Edwin P. Nye
The basic tenant of the first half of Nye’s first chapter is that technology, whether we are talking about an Oldowan chopper or a French Super Collider, is a part of what we are as humans. He mentions that humans, as Homo sapiens, have never existed without tools. Further than that, even Homo habilis, the first organism to be given the Homo genus, used Oldowan tools. We cannot discuss humanity without discussing technology. For all intents and purposes, we are inseparable. The second half of this chapter is about the origin of the term “technology” and its meanings through time. From its beginning in Greek where it only meant a skill in a specific craft, to a manual describing a process, to the current meaning of pretty much anything involving the material or process of changing our environment.
I believe that Nye touches on an important topic here, and also comes to an important conclusion—or if not a conclusion at least an important point. Humans and technology are not two different things, and neither are Nature and technology. Human nature, at least, is technology. The theme of this course is Nature and Technology, and I think why it is, and can be, such an interesting topic is because so many have the belief that these two (forces? ideas?) are diametrically opposed when in reality they are both fundamental parts of what we are.
The second of Nye’s chapters is focused on a very simple idea: many people throughout history have thought that technological determinism was correct, but they are all wrong because that is ridiculous. Basically, it has been proposed many times that new technology is so powerful that it, in effect, controls people. However, this view is silly because, as Nye brings up, it completely disregards any concepts of agency. Even in a situation where you may think you know exactly what someone is going to do, they can surprise you. History is full of such things. I don’t speak of grand occurrences like the climax of a movie, but of every day choices.
This link (http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/09/22/youtube-ranter-wins-battle-over-interest-rates/) is a perfect example. While you may not agree with her ideas or methods (or language), the point is that she made a specific decision that most people would not expect her to make—a textbook example of the unpredictability of agency in any particular person. Another thing to note is that this woman is placed in her predicament by the allure and power of technology (credit cards), but she makes the decision to rebel.
Questions:
- Has there ever been a situation where you were distinctly aware of your agency. This just means your ability to make a choice, and I mean any choice—not just what you want to have in the dining halls—any choice that you could conceivably carry out.
- Why have we demonized technology so much that some people believe that it controls us?
- Do tools really exist before the problem that they solve?