Abstract
Derrida’s more than one hundred published works are permeated by reflections on the technological. What is perhaps most surprising about these reflections is how little contact they have had with the broader philosophy of technology tradition. With the exceptions of Husserl, Heidegger, and Stiegler, Derrida’s writing makes almost no reference to other philosophers of technology. Despite this obvious lack of contact with large swathes of the philosophy of technology tradition, however, elements of his thinking exhibit a clear resemblance to particular ideas within that tradition. This chapter begins with an overview of the ways in which the question concerning technology has historically emerged, followed by a discussion of contemporary trends in philosophy of technology, notably postphenomenology and Science and Technology Studies (STS). I contend that Derrida’s philosophy of technology has a great deal in common with Don Ihde’s and Peter-Paul Verbeek’s postphenomenology, as, for instance, in his resistance to one-sided understandings of essence and his view of technology as a relation between humans and their world. Notwithstanding these superficial similarities, they differ on a number of important points.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Carl Mitcham, Thinking through Technology, p. 19.
- 2.
Dusek och Scharff, Philosophy of Technology, p. 1.
- 3.
Spengler, Der Mensch und die Technik, pp. 8–12.
- 4.
Many philosophers have examined the problematic aspects of modern technological society, including Nikolaj Berdjajev (1874–1948), Karl Jaspers (1883–1969), and Gabriel Marcel (1889–1973).
- 5.
One philosopher who took an interest in technology was the Russian engineer Peter K. Engelmeyer (1855-c.1941). His four-volume Filosofia tekhniki (Philosophy of Technology, 1912) is the first general overview of problems in philosophy of technology. Engelmeyer was the first to systematically connect technology to politics and other philosophical topics. In France, examples of technological oriented philosophers include the social scientist Alfred Espinas (1844–1922), the engineer Jacques Lafitte (1884–1966), and, more recently, the psychologist and philosopher Gilbert Simondon (1923–1989). In the Netherlands, this tradition includes the engineer Hendrik van Riessen and, in the rest of the world, the Spanish-Venezuelan Juan David García Bacca (1901–1992) and the Argentinian-Canadian philosopher Mario Bunge (b.1919). The latter seeks to explain reality in technological-scientific terms and to reformulate the task of humanistic thinking (including philosophy itself) in a technological-scientific direction.
- 6.
My discussion here on Kapp, as well as on Dessauer, Mumford, Ortega y Gasset and Ellul further on is mainly based on and inspired by Carl Micham’s classical Thinking through Technology.
- 7.
For a good overview of Marx’s philosophy, see The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- 8.
Marx’s analyses were subsequently developed in ways that warrant closer examination. The Marxian legacy is strongest in the work of Max Horkheimer, Theodore Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, and Jürgen Habermas. All belonged to the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School, and in their “critical theory” a critique of the shortcomings of economics evolved into a questioning of the Enlightenment, together with a realization that the problem of technology was not restricted to economics but applied to culture as a whole. The problem with the Enlightenment was that it replaced religion with “instrumental reason” without offering an objective theory of how that reason should be used. The result was that the Enlightenment became turned against itself, with production in society becoming directed towards the military and the entertainment industry. Horkheimer and Adorno were highly critical of electronic media, such as television, which they saw as inducing passivity and stupidity. Unfortunately, they were unable to move beyond this critique to formulate a working theory of reason and the correct use of technology. Marcuse wanted to devise specific protocols for technological power. To this end, he sought to transfer technology and scientific thinking to marginalized groups in society and other counter-cultures of artists, poets, environmentalists, feminists, and others. He wished to “liberate” traditional science and technology, which he saw as corrupted by the logic of power, and replace it with an alternative form of science and power that started from human values. For his part, Jürgen Habermas aligned himself with the more Marxist view that the problem lies not in science and technology but in the social conditions under which they exist. In The Theory of Communicative Action (1981), he formulates a theory of “communicative action” intended to serve as a concrete guide for technological and political development. The problem, argues Habermas, is not instrumental reason—which is indispensable in technological-scientific contexts—but the fact that it has been allowed to invade our lifeworld, including political life and private life. Habermas speaks of technocracy’s attempts to “colonize the life-world,” by which he means the deployment of a technocratic approach and instrumental reason within the sphere of human communication.
