Abstract
The world in which we live is a world of technical artefacts. We live our lives with and through them. It is not so much the natural world as well as the technical world that conditions human life. This technical world not only provides us with the means to adapt the physical environment to our needs and desires. Its influence stretches out much further into the world of social affairs and into the world of ideas. Through the ages, for instance, technology has provided strong metaphors for interpreting what it means to be a human being, such as the man-machine or the brain-computer metaphors. So, the technical world strongly influences human thinking and doing. This book is an attempt to understand what kind of world this technical world is by studying the nature of the basic elements that make up this world, namely technical artefacts. Given their pervasive influence on human thoughts and actions, such an understanding may contribute to, or may even be a requisite step to a better understanding of the modern human condition. To that end, this book addresses a number of questions all of which centre around technical artefacts. What kind of objects are they? What does it mean for an object to be a technical artefact? In what sense are they different from objects from the natural world, or the social world? How do they come into existence? Does it make sense to consider technical artefacts to be morally good or bad because of the way they influence human life?
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The term ‘theory’ stems from the Greek ‘θεωρειν’, of which one of its original meanings is to be a spectator at a theatre.
- 2.
In many practices involving scientists and engineers these two attitudes to the world may merge to such a degree that it becomes difficult to characterize such practices as either scientific or technological. Nevertheless, the distinction between these two attitudes makes sense; it is easy to point out scientific and technological practices that reflect these attitudes in more or less pure forms.
- 3.
- 4.
This means that software programs fall outside the scope of this book. I consider software programs to be ‘incomplete’ technical artefacts; only in combination with the appropriate hardware that executes software programs are they able to fulfil their technical function.
- 5.
This quote is from an edited volume with the title Creations of the mind: essays on artifacts and their representations (Margolis and Laurence 2007).
- 6.
In art trouvé also technical artefacts may be turned into works of art by the thoughts or intentions of artists; think of Duchamp’s pissoir.
- 7.
As far as I know the term “for-ness” was coined by Dipert in a paper he presented at Delft University of Technology, (Dipert 2000); see also Romano (2009).
- 8.
Throughout this book I leave out of consideration biological technical artefacts, such as genetically modified organisms. For a discussion of functions in the natural and artificial domains, see (Krohs and Kroes 2009).
- 9.
For a discussion of theoretical and practical rationality in relation to engineering design, see (Kroes et al. 2009).
- 10.
There is not always a strict division of labour; design engineers, for instance, may make real technical artefacts such as prototypes to perform experiments on.
References
Dipert, Randall R. 1993. Artifacts, Art Works, and Agency. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Dipert, Randall R. 2000. Doing and Making: the proper place of actions and artifacts in philosophical theory. In The dual nature of technical artefacts: kick off meeting. Delft, Delft University of Technology (June 2000).
Hilpinen, Risto. 2004. Artifact. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2004 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. (editor): http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2004/entries/artifact/.
Kroes, Peter, Maarten Franssen, and Louis Bucciarelli. 2009. Rationality in Design. In Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, ed. Anthonie Meijers, 565-600. Elsevier.
Krohs, Ulrich, and Peter Kroes. 2009. Functions in biological and artificial worlds; comparative philosophical perspectives. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Margolis, Eric, and Stephen Laurence. 2007. Creations of the mind: theories of artifacts and their representations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pitt, Joseph C. 2000. Thinking about technology; foundations for the philosophy of technology. New York: Seven Bridges Press.
Romano, Giacomo. 2009. Being for: A philosophical hypothesis about the structure of functional knowledge. In Functions in biological and artificial worlds; comparative philosophical perspectives, eds. Ulrich Krohs, and Peter Kroes, 167-184. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.
Simons, Peter. 1995. Artefact. In Companion to metaphysics, eds. J. Kim, and E Sosa, 33. Oxford: Blackwell.
Thomasson, Amie L. 2007. Artifacts and human concepts. In Creations of the mind: essays on artifacts and their representations, eds. Stephen Laurence, and Eric Margolis, 52-73. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kroes, P. (2012). Introduction. In: Technical Artefacts: Creations of Mind and Matter. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3940-6_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3940-6_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-3939-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-3940-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)