The Societal Impact of Technology

Savvas A. Katsikides

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN:
  9780429770203
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophy History & Theory

Published in 1998. This text is concerned with research issues within the context of the emerging information age. The book draws together research which is devoted to key questions examining the relationship between the various and widely discussed developments of technological systems and their societal impacts. Increasing interest and research into the information society and their euphorical assumptions is creating a wide spectrum of societal criticism. Computer supported work for instance has led to the development of innovative organizational processes based on technological developments and communications paradigms. In particular the focus is centred on the perspectives of such Networking Entities and their many varied implications. The book links sociology with technology and aims to lead it to wider discussions of the above issues.

1
Sociological Context and Information Technology

Introduction

Sociological research related specifically to technology remains faithful to its functionalist origins. Theoretical sociology aims to provide solutions to a number of fundamental general problems centered on the concept of social structure, as T. Fararo¹ (1989:9) pointed out. In recent years, much criticism has been addressed to the functional analysis of this particular science. Mulkey’s² (1976:63) central argument, for instance, was that scientists deviate from some of the putative norms with a frequency that is remarkable if one takes into consideration that these norms are becoming firmly institutionalized. Another criticism, has been leveled against methodology; and specifically revolving around the question whether terminology has been standardized across all empirical studies. Information technology and its negative or positive impact on society and people is a theme of current debate, as are the implications of information technology at different social levels, namely, international, national and organizational.

The aim of this chapter is to look at the various needs and approaches of technology and its place in the scientific tradition. In this respect, we examine what is happening in terms of classical sociology and investigate how solutions can be achieved satisfying different and competing concepts of technologies. Finally, we attempt to redefine the problem of theoretical formulations and describe the ARS (Autonomous Reflex System) model.

Sociology and Technology

Linking sociology and technology together is both a relatively new and old phenomenon in social sciences. In the 19th century the role of machines had realized more or less a process of automation and therefore modernization for society. In the 20th century, the use of computers and, in particular the use of software is commonly accepted and is widely recognized that it reduces manpower to a common status absent of any social or organizational context which defines them (Salzman 1994:282). Salzman also pointed out that two main fields of distinction are made, while recognizing at the same time differences in power, position, function and organizational structure, which are all central in analyses of the workplace or society. Furthermore, these are dimensions of the social context that are important for analysis of computerization in general and in the design of software in particular. The first point is linked with our analysis in this article, the second approach is analyzed by Salzman and Rosenthal, (1994) in their book Software by Design.

In general terms, sociologists examine and interpret scientific and research traditions. At least three such traditions exist within sociology: the conflict theory tradition stemming from Marx and Weber, the Durkheimian tradition with its functionalism and ritual solidarity wings, and the micro-interactionist tradition (Fararo 1989:11). Some sociologists have accepted action theory or structuralism, recognizing the variety of world perspectives and domains of work. The era of sociology and technology has given rise to significant problems, but before discussing them, it is useful to map sociological theory and empirical interpretation.

Social scientific work has been much publicized in the past, and turned into technological discourse by Gehlen (1957), Loewith (1964), Marcuse³ (1941, 1967), Habermas (1968), Linde (1972, 1982), Ullrich (1979), Bamme et al. (1983), Rammert (1983, 1991, 1993), Hulsmann (1985), Beck (1986), Tschiedel (1989, 1990), Alemann et al. (1993). The issues have principally focused on the development and the implementation of technology, and on the investigation of the further consequences of technology, primarily from a social and ecological perspective. For instance:

• (1) The evaluation of technology or technology assessment and technology monitoring (see Nowotny 1979, Radkau 1983, Halfmann⁴ 1984, Jochem 1988).
• (2) The origins of technology and initial analysis of technology through sociological factors which would determine the meaning of certain technological concepts within historically concrete societal development (see Hochgerner and Berka 1994, Rammert 1991, Dierkes and Hoffmann 1992).
• (3) The extension of scientific awareness to socially relevant areas, hitherto unrelated to the implementation and effects of technology upon everyday life, private life, biology and ecology, agriculture, the elderly, health, etc. (Wagner 1991, Weingart 1989, Joerges 1988).
• (4) The constructive approach, and the state as commonly accepted in the USA, the UK and Scandinavian countries. As Hochgerner and Berka (1994:108) stated, in socio-technical studies of this kind the combined effects of the protagonists, interests, technological and scientific traditions are investigated in the process of making a decision between different ‘technical’ competing concepts of technology. Leading the way into this field is the work by Bijker et al. (1987) followed for example by Cronberg (1991).
• (5) The shaping of a new era which involves technological and informational reality as a real social awareness.

However, it is difficult to prove that any of the above theses can by itself or in synergy form a common sociology of technology. Hochgerner and Berka (1994) argue that acceptance of interrelating theories in the discipline of sociology of technology will emerge as a natural result of social processes. In the past however, much attention has been paid to the effective implementation of technology as postulated by Adler and Helleloid (1987), and Majchrzack (1986). Accordingly, Salzman (1989) described the process of turning technology into tools, through the examination of the relationship between technology and culture, and by attempting to identify the forms which it may take.

