ENGG 481

Theoretical Perspectives on Technology

Lecture 5

Technology and Society - Chapter 3

Deanna Burgart [Link], CET

January, 2023
Objectives

• To address the fundamental difference between

utopian and dystopian views of technology

• To compare and critically examine a wide range of

theories on the complex interrelationship between
society and technology

• To learn about the field of science and technology

studies (STS) and its unique socio-technical
perspective
Why Study Theoretical Perspectives on Technology?

• No single approach adequately describes the

complex interrelationship between
technology and society.
• Divergent perspectives each shed light
Loading…
on different aspects of technological
society.
• Some early theoretical perspectives
represent simplistic views of this
intersection.
• More recent ones shed greater light on
the relationship between technology
and society.
 Utopian vs. Dystopian Views of Technology
• Utopians embrace technology as a new means
of achieving progress and efficiency.
• Technology allows us to dominate and
manage nature, leading to advancements in
how we produce material goods.
• It does not discount problems but looks at
Source: [Link] The Jetsons
technology as largely positive
• Street (1992) takes a dystopian view of
technology feeling it “threatens established
ways of life” and is thus seen as a regressive
force.

Source: [Link] Luddites

The Luddites

• The story begins in the late 1700s when machines started

to replace workers in the Industrial Age
• The Luddites were skilled textile workers, mainly from
Nottinghamshire, Yorkshire and Lancashire who revolted
against two key things:
Loading…
• Machines replacing skilled textile workers
• The hiring of unskilled workers to operate the machines
• Their livelihoods were threatened by the introduction of
automated looms and knitting frames to their workplace
Source:
• They took matters into their own hands and destroyed [Link]
machinery
Luddites: People who Hate Technology
[Link]
 TEDX Moment – Why we all need to be neo-Luddites

6
 Feenberg’s Categorization of Theories

•Feenberg’s theoretical model

distinguishes between two central
dimensions:
• Theories of neutrality describe technology
as separate from human activity, with no
effect on natural ends. (ethics, morality)
• Value-laden equates tech development with
human progress. (Eg moon landing is a
human accomplishment, usually ignoring
the consequences) “means to an end”
Feenberg’s Categorization of Theories,
cont’d

• Autonomous technology theories would argue

that humans have little choice in deciding how
the technology will evolve and diffuse in
society. ( TV changing way of life, and big
events, GoT)
• Human-controlled theories posit that
technology is controlled by humans and that it
is a socially constructed entity, whose meaning
and use is determined by human action.
Feenberg’s Categorization of Theories,
cont’d

Theories of Technology and Society

Source: Adapted from Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology (p. 9). New York: Routledge, p. 9.
Theories of Technology and Society

•Determinism (Traditional Marxism) -

Autonomous and Neutral
•Instrumentalism (liberal faith in
progress) – Human-controlled and neutral
•Substantivism (means and ends linked in
systems) – Autonomous and Value Laden
•Critical Theory (a choice of alternative
means and ends systems – Human-
controlled and Value Laden
 Determinism

• The overarching belief that technology determines

social structure and cultural values in a largely one
way direction
• This perspective has two opposing theoretical views:
Loading…
• Technological determinism proposes that
technology is the driving force in developing the
structure of society and culture. Technological
determinists adhere to the notion that technology
directs and shapes social interactions. (Transistors
increase doubling)
• Social determinism sees factors in society as
creating specific uses of technology. (Phone
Breakup)
Instrumentalism

• This theory focuses it’s view that humans have greater

control over technology and it’s uses. That the
technology itself is neutral
• Instrumentalism analyzes technology as a neutral
tool or instrument whose purpose is to fulfill users’
specific tasks.
• It proposes that technologies can be used for either positive
or negative reasons depending on the moral intentions of
the human agents who employ them.
• It posits technology as an evolutionary process in which
technologies are the product of previous technological
endeavours.
Substantivism

•Related to Karl Polanyi’s work on economic

anthropology, substantivism looks at technology as
being embedded in social and cultural contexts
•This dimension argues that technology brings forth new
social, political, and cultural systems, which it then
structures and controls.
•Technology can be used for either liberating or
destructive means, according to the nature of the
technology itself, which establishes and controls
society, rather than by the means and goals of human
actors.
 Critical Theory