- 9.
Dessauer, Philosophie der Technik, p. 146.
- 10.
Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, p. 234.
- 11.
Dessauer, Philosophie der Technik, p. 66.
- 12.
An important thinker of the same generation as Dessauer was Ernst Cassirer, whose suggestive and thought-provoking essay “Form and Technology” (1930) seeks to answer the question of “technology’s being.” According to Cassirer, technology must be understood as an activity and not as a “dead product,” a kind of production or intellectual creativity that is intimately connected to thought. Technology makes possible thought as such by providing the basis for “a kind of intermediary belonging to the essence of thinking” (“Form and Technology,” p.30). As important as Cassirer’s positive view of productive human activity as an essential factor in every kind of knowledge production is his conviction that knowledge can only be acquired by means of a combination of historically constituted symbolic forms and external material assistance. In a polemic against Kapp, he also argues that the technologies of the new era are not only extensions of the body, i.e. organ projections, and that technological artifacts are no longer modelled on nature. Flight, Cassirer says, became possible for human beings only after they created fixed wings, which have no counterpart in nature (ibid., p. 54). Alongside technologies that simply imitate nature, there are, in other words, “purely symbolic technologies”—that we today call information technologies—that have no basis in analogy or imitation.
Interest in Cassirer’s philosophy of technology is currently burgeoning, with new books and translations being published continually. An example is the anthology Ernst Cassirer on Form and Technology (2012), which contains a new translation of Cassirer’s “Form and Technology” together with contemporary readings of Cassirer’s writings, such as Hans Ruin’s essay “Technology as Destiny in Cassirer and Heidegger: Continuing the Davos Debate,” which examines “Form and Technology” alongside Heidegger’s “The Age of the World Picture” and “The Question Concerning Technology.” Finally, it should be mentioned that Derrida was familiar with Cassirer’s philosophy and cites him approvingly on several occasions (see, for example, De la grammatologie, p. 156–7 and Margue—de la philosophie, p. 224).
- 13.
Krois, The Age of Complete Mechanization, p. 55.
- 14.
Jünger, Der Arbeiter, pp. 149–94.
- 15.
In my view, the public’s critical view of technology shifted after 1989. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, a new political and cultural situation arose, a new climate in which military knowledge was converted into civilian knowledge, for example, into environmental knowledge through the use of geostationary satellites to measure global natural resources, temperature changes, changes in sea level, and the like, knowledge that had previously only been available to the military. This more positive approach to technology was reinforced by the advent of new communication technologies and media such as the World Wide Web, email, and mobile telephones, which appealed particularly strongly to children and young people. There are perhaps as many naïve technophiles today as there were technophobes during the previous period.
- 16.
Mitcham, Thinking through Technology, p. 1. For his “definition” of the concept “artifact,” see pp. 161–5.
- 17.
Dusek och Scharff, Philosophy of Technology, pp. 112–3.
- 18.
Ibid., p. 117.
- 19.
Husserl, The Crisis § 2 is headed: “The crisis of science as the loss of its meaning for life.”
- 20.
Husserl, p. 6.
- 21.
Husserl, “The Origin of Geometry,” pp. 183–189.
- 22.
José Ortega y Gasset, Meditación de la técnica, p. 366.
- 23.
Heidegger, The Origin of the Work of Art, p. 35.
- 24.
Ibid., p. 38.
- 25.
Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology, p. 4.
- 26.
Heidegger: Nietzsche, vol. III, p. 175.
- 27.
Ibid.
- 28.
Mitcham, Thinking Through Technology, pp. 40–41.
- 29.
Mumford, Technics and Civilization, p. 433.
- 30.
Mumford’s conclusion is supported by recent zoological research showing that not only humans but also animals create tools. Chimpanzees and even insects and crabs seem to use twigs, pebbles, sponges, and other tools. However, humans are distinguished from other animals by their creativity and capacity to “devise tools to make tools to make more tools” (Dusek and Scharff, Philosophy of Technology: The Technological Condition, p. 342).
- 31.
