Technology and Social Inequality

C. Pursell
{"title":"Technology and Social Inequality","authors":"C. Pursell","doi":"10.4245/SPONGE.V8I1.22610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the Fall of 1977 I gave a paper at a conference organized by the Center for Twentieth Century Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. The title of the paper, published in 1980, was “The American Ideal of a Democratic Technology.” Reading it over now, some thirty-seven years later, I am excited all over again by the debate over the nature and role of technology which was so prominent a part of the 1970s, but actually had its roots in the 19th century. But I am also profoundly dismayed by the ways in which America has squandered the insight and the momentum of that debate. Today there are issues with large components of technology and science on the political agenda; fracking and coal seam gas extraction, the spread of crops of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the vacuuming up of masses of private electronic data by the National Security Agency (NSA) for example. By and large, however, they are not understood to be part of the same political issue of social inequality. And of course there is still the obfuscating, and therefore dangerous, insistence on using the terms “science” and “technology” strategically when discussing these topics, and still the Sacred Cows such as space exploration and the dream of unlimited energy through fusion which seem to float above any consideration of opportunity costs where real social needs are concerned.","PeriodicalId":29732,"journal":{"name":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4245/SPONGE.V8I1.22610","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In the Fall of 1977 I gave a paper at a conference organized by the Center for Twentieth Century Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. The title of the paper, published in 1980, was “The American Ideal of a Democratic Technology.” Reading it over now, some thirty-seven years later, I am excited all over again by the debate over the nature and role of technology which was so prominent a part of the 1970s, but actually had its roots in the 19th century. But I am also profoundly dismayed by the ways in which America has squandered the insight and the momentum of that debate. Today there are issues with large components of technology and science on the political agenda; fracking and coal seam gas extraction, the spread of crops of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the vacuuming up of masses of private electronic data by the National Security Agency (NSA) for example. By and large, however, they are not understood to be part of the same political issue of social inequality. And of course there is still the obfuscating, and therefore dangerous, insistence on using the terms “science” and “technology” strategically when discussing these topics, and still the Sacred Cows such as space exploration and the dream of unlimited energy through fusion which seem to float above any consideration of opportunity costs where real social needs are concerned.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
技术与社会不平等
1977年秋,我在密尔沃基威斯康辛大学二十世纪研究中心组织的一次会议上发表了一篇论文。这篇论文发表于1980年,题目是《民主技术的美国理想》。三十七年后的今天,重读这篇文章,我再次为关于技术的性质和作用的争论感到兴奋。技术在20世纪70年代是如此突出,但实际上它起源于19世纪。但我也对美国浪费这场辩论的洞察力和动力的方式深感沮丧。今天,政治议程上存在着技术和科学的大量组成部分的问题;例如,水力压裂法和煤层气开采,转基因生物(GMOs)作物的推广以及国家安全局(NSA)对大量私人电子数据的收集。然而,总的来说,它们并不被理解为社会不平等这一政治问题的一部分。当然,在讨论这些话题时,仍然有一些令人困惑的,因此也是危险的,坚持战略性地使用“科学”和“技术”这两个术语,仍然有一些神圣的牛,比如太空探索和通过核聚变实现无限能源的梦想,它们似乎漂浮在任何考虑机会成本的社会需求之上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beyond Realism and Antirealism ---At Last? Tolstoy’s argument: realism and the history of science Douglas A. Vakoch and Matthew F. Dowd. The Drake Equation: Estimating the Prevalence of Extraterrestrial Life through the Ages The Relevance of Evidence from the History of Science in the Contemporary Realism/Anti-realism Debate Four Challenges to Epistemic Scientific Realism—and the Socratic Alternative.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1