I recently took a domestic Canadian flight from Vancouver and Montreal aboard an Airbus A330. The A330 is marvel of aeronautical engineering: a wide-body twin-engine jet airliner with a wingspan of over 60 meters and a take-off weight nearly 250 000 kg. The variant that I was in (a -300 model) was powered by two Rolls-Royce Trent 700 series turbofan engines, giving the craft a maximum cruising speed of Mach 0.86 (913km/h) and a thrust power of 316 000 Newtons of force (71000 pound per foot). In short, it is a machine of enormous power, and it is rightly celebrated as success of human ingenuity and of France-based Airbus Industries.
However, at the time, none of these awesome facts of the machine that would take me the 3600 km from the west coast to Quebec really occurred to me. I harbour an abiding repugnance for commercial airlines, as one of the few things that I truly dislike about travelling - for hours of my life, I am confined to a metal tube with dry, pressurised air with an array of strangers that range from the pleasant woman whom you are mildly delighted to be seated besides, to the wailing infant right behind you who will not be silent the mother seems completely unable to assuage. Furthermore, with the exception landing and take-off, and with good weather conditions at that, there is nothing to see or view, nothing to provide the sensation of actually travelling anywhere. Unfailingly I finish flight days with a lack of sleep, an aching back, and left wondering when we collectively believed that this was an acceptable way to move from place to place.
The above is meant as an analogy of what I wish to write to about on this blog: the relationship between human beings and the technology we have created, as well as the kinds of spaces and environments that result from this relationship.
In order to explain my intentions for this blog, I must initially delve in the world of philosophy, if only to explain the parameters of any arguments or questions that I pose. The history of discussion and discourse regarding the interplay between people and technology is a long one, but it is modern technology specifically that interests me, which begins with birth of modern science (I will use the words science and technology interchangeably, or the compound techno-science, as this denotes the social context of science, a word originally coined by the French philosopher Gaston Bachelard). For the purposes of this blog then, I refer to science and technology as it is understood in Western thought after the Scientific Revolution of 1543 (this was the year that Nicolaus Copernicus published a paper with a thesis for a heliocentric solar system, that the Earth orbits around the sun, rather than the cosmos orbiting around the Earth).
The word technology, incidentally, is an interesting one. It is a compound of two Greek words: techne- meaning "skill," and is from where we get the English word "technique" which refers to making or doing, and logos, meaning "discourse" which refers to a knowing and knowledge and is the source of the word "logic." Technology then, as a compound word, refers the merging between making and doing, and of knowing something in a logical sense. The definition that I employ when referring to technology then, which I borrow from Dr. Tom Darby in his essay on planetary rule, is "the progressively rational (efficient) arrangement of means and ends and cause and effect." In perhaps less esoteric language, technology is the ordering and altering of the world for the benefit of human use.
It is here on that I hope to cease with the use of philosophical language. The fact is that in-depth thought on the relationship between human beings technology tends to be extremely dense and esoteric, and is, I feel, highly inaccessible to those with a foundational education in political philosophy just to understand the ideas and thoughts being expressed. However, I believe that not only could these ideas be made relate-able for those that have not read philosophy, but that they are important to understand for everyone.
We live now in a technological society, with implications both for ourselves as human beings and this little planet we live on. What motivates me to write this blog is the warning embedded in the writings of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger, that there is nothing wrong with science and technology, indeed, they are of enormous benefit to our success as a species, and have potential in caring for and co-existing with all life on Earth, but we should not accept technology as a value-free fact of life, and that we should be vigilant and carefully reflective of where and how we allow technology into our lives. If we choose to blindly accept technology as a given 'good', then we give it power over us and are doomed to be mastered by the machines we create than mastering the machines.
If we do accept technology as good for everyone, we will become victims of technicity. Technicity is not technology, but a mass belief that science and technology are the great good which serves as a guide for our collective action as a society, not unlike the way in which the idea of "God" used to be the great good which dictated society only a few hundred years ago. The logic of this is that technology, unlike God, is value-neutral because technology serves everyone. This is gravely incorrect. Technology is not, and can never be, value-neutral. Technology is first and foremost, a tool, is it therefore caught up in the politics, economics and ethics of the forces in this world that use technology, and is therefore entangled with the values of these forces.
My goal then, is to set about writing about reflections and observations about the relationship between humans and technology as an attempt to ward off technicity, and keep us informed as how we allow technology into our lives and, hopefully, allow us to better master the machines have created.
Meanwhile, back on my plane travelling to Montreal, we have decided that to move from Point A to B must be done in the fastest, most efficient way possible, which flying undeniably is, but in doing so, we lose any kind of sense of the wonder of travel, of the changing of sights, smells and sounds when we travel by bus, train boat, and on foot. Furthermore, it is often uncomfortable (with the possible exception of flying 1st class) and forces you into a confined space with a lot of people you don't know. Is it worth it? For myself, I love travel, and for that reason alone, commercial airlines will always be disagreeable, though I grudgingly accept that for many of us, including myself, that the limited amount of time we have for holidays and travel often demand that we not spend a week travelling by bus from Vancouver to Montreal (something which I have personally done). It does, however come at a cost, and something which I would suggest that you consider the next time you get on a plane.
