Abstract
A conceptual framework for the analysis of various aspects of technology is indicated. The following points are discussed in succession: Science and technology, the transformation of input variables into output variables, technology as a means, the quasi-autonomy of technological progress. The analysis of the various factors delimiting the given technological possibilities and the investigation of the processes leading to the realization of a certain selection of these possibilities brings the technical and the social aspect together. In this way the assessment implied in the choice among alternative ways of instrumental action becomes evident, and the application of a certain technology can be reconstructed as resulting from a complex social decision.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
The word ‘technology’ is used here in its broader meaning. In case differences between technology as a theoretical discipline and techniques as practical procedures are relevant, they will be evident in the context of discussion.
For an analysis of the interrelation between science and technology see Rapp, F., ‘Technology and Natural Science’, in Contributions to a Philosophy of Technology (ed. by F. Rapp), Reidel, Dordrecht 1974, pp. 97–102.
Various aspects of formulating and structuring a system are discussed in Chestnut, C., Systems Engineering Methods, Wiley, New York, 1967, pp. 70–134.
For an analysis of the input-output relations in terms of economic variables, see the works of J. W. Forrester, Industrial Dynamics, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1961 and Principles of Systems, Wright-Allen Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1968.
This point is examined in detail by Sayre, K. M., ‘Instrumentation and Mechanical Agency’, in Philosophy and Cybernetics (ed. by F. J. Crosson and K. M. Sayre), University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1967, pp. 233–261.
Blair, R. N. and Whitston, C. W., Elements of Industrial Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1971, p. 95.
See, for example, Chestnut, op. cit. Systems Engineering Methods, Wiley, New York, 1967, pp. 70–134; Blair and Whitston, op. cit. Elements of Industrial Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1971, p. 95; and Hall, A. D., ‘Three-Dimensional Morphology of Systems Engineering’, IEEE Transactions of Science and Cybernetics SSC-5 (1969), 156–160 (reprinted in Rapp (ed.), op. cit. ‘Technology and Natural Science’, Reidel, Dordrecht 1974, pp. 174–186).
Duggan, T. V., ‘The Activity of Design’, Engineering Materials and Design 16 (1972), no. 1, pp. 5–8. Strictly speaking, a distinction between (un)desired and (un)intended elements ought to be made; it will be neglected here.
Abt, C. C., ‘The Social Role of Technology’, in Technological Assessment and Quality of Life (ed. by G. J. Stöber and R. Schumacher), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1973, p. 32.
For an analysis of the meaning of ‘efficiency’ in various scientific disciplines see Gasparski, W., ‘Comments on the Concept of Efficiency’, Kommunikation 5 (1969), 81–99.
Hetman, F., Society and the Assessment of Technology, OECD, Paris, 1973, pp. 224–262, gives an account of the methods for a full social assessment of technology.
Hetman, op. cit. Society and the Assessment of Technology, OECD, Paris, 1973, pp. 325.
Duggan, op. cit. ‘The Activity of Design’, Engineering Materials and Design 16 (1972), no. 1, pp. 5.
Gibson, R. E., ‘A Systems Approach to Research Management’, Research Management 5 (1962), 215–423 (quoted from Research, Development and Technological Innovation (ed. by J. R. Bright), Irwin, Homewood, Ill., 1964, p. 44).
At this juncture one could mention, for instance, the Marxist conception that the social structure is determined by the ways of technological production, or the provoking ideas of M. McLuhan (see e.g., his Understanding Media, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964) about the extensions of man brought about by the technology of modern media.
Concerning the accuracy of technological forecasting see Jantsch, E., Technological Forecasting in Perspective, OECD, Paris, 1967, pp. 99–106.
The idea, put forward by D. J. de Solla Price, that science and technology have their own separate cumulation structures, has provoked contradiction (for bibliographical hints see Rapp (ed.), op. cit.‘Technology and Natural Science’, p. 218).
This holds good as far as the observable consequences of scientific knowledge are concerned that can be put to technological use. Hence the ‘revolutionary’ change of the conceptual framework of scientific theories within the history of science, as stressed by Th. S. Kuhn in his The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962, does not apply here.
Parsons, S. A. J., The Framework of Technical Innovation, Macmillan, London, 1968, p. 44.
Kuznets, S., Modern Economic Growth, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1966, p. 11f. and p. 286 gives a description along these lines.
Schmookler, J., Invention and Economic Growth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1966, pp. 57–86 and Kuznets, op. cit.Modern Economic Growth, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1966, p. 11.
Boulding, K. E., ‘The Interplay of Technology and Values’, in Values and the Future (ed. by K. Baier and N. Rescher), The Free Press, New York, 1969, p. 340.
ibid.Boulding, K. E., ‘The Interplay of Technology and Values’, in Values and the Future (ed. by K. Baier and N. Rescher), The Free Press, New York, 1969, p. 342.
Chestnut, op. cit. Systems Engineering Methods, Wiley, New York, 1967, p. 139.
The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed. by P. Edwards), vol. 6. Macmillan, New York, 1967, p. 420.
ibid. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed. by P. Edwards), vol. 6. Macmillan, New York, 1967, p. 420.
The idea of distinguishing various types of possibility relevant in technology is referred to in Mates, B., Elementary Logic, Oxford University Press, New York, 1965, p. 8 and elaborated in detail in Skolimowski, H., ‘Problems of Truth in Technology’, Ingenor, 1974, pp. 43–46.
See Tondl, L., ‘On the Concepts of “Technology” and “Technological Sciences”’, in Rapp (ed.), op. cit. Contributions to a Philosophy of Technology, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1974 pp. 14–16.
At this juncture Skolimowski, op. cit. ‘Problems of Truth in Technology’, Ingenor, 1974, p. 44f. makes a further distinction between technical possibilities (referring to objects that can be produced in the laboratory) and technological possibilities (concerning objects that can be made accessible to society at large by means of mass-production).
ibid. ‘Problems of Truth in Technology’, Ingenor, 1974, p. 44f. makes a further distinction between technical possibilities (referring to objects that can be produced in the laboratory) and technological possibilities (concerning objects that can be made accessible to society at large by means of mass-production).
The idea that the evolution of technology depends on human decisions is discussed in Jouvenal, B. de, ‘Technology as a Means’, in Baier and Rescher (eds.), op. cit. Values and the Future, The Free Press, New York, 1969, pp. 219–232.
A comprehensive survey of this topic can be found in Gold, B., ‘The Framework of Decision for Major Technological Innovation’, in Baier and Rescher (eds.), op. cit. Values and the Future, The Free Press, New York, 1969, pp. 389–430.
See Hetman, op. cit. Society and the Assessment of Technology, OECD, Paris, 1973, pp. 362–370.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rapp, F. The physical and the social foundations of technology. Theor Decis 10, 201–227 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00126339
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00126339