Building Scaffolds

Lars Botin
{"title":"Building Scaffolds","authors":"Lars Botin","doi":"10.5840/techne202027113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Critical Constructivism and postphenomenology are two possible ways of describing, analysing and evaluating the role and meaning of technology in contemporary society and world. Whereas Critical Constructivism looks at the way technologies are dealt with on a macro level considering systems and programs, then postphenomenology digs into the individual and personal appropriation and understanding of technology in everyday life. This means that there is a gap for what concerns levels, but also in relation to what they want to accomplish. The critical stance of Andrew Feenberg in conceiving societal and political problems as ripe for radical technological change is met by postphenomenology’s pragmatic focus on how to build appropriate and meaningful structures for handling of emergent and imminent problems together with and through technology. This paper tries to bridge this gap by introducing the concept of scaffolding, which is inspired by Heidegger’s “Gestell,” but re-read in a new and different way than the usual pessimistic and deterministic interpretation where exploitation and “enframing” is at hand. Scaffolding is read as a common enterprise where we stretch and reach out towards each other in order to create platforms for interventions and activism. The paper is an attempt to direct this common enterprise in specific directions, and this directedness is indicative for our aims and goals. It is the claim that Critical Constructivism and postphenomenology should meet, and perform a certain kind of Techno-Activism when confronted with problems in technological society.","PeriodicalId":123735,"journal":{"name":"Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/techne202027113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Critical Constructivism and postphenomenology are two possible ways of describing, analysing and evaluating the role and meaning of technology in contemporary society and world. Whereas Critical Constructivism looks at the way technologies are dealt with on a macro level considering systems and programs, then postphenomenology digs into the individual and personal appropriation and understanding of technology in everyday life. This means that there is a gap for what concerns levels, but also in relation to what they want to accomplish. The critical stance of Andrew Feenberg in conceiving societal and political problems as ripe for radical technological change is met by postphenomenology’s pragmatic focus on how to build appropriate and meaningful structures for handling of emergent and imminent problems together with and through technology. This paper tries to bridge this gap by introducing the concept of scaffolding, which is inspired by Heidegger’s “Gestell,” but re-read in a new and different way than the usual pessimistic and deterministic interpretation where exploitation and “enframing” is at hand. Scaffolding is read as a common enterprise where we stretch and reach out towards each other in order to create platforms for interventions and activism. The paper is an attempt to direct this common enterprise in specific directions, and this directedness is indicative for our aims and goals. It is the claim that Critical Constructivism and postphenomenology should meet, and perform a certain kind of Techno-Activism when confronted with problems in technological society.
建筑脚手架
批判建构主义和后现象学是描述、分析和评价技术在当代社会和世界中的作用和意义的两种可能的方法。批判建构主义关注的是在宏观层面上考虑系统和程序处理技术的方式,而后现象学则深入研究个人和个人在日常生活中对技术的占有和理解。这意味着在关注的层面上存在差距,但在他们想要完成的事情上也存在差距。安德鲁·芬伯格(Andrew Feenberg)认为社会和政治问题已经成熟,可以进行激进的技术变革,这一批判立场与后现象学的实用主义关注相一致,后者关注的是如何建立适当的、有意义的结构,以便与技术一起或通过技术来处理紧急和迫在眉睫的问题。本文试图通过引入脚手架的概念来弥合这一差距,该概念受到海德格尔的“Gestell”的启发,但以一种新的和不同的方式重新阅读,而不是通常的悲观和确定性的解释,其中剥削和“框架”就在手边。脚手架被解读为一种共同的事业,我们伸展和相互接触,以创造干预和行动主义的平台。本文试图将这一共同的事业引向具体的方向,而这种方向性表明了我们的目的和目标。批判构成主义和后现象学在面对技术社会的问题时,应该相遇并表现出某种技术行动主义的主张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信