As a final thought, there is one element of jet plane travel I do enjoy: the few moments when the plane accelerates down the runway, and the slow, wonderful sensation of the heavier-than-air machine becoming airborne. For those few moments, I appreciate the technological marvel 316 000 N lifting off 250 000 kg of human, cargo and airplane off the ground.
However, at the time, none of these awesome facts of the machine that would take me the 3600 km from the west coast to Quebec really occurred to me. I harbour an abiding repugnance for commercial airlines, as one of the few things that I truly dislike about travelling - for hours of my life, I am confined to a metal tube with dry, pressurised air with an array of strangers that range from the pleasant woman whom you are mildly delighted to be seated besides, to the wailing infant right behind you who will not be silent the mother seems completely unable to assuage. Furthermore, with the exception landing and take-off, and with good weather conditions at that, there is nothing to see or view, nothing to provide the sensation of actually travelling anywhere. Unfailingly I finish flight days with a lack of sleep, an aching back, and left wondering when we collectively believed that this was an acceptable way to move from place to place.
The above is meant as an analogy of what I wish to write to about on this blog: the relationship between human beings and the technology we have created, as well as the kinds of spaces and environments that result from this relationship.
In order to explain my intentions for this blog, I must initially delve in the world of philosophy, if only to explain the parameters of any arguments or questions that I pose. The history of discussion and discourse regarding the interplay between people and technology is a long one, but it is modern technology specifically that interests me, which begins with birth of modern science (I will use the words science and technology interchangeably, or the compound techno-science, as this denotes the social context of science, a word originally coined by the French philosopher Gaston Bachelard). For the purposes of this blog then, I refer to science and technology as it is understood in Western thought after the Scientific Revolution of 1543 (this was the year that Nicolaus Copernicus published a paper with a thesis for a heliocentric solar system, that the Earth orbits around the sun, rather than the cosmos orbiting around the Earth).
The word technology, incidentally, is an interesting one. It is a compound of two Greek words: techne- meaning "skill," and is from where we get the English word "technique" which refers to making or doing, and logos, meaning "discourse" which refers to a knowing and knowledge and is the source of the word "logic." Technology then, as a compound word, refers the merging between making and doing, and of knowing something in a logical sense. The definition that I employ when referring to technology then, which I borrow from Dr. Tom Darby in his essay on planetary rule, is "the progressively rational (efficient) arrangement of means and ends and cause and effect." In perhaps less esoteric language, technology is the ordering and altering of the world for the benefit of human use.
It is here on that I hope to cease with the use of philosophical language. The fact is that in-depth thought on the relationship between human beings technology tends to be extremely dense and esoteric, and is, I feel, highly inaccessible to those with a foundational education in political philosophy just to understand the ideas and thoughts being expressed. However, I believe that not only could these ideas be made relate-able for those that have not read philosophy, but that they are important to understand for everyone.
We live now in a technological society, with implications both for ourselves as human beings and this little planet we live on. What motivates me to write this blog is the warning embedded in the writings of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger, that there is nothing wrong with science and technology, indeed, they are of enormous benefit to our success as a species, and have potential in caring for and co-existing with all life on Earth, but we should not accept technology as a value-free fact of life, and that we should be vigilant and carefully reflective of where and how we allow technology into our lives. If we choose to blindly accept technology as a given 'good', then we give it power over us and are doomed to be mastered by the machines we create than mastering the machines.
If we do accept technology as good for everyone, we will become victims of technicity. Technicity is not technology, but a mass belief that science and technology are the great good which serves as a guide for our collective action as a society, not unlike the way in which the idea of "God" used to be the great good which dictated society only a few hundred years ago. The logic of this is that technology, unlike God, is value-neutral because technology serves everyone. This is gravely incorrect. Technology is not, and can never be, value-neutral. Technology is first and foremost, a tool, is it therefore caught up in the politics, economics and ethics of the forces in this world that use technology, and is therefore entangled with the values of these forces.
My goal then, is to set about writing about reflections and observations about the relationship between humans and technology as an attempt to ward off technicity, and keep us informed as how we allow technology into our lives and, hopefully, allow us to better master the machines have created.
Meanwhile, back on my plane travelling to Montreal, we have decided that to move from Point A to B must be done in the fastest, most efficient way possible, which flying undeniably is, but in doing so, we lose any kind of sense of the wonder of travel, of the changing of sights, smells and sounds when we travel by bus, train boat, and on foot. Furthermore, it is often uncomfortable (with the possible exception of flying 1st class) and forces you into a confined space with a lot of people you don't know. Is it worth it? For myself, I love travel, and for that reason alone, commercial airlines will always be disagreeable, though I grudgingly accept that for many of us, including myself, that the limited amount of time we have for holidays and travel often demand that we not spend a week travelling by bus from Vancouver to Montreal (something which I have personally done). It does, however come at a cost, and something which I would suggest that you consider the next time you get on a plane.
As a final thought, there is one element of jet plane travel I do enjoy: the few moments when the plane accelerates down the runway, and the slow, wonderful sensation of the heavier-than-air machine becoming airborne. For those few moments, I appreciate the technological marvel 316 000 N lifting off 250 000 kg of human, cargo and airplane off the ground.
