Evolution of Technology (TEC 154 2014S) : EBoards

TEC 154 2014S, Class 03: More Foundational Perspectives



Note Takers




Happy 30th anniversary of the Mac!

Notes from FC

[Sam notes that these are a bit brief and need a better summary.]

Today marks the 30th Anniversary of the Mac

Side notes: * Review: Goal was to break down the readings from the authors. * Power: People don't answer when asked questions.

As a class, we defined Pool, Winner, and Marx. After defining each author's claim, we discussed the implications of their claims and what is possible with technology

Review: What does Weinberg say?

Review: What does Berry say?




We discussed the differences between the three authors assigned for today. Winner's focus was on the politics of technology. Winner mentioned that artifacts contain political properties that ultimately benefit a group while limiting the benefits of other's. An example provided in this article was an engineer building bridges no more than 9 feet tall in order to discourage public transportation and their riders (typically working class minorities) from entering Long Island.

Pool's argument revolved around the idea that society shapes a certain technology. The class agreed that there are negative (or in some instances positive) consequences due to technology, but, that the idea of constant innovation will allow new technology to solve the burden the last technology did not fix. This idea was questioned by Amy, stating the question, "How do we fix something already broken?" Alluding to the school systems, she noted that they were already screwed, and that no matter what technology is used, that will not even out the inequalities existing in the system.

Highlights of the class

There was discussion between Chi and Ty (and other members peppered in). The debate was about whether artifacts do in fact contain political properties. Are the politics associated with an artifact a cause of the technological engineering, or are they political because they are ascribed?

With the constant rebuttals for each stand, Lexy finally resolved the conflict by adding that Technology is inherently political although sometimes it may not be seen as such.

Copyright (c) 2014 Samuel A. Rebelsky.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.