• Critical theorists examine the ongoing interrelationships with technology

and society, including power dynamics and social structures.
• Technology is the product of both technical and social factors.
• It must be understood within the context of its use and development, it is
not simply a means of satisfying goals, but a process which directs a
specific mode of living and understanding.
• When governed by a technocracy, technology embodies the values,
social structures, and goals of hegemonic elites, whereas participatory
democratic actions offer an alternative to the technocracy. (tactful
resistance
• Political economy’s aim is to understand how inequality in society is
structured around capitalism and its link to society. (Dyer-Witheford)
 Terminology Check

• Technocracy – a system where experts or technical professionals have

a significant influence or control over decision making, especially
relating to technology and it’s application in society. In a technocratic
system, decisions are more often based on scientific and technical
expertise rather than political considerations.
• Hegemonic Elites – a dominant or ruling class that holds significant
power and influence over society. These elites can shape, control and
guide the values and ideologies of institutions – and can establish a
cultural dominance.
• Food for thought:
• What are some positive impacts of hegemonic elites?
• What are some potential negative influences of hegemonic elites?
15
 Terminology Check

• Political Economy – the study of the interrelationship between political

and economic systems and how they influence each other
• Examines the relationships between political institutions, policies and
economic structures to understand how they shape society including the
distribution of wealth, resources and power
• Participatory Democratic Actions – an alternative to top-down technocratic
models
• Citizen Assemblies
• Referendums and Initiatives
• Community Meetings/Town Halls
• Online Platforms
• Cooperative models (citizens, stakeholders, policy makers, industries etc.)
16 • Suggest some examples of recent participatory democratic actions?
Technology and Social Change
 Science and Technology Studies (STS)

• STS is an interdisciplinary field that studies how

scientific and technological changes intersect with
society.
• Within STS both SCOT and ANT
• STS confronts two major challenges:
• It aims at conducting meaningful research at the micro and
macro levels.
• It neither embraces a fully utopian nor dystopian perspective
of technology.
Science and Technology Studies (STS), cont’d

Characteristic Description

1. Rejection STS rejects the notion of technological determinism, where

of technological technology is perceived as the agent of social, cultural, political,
determinism and economic change.

1. Rejection STS also rejects the notion of social determinism, where the
of social inventor of a technology alone drives technological progress
determinism without any consideration of the social system in which an
invention occurs. Furthermore, society determines how a
technology is used and the kinds of consequences it will have.

1. Holistic STS intends to study the entire sociotechnical system and not the
approach social, political, cultural, and economic dimensions separately.

1. Qualitative STS uses qualitative methods, such as case studies and

methods ethnographies, to provide an in-depth examination of
sociotechnical systems that generate rich descriptions.
Social Construction of Technology
(SCOT)
• SCOT advocates do not see technology as shaping
human action, but instead see human action as shaping
technology.
• They argue that new technologies emerge and gather
meaning through social norms.
• A technological object can acquire different uses and values
according to the social context in which it is placed.
(example Video games)
Social Construction of Technology (SCOT),
cont’d
• Four key concepts have emerged within SCOT for analyzing
technology:
• Relevant social groups
• Interpretive flexibility
• Closure and stabilization
• Wider context
• This perspective is employed to better understand:
• technical change
• the design of tools
• the technological–societal relationship
 Relevant Social Groups

• Social groups are important due to their influence in attributing

meaning to the artifact.
• Meaning is obtained through interacting with like-minded social groups, who
share a similar opinion about the artifact and its uses.
• Without the necessary societal support, a new or existing technology can fail to
be adopted within a group, causing both new and older products to be viewed
as obsolete.
 Interpretive Flexibility
• This notion describes how artifacts are not neutral, but instead
their meaning emerges in a socio-cultural context.
• Example: The Smartphone – initially designed as a means for
instant communication, it has many uses today. What are some
ways you use your smartphone today?
• The bicycle. For some it is a means of recreation and leisure,
for others it is a mode of transportation that signifies an eco-
friendly lifestyle
• Flexibility exists not only “in how people think of or interpret
artifacts but also that there is flexibility in how artifacts are
designed” (Pinch & Bijker 1987).
• A simple tool can be used for multiple purposes and its
meaning and relevance emerge in a socio-cultural context.
 Interpretive Flexibility Examples

