Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):721-727 (2006)
|Abstract||In his critique of my book Heidegger and Marcuse, Jeff Kochan (2006) asserts that I am committed to the possibility of private knowledge, transcendent truths, and individualism. In this reply I argue that he has misinterpreted my analysis of the Challenger disaster and Marcuse’s work. Because I do not dismiss Roger Boisjoly’s doubts about the Challenger launch, Kochan believes that I have abandoned a social concept of knowledge for a reliance on the private knowledge of a single individual. In fact, I consider Boisjoly’s observations just as social, if not as scientific, as the results of rigorous scientific study. Kochan’s reliance on a principle of symmetry derived from science studies to explain such politically charged technological controversies tends to mask the role of power and ideology in social life. Kochan interprets Marcuse as a failed Heideggerian who regresses from Heidegger’s social conception of human being to traditional individualism. I am accused of sharing this view. This interpretation overlooks the importance of the Hegelian–Marxist category of ‘real possibility’ in Marcuse’s work and so mistakes his critique of conformist politics for individualist romanticism. Marcuse always attempted to ground radical opposition in a community of struggle without abandoning the heritage of a long critical tradition. This view I willingly share. Keywords: Philosophy of technology; Principle of symmetry; Challenger disaster; Herbert Marcuse; Martin Heidegger; Knowledge .|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Herbert Marcuse (1968/1988). Negations: Essays in Critical Theory. Free Association Books.
Jeff Noonan (2008). Marcuse, Human Nature, and the Foundations of Ethical Norms. Philosophy and Social Criticism 34 (3):267-286.
Kevin Anderson (1993). On Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory: A Critical Appreciation of Herbert Marcuse's Reason and Revolution, Fifty Years Later. Sociological Theory 11 (3):243-267.
Colin Howson (2009). Sorites is No Threat to Modus Ponens: A Reply to Kochan. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):209-212.
Douglas Kellner (1984). Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism. University of California Press.
Russell P. Boisjoly, Ellen Foster Curtis & Eugene Mellican (1989). Roger Boisjoly and the Challenger Disaster: The Ethical Dimensions. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 8 (4):217 - 230.
Andrew Feenberg (2004). Heidegger and Marcuse : The Catastrophe and Redemption of Technology. In John Abromeit & W. Mark Cobb (eds.), Herbert Marcuse: A Critical Reader. Routledge.
Iain Thomson (2000). From the Question Concerning Technology to the Quest for a Democratic Technology: Heidegger, Marcuse, Feenberg. Inquiry 43 (2):203 – 215.
Jeff Kochan (2006). Feenberg and STS: Counter-Reflections on Bridging the Gap. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):702-720.
Added to index2009-07-03
Total downloads12 ( #101,057 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?