Keywords
pragmatism
social construction of technology
Lewis Mumford
How to Cite
Abstract
Philosophy of technology was not initially considered a consolidated field of inquiry. However, under the influence of sociology and pragmatist philosophy, something resembling a consensus has emerged in a field previously marked by a lack of agreement amongst its practitioners. This has given the field a greater sense of structure and yielded interesting research. However, the loss of the earlier “messy” state has resulted in a limitation of the field’s scope and methodology that precludes an encompassing view of the problematic issues inherent in the question of technology. It is argued that the heterodox disunity and diversity of earlier philosophy of technology was not a mark of theoretical immaturity but was necessitated by the field’s complex subject matter. It is further argued that philosophy of technology should return to its pluralistic role as a meta-analytical structure linking insights from different fields of research.
References
Bijker, Wiebe E. “Technology, Social Construction of.” In The International Encyclopedia of Communication, edited by Wolfgang Donsbach, 5031–36. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiect025.
Bloor, David. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1976.
Brey, Philip. “Social Constructivism for Philosophers of Technology: A Shopper’s Guide.” In Readings in Philosophy of Technology, edited by Richard Kaplan, 98–112. Plymouth, UK: Rowm an & Littlefield Publishers, 2009.
Brey, Philip. “Philosophy of Technology after the Empirical Turn.” Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technologyy 14, no. 1 (2010): 36–48. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne20101416.
Carson, Rachel L. Silent Springgg. London: Penguin, 1962.
Callicott, J. Baird. “Non-Anthropocentric Value Theory and Environmental Ethics.” American Philosophical Quarterlyy 21, no. 4 (1984): 299–309.
Deweyy, John. The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882–1953: The Later Works, edited by Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2008.
Dusek, Val. Philosophy of Technology: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006.
Hickman, Larry. John Dewey’s Pragmatic Technology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.
Du Toit, Jean. “Between Thanatos and Eros: Erich Fromm and the Psychoanalysis of Social Networking Technology Use.” South African Journal of Philosophyy 38, no. 2 (2019): 136–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2019.1630543.
Hickman, Larry. Philosophical Tools for Technological Culture: Putting Pragmatism to Work. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.
Hickman, Larry. “John Dewey as a Philosopher of Technology.” In Readings in the Philosophy of Technology, edited by Richard Kaplan, 43–55. Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009.
Ihde, Don. Philosophy of Technology: An Introduction. New York: Paragon House, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1086/381417.
Ihde, Don. “Has the Philosophy of Technology Arrived? A State-of-the-Art Review.” The Philosophy of Science Association 71, no. 1 (2004): 117–31.
Margolis, Joseph. “Pragmatism, Transcendental Arguments, and the Technological.” In Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 80: Philosophy and Technology, edited by Paul T. Durbin and Friedrich Rapp, 291–312. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7124-0_20.
Mitcham, Carl. “Notes Towards a Philosophy of Meta-Technology.” Society for Philosophy and Technologyy 1, no. 1–2 (1995): 13–17. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne199511/25.
Mullis, Eric. “The Device Paradigm: A Consideration for a Deweyan Philosophy of Technology.” The Journal of Speculative Philosophyy 23, no. 2 (2009): 110–17.
Mumford, Lewis. Technics and Civilization. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1934.
Olsen, Jan K. B., Stig A. Pedersen, and Vincent F. Hendricks. A Companion to the
Philosophy of Technology. London: Blackwell Publishing, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444310795.
Pinch, Trevor J., and Wiebe E. Bijker. “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” Social Studies of Science 14, no. 3 (1984): 399–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631284014003004.
Pinch, Trevor J., and Wiebe E. Bijker. “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor J. Pinch, 11–44. London: MIT Press, 1987.
Pitt, Joseph C. “In Search of a New Prometheus.” In Broad and Narrow Interpretations of Philosophy of Technology, edited by Paul T. Durbin, 3–16. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0557-3_1.
Pitt, Joseph C. Thinking About Technology: Foundations of the Philosophy of Technology. New York: Seven Bridges Press, 2000.
Pitt, Joseph C. Doing Philosophy of Technology: Essays in a Pragmatist Spirit. London: Springer, 2011.
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin. “Reductionist Philosophy of Technology: Stones Thrown from inside a Glass House.” Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 5, no. 1 (1994): 21–28. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne20015115.
Ströker, Elisabeth. “Philosophy of Technology: Problems of a Philosophical Discipline.” In Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 80: Philosophy and Technology, edited by Paul T. Durbin and Friedrich Rapp, 323–36. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7124-0_23.
Swer, Gregory M. “Determining Technology: Myopia and Dystopia.” South African
Journal of Philosophyy 33, no. 2 (2014): 201–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2014.923696.
Routley, Richard. “Is There a Need for a New, an Environmental, Ethic?” In Proceedings of the XVth World Congress of Philosophy. 205–10. Varna: Sofia Press, 1973. https://doi.org/10.5840/wcp151973136.
Winner, Langdon. “Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding it Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology.” Science, Technology and Human Values 18, no. 3 (1993): 362–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399301800306.
Woolgar, Steve. “The Turn to Technology in Social Studies of Science.” Science, Technology & Human Values 16, no. 1 (1991): 20–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399101600102.
Since 2019, TEORIE VĚDY / THEORY OF SCIENCE journal provides open access to its content under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Authors who publish in this journal agree that:
- Authors retain copyright and publication rights without restrictions and guarantee the journal the right of first publishing. All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license, which allows others to share this work under condition that its author and first publishing in this journal was acknowledged.
- Authors may enter into other agreements for non-exclusive dissemination of work in the version in which it was published in the journal (for example, publishing it in a book), but they have to acknowledge its first publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to make their work available online (for example, on their personal websites, social media accounts, and institutional repositories) as such a practice may lead to productive exchanges of views as well as earlier and higher citations of published work.
There are no author fees, no article processing charges, or submission charges.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allows readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
A summary of the open access policy is also available in the Sherpa Romeo database.