Mumford, “Technics and the Future of Western Civilization,” p. 39.
- 32.
Ellul, The Technological Society, p. xxv.
- 33.
Ellul, La Technique, ou L’Enjeu de siècle, p. 2.
- 34.
Ellul, “Recherche pour une Ethique dans une société technicienne,” p. 16 (cited in Mitcham, Thinking Through Technology, p. 61).
- 35.
Perhaps the most thorough discussion of the ethical problems associated with technological power is Hans Jonas’s The Imperative of Responsibility (1984). For Jonas, the problem with new technology is that its long-term consequences for the global environment are not always possible to predict. His thesis is that “the new kinds and dimensions of action require a commensurate ethics of foresight and responsibility which is as novel as the eventualities which it must meet” (p. 18). This new imperative, the imperative of responsibility, demands in turn a new kind of humility in the face of humanity’s new-found power. Jonas’s position is close to Ellul’s argument for an ethics free from technological power, albeit an ethics whose rationale is theological rather than secular. Despite this nuance, both have set the terms for an ethical debate about technology that has affected, and continues to affect, both philosophers and the public at large.
- 36.
Foucault, Technologies of the Self, p. 18.
- 37.
Ibid., p. 18.
- 38.
Foucault, “Political Technology of Individuals,” p. 161.
- 39.
Foucault, Discipline and Punish, p. 11.
- 40.
Ibid., pp. 226, 253, 255.
- 41.
Ibid, p. 211.
- 42.
Foucault, Technologies of the Self, p. 19.
- 43.
Ibid., p. 35.
- 44.
Feenberg, Questioning Technology, pp. 6–7.
- 45.
Fuller, The Philosophy of Science and Technology Studies, p. 4.
- 46.
Ibid., p. 7.
- 47.
Ibid., p. 79.
- 48.
Ibid., pp. 45–6.
- 49.
Ibid., p. 67.
- 50.
See, for example, Callon, “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation,” pp. 196–229.
- 51.
Deconstruction can be defined in many ways but common to all is that they start from an understanding that the philosophical tradition is characterized by thinking in hierarchically structured binary opposites, such as speech/writing, male/female, central/marginal, in which the first term dominates over the second. Deconstruction questions this dominance by inverting the order and erasing the polarity of the terms. Its aim is to destabilize established philosophical positions and hierarchies in the hope that new perspectives and insights will emerge.
- 52.
Latour, Pandora’s Hope, p. 8.
- 53.
Ibid., p. 296.
- 54.
World Transhumanist Association: Transhumanist Declaration.
- 55.
Stiegler, Technics and Time 1, p. 17.
- 56.
Stiegler, Philosopher par accident, pp. 14–15.
- 57.
As far as I am aware, although Derrida had a protracted and highly publicized controversy at an abstract philosophical level regarding the aims and contents of Foucault’s Histoire de la folie (1961), Derrida never commented on Foucault’s work on technologies of power and technologies of the self. In fact, he has written surprisingly little about technological power and power relations in society. Rather, his main interest is in which Foucault calls production technologies and technologies of sign systems, areas that Foucault himself did not engage with.
- 58.
Verbeek, What Things Do, pp. 112–3.
References
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fisherman of St Brieux Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action, and belief (pp. 196–229). Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Cassirer, E. (1930). Form und Technik. In L. Kestenberg (Ed.), Kunst und Technik (pp. 15–61). Wegweiser.
Cassirer, E. (2012). Form and technology (trans. W.M. Dunlavey & J.M. Krois). In A. S. Hoed & I. Folkvord (Eds.), Ernst Cassirer on form and technology: Contemporary readings (pp. 15–53). Palgrave Macmillan.
Dessauer, F. (1927). Philosophie der Technik. F. Cohen.
Dessauer, F. (1956). Streit um die Technik. J. Knecht.
Dusek, V., & Scharff, R. C. (Eds.). (2003). Philosophy of technology: The technological condition: An anthology. Blackwell Publishing Ltd..
Dusek, V. (2006). Philosophy of technology: An introduction. Blackwell Publishing Ltd..
Ellul, J. (1954). La technique, ou L’Enjeu du siècle. Colin.
Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. (trans. J. Wilkinson). Knopf.
Ellul, J. (1983). Recherche pour une Ethique dans une société technicienne (pp. 7–20). In Hottois (Ed.), Ethique et Technique.
Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology. Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1961). Histoire de la folie à l’âge classique. Plon.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. (trans. A. Sheridan). Pantheon.
Foucault, M. (1988). The political technology of individuals. In L. H. Martin, H. Gutman, & P. H. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self: A seminar with Michel Foucault. University of Massachusetts Press.
Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality (trans. R. Brandotti and revised by C. Gordon). In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect, studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). University of Chicago Press.
Fuller, S. (2006). The philosophy of science and technology studies. Routledge.
Heidegger, M. (1954). Die Frage nach der Technik. In Vorträge und Aufsätze. Neske.
Heidegger, M. (1962a). Being and time. (trans. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson). Harper and Row.
Heidegger, M. (1962b). Die Technik und die Kehre. Neske.
Heidegger, M. (1971). The origin of the work of art. In Poetry, language, thought. (trans. A. Hofstadter). Harper & Row.
Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. (trans. W. Lovitt). Harper and Row.
Heidegger, M. (1979–1987). Nietzsche, Vol. 1-4 (trans. D.F. Krell). Harper One.
Hoed, A. S., & Folkvord, I. (2012). Ernst Cassirer on form and technology: Contemporary readings. Palgrave Macmillan.
Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology. (trans. D. Carr). Northwestern University Press.
Husserl, E. (1978). The origin of geometry (trans. D. Carr). In J. Derrida (Ed.), Edmund Husserl’s origin of geometry (pp. 155–180). University of Nebraska Press.
Ihde, D. (1979). Technics and praxis: A philosophy of technology. D. Reidel.
Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological age. University of Chicago Press.
Jűnger, E. (1931). Die totale Mobilmachung. Verlag für Zeitkritik.
Jűnger, E. (1932). Der Arbeiter: Herrschaft und Gestalt. Hanseatische Verlag.
Kapp, E. (1877). Grundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik: Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Cultur aus neuen Gesichtspunkten. [Fundamentals of a philosophy of technology: The genesis of culture from a new perspective]. Westermann.
Krois, J. M. (2012). The age of complete mechanization. In A. S. Hoed & I. Folkvord (Eds.), Ernst Cassirer on form and technology: Contemporary readings (pp. 54–61). Palgrave Macmillan.
Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. (trans. C. Porter). Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Sage.
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. The University of Chicago Press.
Mumford, L. (1934). Technics and civilization. Harcourt Brace. Reprinted 1963.
Mumford, L. (1954). Technics and the future of Western civilization. In In the name of sanity. Harcourt Brace.
Mumford, L. (1967/1970). The myth of the machine. Vol 1, Technics and human development. Vol. 2, The pentagon of power. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1914). Meditaciones del Quijote. : Publicaciones de la Residentia de Esudiantes.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1939). Meditación de la técnica. In Ensimismamiento y alteration.: Espasa-Calpe. In Obras Completas (pp. 317–375). Madrid: Revista de Occidente 1945–1947.
Ruin, H. (2012). Technology as Destiny in Cassirer and Heidegger: Continuing the Davos Debate. In A. S. Hoed & I. Folkvord (Eds.), Ernst Cassirer on form and technology: Contemporary readings (pp. 113–138). Palgrave Macmillan.
Spengler, O. (1931). Der Mensch und die Technik: Beitrag zu einer Philosophie des Lebens. C.H. Beck.
Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and time, 1: The fault of epimetheus. (trans. R. Beardsworth & G. Collins). Stanford University Press.
Stiegler, B. (1994/1996/2001). La technique et le temps I, II et III. : Galilée.
Stiegler, B. (2004). Philosopher par accident. Galilée.
Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What things do. (trans. R.P. Crease). Pennsylvania State University Press.
World Transhumanist Association (1998). Retrieved from http://transhumanism.org. Accessed 21 Sept 2015.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sjöstrand, B. (2021). The Philosophy of Technology Tradition. In: Derrida and Technology: Life, Politics, and Religion. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83407-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83407-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-83406-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-83407-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)