Paradox Lost
[Click on title for link]
The Paradox of Technology: What’s Gained and Lost? is a paper written a decade ago C. A. Bowers, an American educator. It is still relevant and thought-provoking. Written during the late 90s, Bowers argued that Western society was becoming dependent on communication technologies that it understood in terms of application, but was unable to fully appreciate the connections between the culturally diverse forms of knowledge that it was losing through the introduction of such ubiquitous technologies.
Bowers makes a number of thought-provoking observations:
1. Computers amplify explicit, context-free forms of knowledge, while their programmers usually overlook implicit and culturally specific analog experiences and ways of knowing.
2. Computers amplify a conduit view of language, while hiding the metaphorically layered nature of language, as well as masking how language on the screen reproduces a specific form of cultural intelligence.
3. Computers amplify a Western view of the individual as autonomous in matters of rational judgment and moral decision making.
4. Computers reinforce a Western way of experiencing time, which involves a linear sense of movement into the future and away from the past. What separates this way of experiencing time from other cultural patterns of temporality is that the autonomous individual decides whether anything from the past has relevance.
Bowers continues. . .
Yet only if we understand these amplification and reduction characteristics will we see the connections between computers and the forms of knowledge that lead to a consumer, technologically oriented culture.
Bowers goes on to suggest some of the technology issues that need to be included in curriculum reform discussion:
• The cultural mediating characteristics of computers that threaten cultural diversity and ecological sustainability.
• Technologies developed in traditional, more ecologically centered cultures versus the modern, Western approach to technology.
• The characteristics of technologies based on the principles of ecological design.
• The relationship between different forms of technology and the commodification of knowledge—and how the expansion of market forces undermine the viability of communities and natural systems.
• The impact of different forms of technology on traditions that contribute to the self-sufficiency of community life.
• The influence of technologies on patterns of thinking, values, and the metaphorical language that influences how relationships are understood.
• The social justice issues that are connected to different forms of technology.
. . .Bowers concludes.
In effect, this list covers the basic knowledge needed for democratizing decisions about technological innovation and globalization. If education were to include a systematic study of these issues, we would see a far more intelligent discussion of technology and, hopefully, fewer decisions based on the myth that equates technological innovation with progress.
Reference:
Bowers, C. A. (1998). The Paradox of Technology: What's Gained and Lost? Thought & Action, 14 (1) pp. 49-57
See also: Is technology neutral?
The Paradox of Technology: What’s Gained and Lost? is a paper written a decade ago C. A. Bowers, an American educator. It is still relevant and thought-provoking. Written during the late 90s, Bowers argued that Western society was becoming dependent on communication technologies that it understood in terms of application, but was unable to fully appreciate the connections between the culturally diverse forms of knowledge that it was losing through the introduction of such ubiquitous technologies.
Bowers makes a number of thought-provoking observations:
1. Computers amplify explicit, context-free forms of knowledge, while their programmers usually overlook implicit and culturally specific analog experiences and ways of knowing.
2. Computers amplify a conduit view of language, while hiding the metaphorically layered nature of language, as well as masking how language on the screen reproduces a specific form of cultural intelligence.
3. Computers amplify a Western view of the individual as autonomous in matters of rational judgment and moral decision making.
4. Computers reinforce a Western way of experiencing time, which involves a linear sense of movement into the future and away from the past. What separates this way of experiencing time from other cultural patterns of temporality is that the autonomous individual decides whether anything from the past has relevance.
Bowers continues. . .
Yet only if we understand these amplification and reduction characteristics will we see the connections between computers and the forms of knowledge that lead to a consumer, technologically oriented culture.
Bowers goes on to suggest some of the technology issues that need to be included in curriculum reform discussion:
• The cultural mediating characteristics of computers that threaten cultural diversity and ecological sustainability.
• Technologies developed in traditional, more ecologically centered cultures versus the modern, Western approach to technology.
• The characteristics of technologies based on the principles of ecological design.
• The relationship between different forms of technology and the commodification of knowledge—and how the expansion of market forces undermine the viability of communities and natural systems.
• The impact of different forms of technology on traditions that contribute to the self-sufficiency of community life.
• The influence of technologies on patterns of thinking, values, and the metaphorical language that influences how relationships are understood.
• The social justice issues that are connected to different forms of technology.
. . .Bowers concludes.
In effect, this list covers the basic knowledge needed for democratizing decisions about technological innovation and globalization. If education were to include a systematic study of these issues, we would see a far more intelligent discussion of technology and, hopefully, fewer decisions based on the myth that equates technological innovation with progress.
Reference:
Bowers, C. A. (1998). The Paradox of Technology: What's Gained and Lost? Thought & Action, 14 (1) pp. 49-57
See also: Is technology neutral?
Comments
Post a Comment