In order to understand the transformations a theory undergoes when it is brought into practical use, it is necessary to analyse the rationality of technology which should preclude all predictable irrationalities. One of the most basic reasons for the division of labour is the ideology of fundamental differences between women and men. The gender question has only recently been taken into consideration and today modern philosophy is dominated by several dichotomies: mind/body, reason/passion and nature/culture, all of which interact with the feminine/masculine dichotomy in complex ways, (Katsikides/Pohl 1994:35)⁵. The associations between women, nature, passion and the body are very influential in contemporary thought and are based (along with theoretical tools) on the different cognitive styles as identified by Human Computer Interaction (HCI) which is consequently rebased on these dichotomies. Gender differences have been regarded as pre-determined and natural: for example so that women have restricted choice and are forced to adapt to male values. The alternative is to develop a completely different model of computer or technology usage based on traditional female qualities such as emotion and personal focus.

Clearly every process needs standardisation and control. As technology focused on very strict natural scientific laws it seemed to circumvent the dilemma of exploitation and oppression. Traditional science based on Thomas Kuhn builds on past scientific achievement acknowledged by certain scientific communities, accepting it as the foundation from which to advance. It also accepts as its basis the known classics of science such as Aristotles’ Physics, Ptolemy’s Almagest, Newton’s Principia and Opticks, etc. Before exploring Thomas Kuhn’s theory on paradigm, the basic concepts related to the field must first, be defined. Wittgenstein, for example, termed the various parts of human activities as ‘games’ and we can find similarities between these games and the activities of real human families. The understanding of the term game can only be achieved through the construction of a catalogue of typical cases which possess a minimum of common characteristics, and in which the definition of an activity must not figure. On the other hand, the term ‘paradigm’ as established by T. Kuhn⁶, was closely related to normal science. In his acceptance of the term, he was suggesting that some accepted examples of actual scientific practice - examples which include law, theory application, and instrumentation-provide models for traditions of scientific research. A paradigms acquisition of key characteristics makes more substantive research possible and signals a mature level of development in its particular scientific field (Kuhn 1970:11). For example, with an established paradigm we can relate the growth and social function of technical workers whose work involves the application of science and technology to the development of Taylorism, in addition to the complexity of the new division of labour, and the state in relation to other states, or within a supra-national state (Smith 1990:452)⁷.

Furthermore, the social consequences of such complexities can only be understood through examination of the way in which organizations and their structure are changing. Obviously the role of technology has been central, and has ultimately brought about the rational activities of the economic and social order. Max Weber in Economy and Society, structured his analysis around the contradictions between the traditional and the non-traditional. He argued that the transition from a predominantly traditional society to a rational society accounted for modernization. Further into the twentieth century however, modern technology and organizations, characterized by sameness and worker alienation, began to be replaced by post-modern/post-industrial technology so that an organization became characterized by its features of diversity and the challenge it could pose to the individual. Marcuse (1941, 1967) was quite accurate in his assertion that technology was a historical, societal project which could not be reduced to a material dimension because the understanding of technology as a social process has slowly become integrated into sociology, despite some opposition (Ogburn 1922, Habermas 1968). Moreover, it is also important to note that if technology is to be seen as an element of social action, or as a process whereby social relationships are to be constituted, then it must be expressed by a theory of social change (Weingart 1989:11)⁸. Thus it becomes obvious that any distinction between models of technology as causal factors of social change and models of social determination of technology must be eliminated. A theory of social action should integrate and comprise both aspects, i.e., societal change and development of technology, as two conflicting processes. With respect to technology and its development, we are in a position to define two possible hypotheses. The first hypothesis relates to the application and dimension of technology (as a result of the development of the natural sciences), wherein societal consequences can be seen as a result of their use or implementation. The representative the first position was Heinz Hiilsmann⁹ (1985) who stated that technology is possible only under the circumstances of developed societies, for they alone can support and maintain technology. Hiilsmann understands the term technology in its relation to structure and situation, both covering the societal formation, technology is a technique (Technik) and belongs to natural sciences. Natural sciences are technological by definition and coexist with technology via a specific structural and functional connection. The second hypothesis states that technologies result from processes related to social action that have contributed to the knowledge of natural science.

The transition from the natural sciences to technology implies a simultaneous transition to sociality (Hiilsmann 1985:9) i.e., technology is a social reality and it therefore engenders a real sociality. On the contrary, it could be said that technology creates social reality and materializes a real sociality. This happens not afterwards but during social formation. That means, technology forms society.

Effects of New Technology

How does technological development affect organizations? Hoerning¹⁰ (1989) maintains that it is ironic that we do not possess sufficient sociological tools to provide the necessary insight these issues require, since technology has become a decisional factor in societal action. Technology has affected many areas of life, a fact which is generally ignored by the creators of such structures. In this sense however, technological development can be seen as independent action whilst societal cultural ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• The Author
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Sociological Context and Information Technology
• 2 Sociology and the Functions of Technological Autonomy
• 3 Gender and Social Construction of Technology
• 4 Organizational Implications of Technological Change: Some Aspects of Applied Systems in Hospitals
• 5 The Making of Global Cities: Technology and Social Sustainability
• 6 Technological Change and Employment in Society
• 7 Structuring Technology and Working Environments
• 8 Critical Issues for the Domains of an Information Society
• 9 An Interpretation of Sociology in the Information Society