産業社會에 있어서 技術이 차지하는 性格에 관한 硏究 = A Study on the Characteristic Features of Technology in Industrial Societies

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

It has come to be realized in recent years that it is characteristic of science and technology continually to be creating new problems and new types of problem in modern societies.
science and science-based technology have become more basic to the production processes of industrial societies.
The progressive ‘rationality’ of mrodern society is linked to the institutionalization of scientific and technical development.
It is because ‘technological society’ is represented as the future of ‘industrial society’ that it seems right as a preliminary to summarize some of thought behind ‘industrial society’, itself a hypothetical construct.
The approach adopted here is to begin with a brief examination of the idea of ‘technological society, and to move on from there to discuss the nature and the characteristic features of technology in modern societies.
Technology is a word used by non-technologist to describe what the other people are about. Technology is an impression rather than a definition. The more one examines the impression the more difficult becomes a definition.
Philosophy is the creation of understand.
Art is the creation of response.
Science is the generation of knowledge.
Technology is the use of knowledge.
The most satisfactory definition of technology is probably this ‘use of knowledge’. Technology is the process of producing something useful through the application of knowledge.
Technology is the effective use of knowledge. As such it is coming to play a bigger and bigger part in the running of society.
Technology means the systematic application of scientific or other organized knowledge to practical tasks. technology is the real metaphysics of the twentieth century. the irreversible collectivist tendencies of technology, whether it calls itself democratic or authoritarian, were already apparent.
In The Technological Society, Jacques Ellul formulates a comprehensive and forceful social philosophy of our technical civilization.
Ours is progressively technical civilization: by this Ellul means that the everexpanding and irreversible rule of technique is extended to all domains of life. It is a civilization committed to the quest for continually improved means to carelessly examined ends. Indeed, technique transforms ends into means. What was once prized in its own right now becomes worthwhile only if it helps achieve something else. And, conversely, technique turns means into ends. “Know-how” thakes on an ultimate value.
The technological society is a description of the way in which an autonomous technology is in process of taking over the traditional values of every society without exception, subrevting, and suppressing these values to produce at last a monolithic world culture in which all nontechnological difference and variety is mere appearance.
Technology serves to institute new, more effective, and more pleasant forms of social control and social cohesion.
The technological a priori is political a priori in as much as the transformation of nature involves that of man, and in as much as the ‘the man made creations’ issue from and reenter a societal ensemble.
Technological rationality has become political rationality.
The technological society is a system of domination which operates already in the concept and construction of techniques. The very concept of technical reason is perhaps ideological. Not only the application of technology but technology itself is domination(of nature and men) methodical, scientific, calculated, calculating control.
The conjunction of state and technique is not a neutral fact. For many it is not surprising and implies nothing but a growth of state power.
Technique, in its present state of development, is no longer merely a passive instrument under state control, as it was under the control of certain individuals.
The first consequence of the conjunction of the state and technique is the progressive transformation of the old techniques of formerly private but now becoming public. A second consequence of the penetration of the state by techniques is that the state as a whole becomes an enormous technical organism.
The state plays a role of prime importance with respect to techniques.
The basic effect of state action on techniques is to co-ordinate the whole complex. The state possesses the power of unification, since it is the planning power par excellence in society. In this it plays its true rule, that of co-ordinating, adjusting, and equilibrating social forces.
Industrialization, followed by the establishment and exploitation of successive generations of indigenous advanced technologies, is certainly now seen as the uniquely progressive path for all countries.
However, the writers concerned with the new industrial state appear to have in mind a more formidable technocracy than a sort of technostructure as it were.
With its shades of Burnham, a scientific-technological elite can perhaps be subsumed under a more general term, technocracy.
This is Galbraith’s word and he means by it all who contribute a specialized knowledge or experience to decision-making, a process which in government and in industry becomes correspondingly more and more a group excise.
Technology, as defined by Edward de Bono, is ‘the grammar of the future’.
Modern societies are centered on technical necessity and derivatively, of course, on human adherence.
Man, in modern socities, is not situated in relation to other men, but in relation to technique; for this reason the sociological structure of these societies is completely altered.
Views on technology and man’s future seem to divide in two classes: those that promise a technological paradise where science in the service of man will solve all problems and cure all ills, and those that foresee a catastrophic future where man will be the slave of uncontrolled, monstrous machinery.
They believe that a tragic contradiction is inherent in the development of modern technology: the machine, created to service the individual’s purposes, has gained so much power that it has become immune to man’s will. Instead of helping to implement the autonomy of the human being, the machine has triumphed over it. Technological developmemt-through created by us-has emancipated itself from our direction and seems to follow its own inherent law.
Man according to Fritz Pappenheim, can no longer express himself in his work.
The increasing mechanization of life engenders a calculating outlook toward nature and society and dissolves the individual’s bond of union with them. Man in the technological age has become alienated from his work, from himself, and from the reality of society and nature.
Technology, which we continue to conceptualize as the servant of man, will overthrow everything that prevents the internal logic of its development, including humanity itself-unless we take the necessary steps to move human society out of the environment that ‘technique’ is creating to meet its own need.
Technology badly needs criticisms to curb its excesses and to overcome the idea that anything which can be done is good to do. But, more than horrified criticism from the outside, technology needs control from within, from the people with a broad view who have hitherto been content to stay outside.
The essential point is that technique produces all this without plan, no one wills it or arranges that it be so. Our technical civilization does not result from a Machiavellian scheme. It is a response to the ‘law of development’ of technique.
Technology has generated an illusion of achievement, but without it there would have been no welfare state.
We must review then, with clarity and seriousness the more important theories and prophesies about the future and then go beyond them, evaluating man’s immense possibilities, as well as limitations, on the threshold of a new age. Although doubting that there is any certain effective way to deal with the problems facing man, we must try to make a guideline for more rational, social, political and economic decision-making based on a system of social accounting, in addition to some special policies dealing with controls over technology, procreation and genetics.
Finally, we shall be looking at technique in its sociological aspect; that is, we shall consider the effect of technique on social relationships, political structures, economic phenomena. Technique is not an isolated fact in society (as the term technology would head us to believe) but is related to every factor in the life of modern man; it affects social fact as well as all others. Thus technique itself is a sociological phenomenon, and it is in this light that we shall study it.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 緖論
• 1. 問題의 提起
• 2. 硏究의 意義및 目的
• Ⅱ. 本論(Ⅰ)
• 1. 技術의 定礎
• 2. 技術의 影響
• 3. 技術의 性格
• Ⅲ. 本論(Ⅱ)
• 1. 技術과 政治
• 2. 技術과 國家
• 3. 技術과 疎外
• Ⅳ. 結論