What do you think?
Rate this book
Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism
These thirteen essays explore a crucial historical question that has been notoriously hard to pin To what extent, and by what means, does a society's technology determine its political, social, economic, and cultural forms? Karl Marx launched the modern debate on determinism with his provocative remark that "the hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist," and a classic article by Robert Heilbroner (reprinted here) renewed the debate within the context of the history of technology. This book clarifies the debate and carries it forward. Marx's position has become embedded in our culture, in the form of constant reminders as to how our fast-changing technologies will alter our lives. Yet historians who have looked closely at where technologies really come from generally support the proposition that technologies are not autonomous but are social products, susceptible to democratic controls. The issue is crucial for democratic theory. These essays tackle it head-on, offering a deep look at all the shadings of determinism and assessing determinist models in a wide variety of historical contexts. Contributors: Bruce Bimber. Richard W. Bulliet. Robert L. Heilbroner. Thomas P. Hughes. Leo Marx. Thomas J. Misa. Peter C. Perdue. Philip Scranton. Merritt Roe Smith. Michael L. Smith. John M. Staudenmaier. Rosalind Williams.
Paperback
First published June 2, 1994
5 people are currently reading
264 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
August 31, 2014
A. Intro
1. Hard technological determinism is defined as the power of technology to act as an agent of change in society. Stories of hard determinism show technology as an independent artifact in before-after narratives. Such deterministic mini-fables include the compass and other navigational tools allowing Europe to discover America and the printing press as the cause of the Reformation. Another is that the invention of the cotton gin reinvigorated the use of slaves to harvest cotton.
2. Soft determinists argue that agency should not be given to technology. They argue that no technology has ever initiated an action not programmed by human beings. The history of technology is the history of human actions. Therefore the soft determinists ask questions like who invented something, why did they do it and not others, etc. The definition of soft determinism is the “human tendency to create the kind of society that invests technologies with enough power to drive history.”
B. Merritt Roe Smith provides a history of technological determinism and argues how deeply this idea in entrenched in out American past. As early as the 1780s Tench Coxe began to attribute agency to the technologies associated with the factory system. These deterministic beliefs only increased in the 19th and when America became an industrial power.
C. Thomas Hughes uses his concept of technological momentum as something which exists between the two poles of technological determinism and social construction. Momentum is the more valuable of the two concepts because it is time dependent. He argues that younger systems tend to be more open to sociocultural influences while older systems tend to be more resistant and deterministic in nature. In this essay he argues against the Bijker-Pinch interpretation because he finds it to be social determinism.
D. Thomas Misa argues that the level at which scholars conduct their research influences the degree of emphasis that they place on technological change. Those who conduct ‘macro-level’ investigations are more prone to technological determinism. Those who conduct ‘micro-level’ investigations are more prone to find societal forces at work in the historical process. Misa suggests that a ‘middle-level’ methodology that combines the social construction of the micro approach and the technological determinism of the macro approach.
E. Rosalind Williams argues against all of the scholars who believe that technology is inherently rational. She says this obscures the fact that technological systems can be designed for authoritarian purposes of control and domination. Drawing from the writings of Lewis Mumford she argues that we need to understand the motives behind the construction of powerfully determinative technologies. Further, she argues that there is a fundamental dissonance between technological determinism and feminist understandings of history. A feminist perspective can recognize the relationship between the human and non-human factors.
F. Leo Marx believes that the Pre-WWII optimism in the US has dissipated into social pessimism. The reasons for this change are complex but they include specific technological disasters like Three Mile Island and the loss of faith in technology as the driving force of progress. He then looks at the history of the idea of ‘technology.’ In the 19th century it changed from meaning discrete artifacts to abstract, scientific systems of production. These new systems were invested with metaphysical properties that invited the belief of technology as an autonomous agent. This set the stage for the mid-20th century pessimistic sense of technological determinism
G. John Staudenmaier discusses the invisibility of the history of technology to the public and the historical profession. The problem stems from how historians have handled the question of technological determinism in the past. The old internalist tradition which focused on the priority of invention and master narratives of progress has to be amalgamated with the contextual tradition of the New History. Artifacts will remain central to the history of technology but we must unpack their meaning to a larger civilization.
1. Hard technological determinism is defined as the power of technology to act as an agent of change in society. Stories of hard determinism show technology as an independent artifact in before-after narratives. Such deterministic mini-fables include the compass and other navigational tools allowing Europe to discover America and the printing press as the cause of the Reformation. Another is that the invention of the cotton gin reinvigorated the use of slaves to harvest cotton.
2. Soft determinists argue that agency should not be given to technology. They argue that no technology has ever initiated an action not programmed by human beings. The history of technology is the history of human actions. Therefore the soft determinists ask questions like who invented something, why did they do it and not others, etc. The definition of soft determinism is the “human tendency to create the kind of society that invests technologies with enough power to drive history.”