• Interpretive flexibility could involve an item’s

symbolism or cultural meaning
• Tobacco. For most people we associate it with cigarette
smoking. Once a common activity acceptable in all
spaces (work, the cinema, an airplane) now largely
frowned upon for health reasons, has deep significance
in Indigenous culture for ceremonial purposes

24
 Time Travel moment: 1950s

25
 The Sacred Practice of Tobacco Offering

26
 Tobacco Offering

27
 Closure and Stabilization

• As an artifact gains prominence in society, its flexibility to be

interpreted for other uses decreases because the social construction of
the artifact’s meaning becomes embedded in society.
• Closure describes the moment at which the relevant social group has
reached a consensus on what the tool is all about.
• Stabilization occurs when the tool has been assigned a very specific
use.
Wider Context

• Pinch and Bijker describe how “the sociocultural and

political situation of a social group shapes its norms
and values, which in turn influence the meaning given
to an artifact” (Pinch & Bijker 1987).
Loading…
• In this perspective, norms and values are powerful
frameworks for interpreting artifacts and for
understanding their value to society. (printing press
China)
 SCOT Critques

• Lacks understaning of the dynamics of technological change such as

social context, economic conditions, and structural relationships
within society.

• SCOT spends too much time studying the development and social
construction of tech, showing “disregard for the social consequences
of technical choice”

• Importance of opinions to some groups over others (pipelines Canada)

30
Actor Network Theory (ANT)

• This theory views “everything in the world as a continuously generated

effect of the webs of relations within which they are located” (Law 2009).
• A strength of this theory is its ability to examine the active processes and
interconnected relationships between human and non-human actors,
something not possible in many other technological theories.
• Within ANT, actors, or actants, can emerge in a variety of forms ranging
from human beings to concepts or ideas, technologies, institutions, and so
forth.
• Rather than focusing on the reasoning as to why relationships between
actors occur, the theory examines how these relationships are constructed
and practiced.
 Technological Affordances

• The theoretical framework of affordances allows us to

understand what features, functions, and characteristics of
digital media facilitate what kinds of social and informational
possibilities and constraints.
• Affordances refers to how computers, apps, and interfaces
together create a range of action possibilities. Thus, affordances
comes to mean to invite or suggest a use action.(liking on Insta)
History of Affordances

• Gibson (1966) coined the term affordances to describe how

features of the environment create opportunities for good or ill
in terms of an object.
• the design of objects interacts with a person’s mental model
and thereby elicits specific opportunities. (door handle)
• Norman (1988) developed the concept further in the context of
human–computer interaction to refer to how computers create a
range of action possibilities. This comes through in design of
UI.
Affordances of Social Media
• Studies looking at the affordances of social media stress both the
social and informational benefits.
• It allows us to understand the development of social norms in
digital communication and link these to features and functions
• Understanding affordances in the educational context can aid
designers to map social and information behaviors to features
and functions.
Case Study: Fake News

• Several social and information affordances of social media

facilitate the propagation of fake news.
• Clickbait: This kind of content may attract more likes,
shares, and forwards, leading to rapid dissemination across
social networks.
• Another affordance of digital media that complicates the
identification of fake news is the fact that these stories are
often shared or liked by family, friends, and other trusted
network members.
• Can be entertaining, support political agendas or sway
public opinion. Further exacerbated by AI recently.
Affordances Critiques

• The term is often only loosely defined and is used in a

wide range of contexts, creating conceptual vagueness.
• Exclusive focus on features and functions can leave
scholars myopic to social contexts, favoring
technological determinism.
Affordances Critiques (cont’d)

• Fox and McEwen (2017) warn scholars not to confuse

researcher-perceived affordances with user-perceived
affordances.

• The meanings given to affordances may vary across

cultures, communities, life stages, and other social
factors that need to be taken into consideration.
• Affordances may particularly vary across levels of
expertise in using digital media.
• May allow expert users to find new info online, may
overwhelm a novice user and lead to fake news and
misinformation.
Conclusions

• Simple approaches to the understanding of the

interrelationship between technology and society have
been largely refuted.

• Current perspectives on technological society focus on

a mutual shaping process—technological factors
impact society and, in turn, societal factors impact
technological design and implementation.
Conclusions, cont’d

• Technology is not necessarily to be studied as a

universal force, but rather, technology is examined
within unique social contexts.

• As technologies become even more engrained in our

daily lives, continued critical, in depth, and
contextualized analysis of our technological society
will be imperative.