Overview
Reflection Paper 2?(minimum 1000 words)
It is common in society to think that technologies are just things, that they are in and of themselves value-neutral. In fact, all technologies are value-laden. They reflect the values of the designers (e.g., the problem or opportunity to address), embody trade-offs, and are introduced in a way meant to attract. In addition, technology can be value-laden in a more profound way — it can embody, following Langdon Winner’s phrase, “political qualities.”
A technology has political qualities if it necessarily, or in the way it is deployed, influences how a society seeks to govern itself. Here are three ways technology may do this: ?
by disrupting the social order — the collection of primary groups in the society who understand themselves to be groups, and who have a stance toward other groups. To disrupt the social order is to create new groups (new actors), or marginalize some, change the relative relationships among some (e.g., power or wealth or status), or alter available mechanisms enabling people to organize themselves. ?
by altering social routines pertinent to social choice processes — influencing who may participate in: naming problems or opportunities; formulating choices with implications for the lives of many/most/all; contributing arguments and narratives for various options in this social choice; and entering directly in the decision-making process. ?
by installing durable conditions that favor a particular group’s interests — such as putting in place conditions and organizations and institutions that are highly influential and that cannot easily be ‘undone,’ such as the nuclear energy and weapons complex; setting the rules for how society overall will make key decisions; creating a narrative (e.g., around a historical event or a current social problem) that orients decisions in a given way; or installing one’s partisans in positions where they can make influential decisions that favor a given perspective and values. This can have the form of worsening the lives of others, may be mainly a way to defend a status quo that favors a group or groups, or (in rare cases!) may be for the benefit of all.
- A technology has “inherently political qualities” if it is certain, or nearly certain, that its introduction will have a substantial influence the social order, and social choice processes, and (perhaps) important conditions that must favor the values/interests of some. Equally, a technology is inherently political if we cannot imagine its introduction apart from a significant impact on social choice processes — the choices that may arise, participants, and decision-makers. Further, it is inherently political only if it biases the transition into a later society (one with the new technology) — it does not simply disrupt; it constrains the evolution of society in a particular direction.
E.g., nuclear energy and weapons cannot be created without a substantial and centralized authority — and there is no effective way to choose not to have them. In terms of the triad above, creating them meant • social order: a new bureaucratic apparatus to secure everything (a new and exceptionally powerful actor) • social choice processes: the original choice to introduce this technology was in the hands of a very few extremely powerful actors who decided unilaterally ... and further, present-day choices must be about this system in place and must take it as given and fixed in any 'connected' choice situations • durable conditions: the presence and form of this complex, including its ongoing expense to maintain, cannot be undone (at least not presently)
- In contrast, note that bridges and freeways are not inherently political. R. Moses had to distort standard practice greatly to deploy them to further his segregationist and racist interests. So a technology is inherently political only if this is so for its nominally intended or native use.
It is important to consider the entry and uptake of technology in society for its ethical qualities. We can define ethics as “those beliefs and actions that generally promote the flourishing of all.” For example, honesty by leaders, fairness in law enforcement, and justice in the courts, are ethical because they generally benefit everyone. In contrast, when some benefit in a way that necessarily harms others, this is unethical. Technology can influence the social order, governance, or key context conditions in ways that are ethical (e.g., increase freedom, equality, or self-determination) or unethical (e.g., transfer wealth in a way that creates an underclass).
- For this assignment, you will consider whether or not some technology possesses inherently political qualities. Do research on how your selected technology has influenced the political organization and behavior of another country's people outside of the US and Canada, regardless of where that technology was first designed and developed. You may choose any technology other than nuclear energy/weapons and timekeeping. Also, please restrict your choice of example to the history of the 19th-21st centuries.
Answer these questions: 1) Describe the relevant factual details of the case you will be discussing (i.e., the technology, where it was first developed, how people are using it in another country, etc.).
2) State your conclusion about whether or not the technology possesses inherently political qualities, and give an argument that establishes your conclusion based on the relation of the technology to specific social factors. That is, does it have a significant impact on the social order, on social routines pertinent to governance or social choice processes, and (perhaps) on context conditions that likely serve the interests of a particular population?
3) State your conclusion about whether or not it was ethical to introduce the technology into the country that assimilated the technology, and give an argument that relates the use of the technology (perhaps by only a distinct population) to social factors that resulted, and then that those factors are either exhibits of general flourishing, or that some are harmed.
Grading?
Write an essay that addresses the questions above. When you respond to these questions, you should be specific and cite specific details from the readings, class lectures, and your own research. You may provide references from your own research, but only in addition to material provided by the course. Also, you MUST make sure to cite your sources in your response and include a reference list at the end of your essay. Citations must be from reputable sources. Sites like Wikipedia, about.com, etc. are NOT considered acceptable sources. ?Higher credit will be given for responses that show evidence of a systematic and comprehensive understanding of the topics involved.?You are encouraged to review the rubric for this assignment and make sure that you answer each question in detail and with specifics.?Correct use of English is a fundamental requirement for your papers to be graded. If errors in English make it difficult for a grader to understand your sentences, or excessively slow down the grader to mark your technical errors, your paper will be returned to you for further work on its English, and your grade for the paper will be deferred until it is resubmitted with corrected English. If your assignment is returned for an excessive number of grammatical errors, you will be allowed to rewrite and resubmit it within two weeks of the original return date. If not resubmitted by the date set by your instructor, you will receive a zero (0) for the writing assignment.