B. Merritt Roe Smith provides a history of technological determinism and argues how deeply this idea in entrenched in out American past. As early as the 1780s Tench Coxe began to attribute agency to the technologies associated with the factory system. These deterministic beliefs only increased in the 19th and when America became an industrial power.
C. Thomas Hughes uses his concept of technological momentum as something which exists between the two poles of technological determinism and social construction. Momentum is the more valuable of the two concepts because it is time dependent. He argues that younger systems tend to be more open to sociocultural influences while older systems tend to be more resistant and deterministic in nature. In this essay he argues against the Bijker-Pinch interpretation because he finds it to be social determinism.
D. Thomas Misa argues that the level at which scholars conduct their research influences the degree of emphasis that they place on technological change. Those who conduct ‘macro-level’ investigations are more prone to technological determinism. Those who conduct ‘micro-level’ investigations are more prone to find societal forces at work in the historical process. Misa suggests that a ‘middle-level’ methodology that combines the social construction of the micro approach and the technological determinism of the macro approach.
E. Rosalind Williams argues against all of the scholars who believe that technology is inherently rational. She says this obscures the fact that technological systems can be designed for authoritarian purposes of control and domination. Drawing from the writings of Lewis Mumford she argues that we need to understand the motives behind the construction of powerfully determinative technologies. Further, she argues that there is a fundamental dissonance between technological determinism and feminist understandings of history. A feminist perspective can recognize the relationship between the human and non-human factors.
F. Leo Marx believes that the Pre-WWII optimism in the US has dissipated into social pessimism. The reasons for this change are complex but they include specific technological disasters like Three Mile Island and the loss of faith in technology as the driving force of progress. He then looks at the history of the idea of ‘technology.’ In the 19th century it changed from meaning discrete artifacts to abstract, scientific systems of production. These new systems were invested with metaphysical properties that invited the belief of technology as an autonomous agent. This set the stage for the mid-20th century pessimistic sense of technological determinism
G. John Staudenmaier discusses the invisibility of the history of technology to the public and the historical profession. The problem stems from how historians have handled the question of technological determinism in the past. The old internalist tradition which focused on the priority of invention and master narratives of progress has to be amalgamated with the contextual tradition of the New History. Artifacts will remain central to the history of technology but we must unpack their meaning to a larger civilization.
January 7, 2013
Basically, the title says it all. This book is a collection of essays that seek to explore the extent to which technology operates autonomously, as a driving force in a given social context. For the most part, each essay is short and to the point, though some are more accessible than others. The reader will most likely be drawn to one or another take on the subject. I was particularly intrigued by Thomas Hughes's idea of technological momentum.
While my ability to clearly comprehend Hughes's writing probably had a bit to do with my preference for it, on the whole I think he offers the most level-headed analysis of the prospects of technological determinism. Basically, he says that societies and technologies are mutually affected by each other. Technology both shapes and is shaped by a given society. I think this fits well with Lynn White's contention that technology doesn't spontaneously appear and impact a society. The society must be sufficiently prepared to integrate and use the technology and its leaders must be sufficiently visionary and prepared to shift to future changes as a result of the technology.
While my ability to clearly comprehend Hughes's writing probably had a bit to do with my preference for it, on the whole I think he offers the most level-headed analysis of the prospects of technological determinism. Basically, he says that societies and technologies are mutually affected by each other. Technology both shapes and is shaped by a given society. I think this fits well with Lynn White's contention that technology doesn't spontaneously appear and impact a society. The society must be sufficiently prepared to integrate and use the technology and its leaders must be sufficiently visionary and prepared to shift to future changes as a result of the technology.
May 25, 2013
I read this book is fits and bursts during lunch during the work week usually. Each chapter is by a different author so it worked out rather well.
All in all the idea of technological determinism is that technology drives history. The invention of the heavy plow changed society in Europe or the invention of the printing press required society to change. While technology adaptation within society does/can change society the overall opinion is that technology itself does not drive change. It is merely one piece at work in the march of change. One reason this is apparent is that every society does not have the same changes when new technologies appear. Some changes that are tied to new technologies do not happen in a society until a significant amount of time has passed. So, technology may be an agent of change but it should only be viewed as a part of the greater picture when one measures the factors that drive societal change.
Overall the book contained some good analysis on the subject but it was somewhat technical in nature. This was not written to appeal to the broad masses.
All in all the idea of technological determinism is that technology drives history. The invention of the heavy plow changed society in Europe or the invention of the printing press required society to change. While technology adaptation within society does/can change society the overall opinion is that technology itself does not drive change. It is merely one piece at work in the march of change. One reason this is apparent is that every society does not have the same changes when new technologies appear. Some changes that are tied to new technologies do not happen in a society until a significant amount of time has passed. So, technology may be an agent of change but it should only be viewed as a part of the greater picture when one measures the factors that drive societal change.
Overall the book contained some good analysis on the subject but it was somewhat technical in nature. This was not written to appeal to the broad masses.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews