What do you think?
Rate this book
Power without Knowledge: A Critique of Technocracy
Technocrats claim to know how to solve the social and economic problems of complex modern societies. But as Jeffrey Friedman argues in Power without Knowledge , there is a fundamental flaw with it requires an ability to predict how the people whom technocrats attempt to control will act in response to technocratic policies. However, the mass public's ideas-the ideas that drive their actions-are far too varied and diverse to be reliably predicted.
But that is not the only problem. Friedman reminds us that a large part of contemporary mass politics, even populist mass politics, is essentially technocratic too. Members of the general public often assume that they are competent to decide which policies or politicians will be able to solve social and economic problems. Yet these ordinary "citizen-technocrats" typically regard the solutions to social problems as self-evident, such that politics becomes a matter of vetting public officials for their good intentions and strong wills, not their technocratic expertise.
Finally, Friedman argues that technocratic experts themselves drastically oversimplify technocratic realities. Economists, for example, theorize that people respond rationally to the incentives they face. This theory is simplistic, but it gives the appearance of being able to predict people's behavior in response to technocratic policy initiatives. If stripped of such gross oversimplications, though, technocrats themselves would be forced to admit that a rational technocracy is nothing more than an impossible dream.
Ranging widely over the philosophy of social science, rational choice theory, and empirical political science, Power without Knowledge is a pathbreaking work that upends traditional assumptions about technocracy and politics, forcing us to rethink our assumptions about the legitimacy of modern governance.
But that is not the only problem. Friedman reminds us that a large part of contemporary mass politics, even populist mass politics, is essentially technocratic too. Members of the general public often assume that they are competent to decide which policies or politicians will be able to solve social and economic problems. Yet these ordinary "citizen-technocrats" typically regard the solutions to social problems as self-evident, such that politics becomes a matter of vetting public officials for their good intentions and strong wills, not their technocratic expertise.
Finally, Friedman argues that technocratic experts themselves drastically oversimplify technocratic realities. Economists, for example, theorize that people respond rationally to the incentives they face. This theory is simplistic, but it gives the appearance of being able to predict people's behavior in response to technocratic policy initiatives. If stripped of such gross oversimplications, though, technocrats themselves would be forced to admit that a rational technocracy is nothing more than an impossible dream.
Ranging widely over the philosophy of social science, rational choice theory, and empirical political science, Power without Knowledge is a pathbreaking work that upends traditional assumptions about technocracy and politics, forcing us to rethink our assumptions about the legitimacy of modern governance.
408 pages, Hardcover
Published January 15, 2020
5 people are currently reading
155 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 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 9, 2024
Ever suspected that clueless technocrats were goofing around? Read this book.
November 25, 2021
Turned out to be an advertisement for Google in hippy talk.
Author's disdain of the Zuck and Gates are barely contained (deservedly so, they're both tools).
While I'm neutral on what I know of Larry Page and Ray Kurzweil, to paint them with such religious veneration is hagiography. Friedman documents technology's exponential growth and our inability to grapple with its run away power, "Power Without Knowledge", but doesn't really offer much of a solution where many of us can get out one piece.
This, by virtue of the fact that the follow up title, is a "Critique of Technocracy", should be something considered. Friedman lauds Google and with shameless political pandering has missed some very important points. This highlights the book's central weakness: a lopsided acceptance of 'the right kind' of political power that filters into any Technocracy. He quotes Jefferson, whose vision of American was agrarian and self deterministic, but then turns around and attacks the people who would most likely agree with that. He foolishly assumes that Moonshot, Alphabet, Deep Mind, along with Facebook (and every other social media giant) should never be used by the military, but ignores ABC intelligence groups, and overlooks the fact that all this dirty work is contracted out.
What gets me is the hippy hat-tips found throughout the first half of the book followed by the hypocritical genuflexion to mega corporations and the naïve idea that Google can be a good technocracy (not stated, but strongly implied). Or, that "The Singularity", will benefit the common man, and somehow this does not mean a cold blooded Technocracy. Seriously, what turnip truck did he fall from? I had to laugh that the only supporting argument for a technocracy is to use applications of Leibnitz equations. Ya, and who's going to provide the data used? The same people who use 'Ethics' to justify what they're doing today? SinguHELLarity.
On the eve of 2022 the masks are coming off, the perfect society that tyrants world wide have sold to the gullible still remains a Marxist wasteland. Reality's a bitch, and denial is a river in Egypt. The world is rapidly moving to a Technocracy, just like the kind China is engineering right now, but the utopia he's preaching consist only of a very few elites, and lots of slaves. The book fools one into thinking that we're all invited, but as George Carlin so famously said, "It's a big club... and you ain't one of 'em". And that circle is ever shrinking.
The hippy vision of people working towards a common goal in fairness and love does not exist in a Technocracy. He condemns it while embracing it. Technocracy is all the same: it's cold, brutal, involves a lot of death, thinks itself to be efficient and benevolent, but ultimately won't include you, me, or him.
Author's disdain of the Zuck and Gates are barely contained (deservedly so, they're both tools).
While I'm neutral on what I know of Larry Page and Ray Kurzweil, to paint them with such religious veneration is hagiography. Friedman documents technology's exponential growth and our inability to grapple with its run away power, "Power Without Knowledge", but doesn't really offer much of a solution where many of us can get out one piece.
This, by virtue of the fact that the follow up title, is a "Critique of Technocracy", should be something considered. Friedman lauds Google and with shameless political pandering has missed some very important points. This highlights the book's central weakness: a lopsided acceptance of 'the right kind' of political power that filters into any Technocracy. He quotes Jefferson, whose vision of American was agrarian and self deterministic, but then turns around and attacks the people who would most likely agree with that. He foolishly assumes that Moonshot, Alphabet, Deep Mind, along with Facebook (and every other social media giant) should never be used by the military, but ignores ABC intelligence groups, and overlooks the fact that all this dirty work is contracted out.
What gets me is the hippy hat-tips found throughout the first half of the book followed by the hypocritical genuflexion to mega corporations and the naïve idea that Google can be a good technocracy (not stated, but strongly implied). Or, that "The Singularity", will benefit the common man, and somehow this does not mean a cold blooded Technocracy. Seriously, what turnip truck did he fall from? I had to laugh that the only supporting argument for a technocracy is to use applications of Leibnitz equations. Ya, and who's going to provide the data used? The same people who use 'Ethics' to justify what they're doing today? SinguHELLarity.
On the eve of 2022 the masks are coming off, the perfect society that tyrants world wide have sold to the gullible still remains a Marxist wasteland. Reality's a bitch, and denial is a river in Egypt. The world is rapidly moving to a Technocracy, just like the kind China is engineering right now, but the utopia he's preaching consist only of a very few elites, and lots of slaves. The book fools one into thinking that we're all invited, but as George Carlin so famously said, "It's a big club... and you ain't one of 'em". And that circle is ever shrinking.
The hippy vision of people working towards a common goal in fairness and love does not exist in a Technocracy. He condemns it while embracing it. Technocracy is all the same: it's cold, brutal, involves a lot of death, thinks itself to be efficient and benevolent, but ultimately won't include you, me, or him.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews