lepto
10-12-2008, 09:50 AM
Hello everyone! I'm new to your site but I thought I would get my feet wet this morning by throwing something out for your comments. Recently I've been exposed to Albert Borgmann's analysis of the role of technology in our society. Briefly, he dichotomizes between what he terms the "device paradigm" and "focal practices".
The "device paradigm" is the separation of the commodity from the machinery that produces it. An example might be in the difference between a play and a movie. In a play you have a group of people (actors/actresses, directors, stage hands and etc.) who get together to practice and perform for the public. The play is then put on for the public who appear in person in a public place surrounded by other people and partake in what is a fundamentally public and participatory activity.
A movie, however, is different. For purposes of this example I will avoid theaters and focus, instead, on DVD/VCR/Cable techology. With a movie you move from a public activity to a private one. You watch the movie in the privacy of your own home. You may be thrilled by the special effects, however, you are, almost, totally separated from the knowledge of how the effects are produced. In point of fact, very few have any idea as to how their tv, dvd, vcr and etc. work much less the techology required to actually produce the movie.
This is the "device paradigm": the separation of the commodity (the movie) from the techology required to produce it. The movie becomes a mere abstraction a "commodity". Contrast this from what Borgmann terms a "focal practice".
The focal practice would be the play. In it you have a group of individuals who come together, who practice and who hone their art for performance before the public. Citizens, then, come together in a public place and watch the play being performed. They are, necessarily, drawn into the process by the mere fact that they are surrounded by other individuals as well as presented with real humans performing, without a net as it were, in the flesh and in real time.
In this focal practice neither the performers nor the audience is divorced from the machinery required to produce the product. Everyone knows there are real performers on the stage and the props used are merely that "props". In order to appreciate the play the performers must excel and the audience must suspend disbelief and allow themselves to participate in the process. The focal practice, then, is a group product that engages and uplifts both the performers and the audience.
I'm no luddite nor do I think is Borgmann. I enjoy both movies and the theater. As I write this I do so on a computer that I little understand. I post this information via the internet, of which I have less understanding, to indivduals whom I don't know each of whom are sitting in their own little techological bubbles. In other words I am a full participant in this process. It seems to me, however, this dichotomization has profound consequences for our society. As more and more things are reduced to mere abstract commodities individuals become more isolated. We lose our sense of community and public spirit. As we move away from focal practices to the device paradigm we find ourselves lacking a basic understanding of our place in the world. Tradesmen begin to disappear only to be replaced by "parts changers" who have little understanding of how the parts they are changing work. It is a fairly bleak picture since I cannot see how we can change directions.
My question is, "do any you agree or disagree with Borgmann?" If you agree do you think there is any way to change this process? If you disagree, how and why?
The "device paradigm" is the separation of the commodity from the machinery that produces it. An example might be in the difference between a play and a movie. In a play you have a group of people (actors/actresses, directors, stage hands and etc.) who get together to practice and perform for the public. The play is then put on for the public who appear in person in a public place surrounded by other people and partake in what is a fundamentally public and participatory activity.
A movie, however, is different. For purposes of this example I will avoid theaters and focus, instead, on DVD/VCR/Cable techology. With a movie you move from a public activity to a private one. You watch the movie in the privacy of your own home. You may be thrilled by the special effects, however, you are, almost, totally separated from the knowledge of how the effects are produced. In point of fact, very few have any idea as to how their tv, dvd, vcr and etc. work much less the techology required to actually produce the movie.
This is the "device paradigm": the separation of the commodity (the movie) from the techology required to produce it. The movie becomes a mere abstraction a "commodity". Contrast this from what Borgmann terms a "focal practice".
The focal practice would be the play. In it you have a group of individuals who come together, who practice and who hone their art for performance before the public. Citizens, then, come together in a public place and watch the play being performed. They are, necessarily, drawn into the process by the mere fact that they are surrounded by other individuals as well as presented with real humans performing, without a net as it were, in the flesh and in real time.
In this focal practice neither the performers nor the audience is divorced from the machinery required to produce the product. Everyone knows there are real performers on the stage and the props used are merely that "props". In order to appreciate the play the performers must excel and the audience must suspend disbelief and allow themselves to participate in the process. The focal practice, then, is a group product that engages and uplifts both the performers and the audience.
I'm no luddite nor do I think is Borgmann. I enjoy both movies and the theater. As I write this I do so on a computer that I little understand. I post this information via the internet, of which I have less understanding, to indivduals whom I don't know each of whom are sitting in their own little techological bubbles. In other words I am a full participant in this process. It seems to me, however, this dichotomization has profound consequences for our society. As more and more things are reduced to mere abstract commodities individuals become more isolated. We lose our sense of community and public spirit. As we move away from focal practices to the device paradigm we find ourselves lacking a basic understanding of our place in the world. Tradesmen begin to disappear only to be replaced by "parts changers" who have little understanding of how the parts they are changing work. It is a fairly bleak picture since I cannot see how we can change directions.
My question is, "do any you agree or disagree with Borgmann?" If you agree do you think there is any way to change this process? If you disagree, how and why?