in different social settings.

Suppression of Radical Potential
Media and cultural studies theorist Brian Winston's model of the suppression of radical potential critiques technological determinism. He argues that societal factors and power dynamics can suppress or shape the full transformative potential of a technology. According to this criticism, the deterministic view fails to account for the complexities of technological emergence and adoption.

[[file:Wikipedia.png]] Wikipedia

 * [[file:Wikipedia.png]] Technological Determinism