Technology as a Life Form
Epiphany in the orbit
The dawn of manned space exploration brought profound philosophical quandaries about the nature of reality and human perception. The experience of astronaut John Glenn, orbiting Earth aboard Friendship 7 in 1962 is a compelling entry point into these deep waters of inquiry. Glenn described an unexpected sense of familiarity with the view of our planet from orbit, which challenges our understanding of authentic experience. His prior exposure to simulations had so thoroughly prepared him that the actual event felt oddly routine. How can such a strange, one-of-a-kind event feel that way? This raises fundamental questions about the relationship between reality and technologically mediated representations.
It invites us to explore the epistemological implications of living in times where our cognitive frameworks are shaped by simulated environments. It prompts us to reconsider how we define and perceive "reality" when our minds process artificial and genuine experiences in strikingly similar ways. Glenn's experience is instrumental in depicting the complex interplay between technology and human cognition. Cognitively, our capacity for wonder and our ability to appreciate novelty may be profoundly influenced by our reliance on simulated experiences. Glenn's orbital epiphany serves as a reminder that compels us to examine the nature of perception, the essence of authentic experience, and the evolving relationship between human consciousness and technological representation.
Technological Blindness or Sleepwalking Through Progress
I find myself confronted with a surprising task that is unfamiliar to the known intellectual landscape. Despite the pervasion of technology in our lived experience, there is an absence of a well-rounded philosophical engagement with the subject of technology itself. This gap in our collective intellectual endeavor is concerning. One might reasonably expect that a civilization so deeply entrenched in the creation and utilization of artificial realities would have developed a robust philosophical framework to examine the nature and implications of this commitment. But the philosophy of technology remains an underdeveloped field – it lacks the depth and the attention that is usually afforded to other branches of philosophy.
But as far as I’m concerned, the absence of a cohesive philosophy of technology is not an oversight – it is a critical blind spot in our understanding of the human condition within the modern world. Practically, we create and inhabit artificial environments, but theoretically we lack the tools to examine the implications of technological extensions of human capability. It is evident from the lack of resources and the limited integration of technological philosophy into broader discourse. Even when the subject is broached, it emerges as a tangential concern within a larger framework rather than as a distinct and vital area of study in its own right. We must get a grip on the artificial aids to human activity, the relationship between technology and human perception, and the broader implications of our reliance on simulated realities.
Waking Up to Techno-Social Structures
The reluctance to develop a robust philosophy of technology stems from multiple sources:
There's the persistent belief in technological progress as an unquestionable good. This faith is deeply ingrained in our social consciousness, and precludes critical examination. The promise of each new innovation is presented as a panacea for our problems, and that creates a cultural inertia against deeper questioning.
Our conventional understanding of technology is rooted in the simplistic dichotomy of "making" and "use," which fails to capture the complex ways in which technology structures our lives and society. We tend to view technology as either the domain of specialists or as neutral tools we simply pick up and put down at will. This perspective obscures the ways in which technological systems have influence on our social structures.
Even among engineers and technologists, there's a surprising lack of philosophical engagement with their work. The foundational principles and broader implications of their disciplines are being left unexamined, with those who do raise such questions are being marginalized.
It's a collective blindness to the philosophical dimensions of technology, and it is particularly alarming given the extent to which our civilization is built upon and shaped by technological systems. If we cannot critically examine these foundations, it leaves us ill-equipped to navigate the existential challenges caused by technological advancement.
This is a limited conception of technology. It must be recognized that technologies are not just tools, but active shapers of human activity and experience. It’s important for understanding our technological present as well as the future. It requires us to look beyond the simplified notions of making and use, and to engage with the complex ways in which technology structures the world.
Technologies as Life Forms
So – are technologies just passive tools, or are they active forces? The introduction of new technologies leads to profound transformations in various spheres of human life. For instance, the integration of robots in industrial settings doesn't just boost productivity, it alters the nature of work itself. Or advanced medical technologies not only change medical practices but also change the conceptions of health, illness, and care. That means that technological alterations are, in fact, defining features of living.
