One of our world's buzzwords, "technology," is also one of the most muddled. It appears essential as an analytical category for our comprehension of the entire history of humanity, and perhaps even further. It's probably safe to say that humans have been using tools since the Paleolithic, and a variety of species, from crows to chimpanzees, have even been found to utilize tools. Though related concepts like techno, arts, and so on have a considerably longer history, "technology" as an actor's category is fairly new. But even for a relatively new English word, "technology" has come to encompass a variety of frequently contradictory meanings. I have three objectives for this essay review. I'll start by summarizing Eric Schatzberg's significant new book Technology, which defines and deconstructs the origins of the term "technology" and its cognates as actor categories. Second, I'll present a critical critique, contending that while Schatzberg effectively divides earlier conceptions of technology into the "cultural" and "instrumental" approaches, doing so at the expense of the latter is a mistake. Third, I provide an expansion of my preferred instrumentalist definition, one that emphasizes a crucial characteristic of technologies - their ability to intervene over scales - in a way that, in my opinion, offers a fresh, energizing area of research for historians of science and technology.
According to its etymology, the word "technology" derives from the Indo-European root tek, which "possibly alluded to the construction of wooden dwellings by wattling, or weaving sticks together" (p. 19). Because of this, the words "textile" and "technology" sound alike. The word "tek" is derived from the Greek word "techne," which originally meant "skills of working with wood," but quickly came to mean "specific competence," "know how," or the ability to create things that would not otherwise exist. Thus, techne was preoccupied with the artificial. But there were already disagreements. At least some Hippocratic authors considered medicine to be a type of techne. Was, however, rhetoric techne? Aristotle agreed, whereas Plato disagreed. Aristotle went one step further in the Nicomachean Ethics, saying that while techne was a type of knowledge (of how to manufacture, an art), it was to be distinguished from phronesis (moral knowledge, knowledge of how to conduct rightly), and episteme (knowledge of the eternal). Importantly, a hierarchy was established for these three. Knowing how to act was preferable to knowing how to make. The division of means and ends was a result of this hierarchy. While the methods to an end could be appreciated, the ends themselves are not. By insisting on this, Techne became "morally neutral."
Two more developments in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries strengthened the hierarchy. First, the formation of a distinct category of "fine arts" distinguished aesthetic innovation from the mechanical arts' purely technical expertise. The distinction between "artist" and "craftsman" grew. Second, as scientists and engineers became more qualified, the boundaries of the interaction between "science" and industry underwent significant boundary work. With its elevated stature, "applied science" might be claimed by engineers, especially American engineers, as their own independent body of knowledge. John Tyndall and Henry Rowland, among other scientists, viewed "applied science" as the application of pure science, reserving the autonomy of their own work while yet taking credit for "new wonders of the industrial age." According to Schatzberg, the phrase "mechanical arts" was used less frequently after 1850 while "applied science" usage rose. However, as Leo Marx noted, the outcome was a "semantic hole," or "the lack of suitable words to represent the profound changes in the material culture of the century."
Perhaps in essence, technologies act as a bridge across scales. Take driving a car as an example. On one level, a car is a materialized, constructed way of travelling a distance over which it would be difficult to walk. However, as a collection of technologies, an automobile's parts transfer actions from the scale of the human body to that of the road: turning the steering wheel with the hand or pressing a pedal with the foot causes bigger sideways or forward movements. In this instance, distance serves as the scale. Other technologies operate at various scales. The scales in question may be thermodynamic (see refrigerators), luminosity-based (consider lighting), or of a variety of other types.
You must be logged in to post a comment.