At the same time, the pervasiveness of technology renders its influence invisible to us. Like unconscious processes we take for granted, such as speaking a language or performing routine tasks, the technological structures forming our lives escape our notice. It is typically only when we encounter a new technology or face a disruption that we become aware of these underlying patterns.
This, for example, is illustrated by the anecdote of the student whose paper "crashed" due to a computer malfunction. This incident shows how technology has created new situations with their own set of rules, expectations, and moral considerations. It also highlights how technology mediates our social interactions and moral judgments. The negotiation of an excuse for a late paper due to a computer crash represents a new frontier in our moral landscape, one that didn't exist before the advent of computer-based work. By recognizing these influences, we begin to gain a large/scale perspective on philosophy of technology. It's not just about understanding "how things work" in a technical sense, but about grasping how we function within our technological environments, as we become a part of the mechanism itself.
Beyond Determinism
The integration of technology into our lives often needs the evolution of legal and moral frameworks. For instance, the rise of computer technology leads to the creation of new categories of crime, and challenges the traditional notions of property and theft. Here we can see how technological change affects our daily practice but also our legal and ethical landscapes.
Now consider the contrasting experiences of a pedestrian and a motorist. They’re both engaged in the act of traveling, but they inhabit different perceptual and social worlds. The pedestrian has flexibility and direct engagement with their environment, and the motorist operates within a structured realm defined by the car's physical constraints and traffic rules. In this case, technologies don't just enable movement, they alter our relationship with space, time, and social interaction. When we take things further, the interaction between the pedestrian and the motorist shows the collision of the technologically-mediated worlds. A simple greeting becomes a complex negotiation that is hindered by the physical and social structures of the automobile. It reveals how deeply embedded technological systems can complicate even the most basic human interactions.
The main takeaway is this – prevalence of certain technologies can render alternative modes of being that are almost alien. In car-centric cities, the act of walking can be viewed with suspicion, because it highlights how technological norms change social expectations and even legal interpretations of behavior.
This is the real impact of technology on our lived experience that usually escapes our notice and examination. And because we tend to evaluate new technologies based on narrow criteria such as efficiency or convenience, we overlook the broader implications for social relationships, perceptions of self, and moral boundaries. Only in retrospect can we recognize the profound influence of technological change. So beyond instrumental and functional analysis, we need an interpretative framework to interpret too many ways in which technological devices mediate the states between different realms of perception and action. It is because our engagement with technology resembles a series of social contracts, and they are only revealed to the fullest after we've committed to them.
But how do we conceptualize this relationship? The perspective I'm proposing should not be confused with technological determinism, because it oversimplifies the complexity. Technological determinism defines technological innovation as the primary driver of social change, which leaves humans to be passive observers of an inevitable process. But this is simply too rigid to accurately capture the nuances of technological realities and societal transformation. It fails to account for the genuine choices and agency that humans possess and exercise also shape and respond to said technological change.
Technological Somnambulism
For this purpose, Winner introduces the concept of "technological somnambulism,” which suggests that we engage with technology in a sleepwalking state. That means that we are moving through profound changes in our existence without having full awareness or any critical reflection of it. On the contrary to determinism, which denies human agency, the idea of somnambulism does acknowledge human participation in technological change, but highlights the lack of conscious engagement with its implications.
The problem is not that technology shapes our world. It's that we are so willing to allow it to happen without any questioning of the process. We actively participate in reconstituting the conditions of human existence through our adoption and use of technologies, yet we do so with a complete lack of awareness.
But can we collectively wake up from the technological slumber? How can we make informed choices about how technology develops and how it’s integrated into society? Firstly, we can start by moving beyond naive acceptance. And without being overly deterministic, we can cultivate an understanding of our relationship with technology, and recognize the power it has while affirming the role of human agency and responsibility in it.