David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 43 (4):429 – 444 (2000)
In Questioning Technology, Feenberg accuses Heidegger of an untenable 'technological essentialism'. Feenberg's criticisms are addressed not to technological essentialism as such, but rather to three particular kinds of technological essentialism: ahistoricism, substantivism, and one-dimensionalism. After these three forms of technological essentialism are explicated and Feenberg's reasons for finding them objectionable explained, the question whether Heidegger in fact subscribes to any of them is investigated. The conclusions are, first, that Heidegger's technological essentialism is not at all ahistoricist, but the opposite, an historical conception of the essence of technology which serves as the model for Feenberg's own view. Second, that while Heidegger does indeed advocate a substantivist technological essentialism, he offers a plausible, indirect response to Feenberg's voluntaristic, Marcusean objection. Third, that Heidegger's one-dimensional technological essentialism is of a non-objectionable variety, since it does not force Heidegger to reject technological devices in toto. These conclusions help vindicate Heidegger's ground-breaking ontological approach to the philosophy of technology.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Lin Ma & Jaap van Brakel (2014). Heidegger's Thinking on the “Same” of Science and Technology. Continental Philosophy Review 47 (1):19-43.
Dana S. Belu (2005). Thinking Technology, Thinking Nature. Inquiry 48 (6):572 – 591.
Similar books and articles
Ilkka Niiniluoto (1990). Should Technological Imperatives Be Obeyed? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (2):181 – 189.
Andrew Feenberg (2000). The Ontic and the Ontological in Heidegger's Philosophy of Technology: Response to Thomson. Inquiry 43 (4):445 – 450.
David J. Stump (2000). Socially Constructed Technology. Inquiry 43 (2):217 – 224.
Hubert L. Dreyus & Charles Spinosa (1997). Highway Bridges and Feasts: Heidegger and Borgmann on How to Affirm Technology. [REVIEW] Man and World 30 (2):159-178.
Jeff Kochan (2006). Feenberg and STS: Counter-Reflections on Bridging the Gap. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):702-720.
Martin Heidegger & Wanda Torres Gregory (1998). Traditional Language and Technological Language. Journal of Philosophical Research 23:129-145.
Andrew Feenberg (2006). What is the Philosophy of Technology? In John R. Dakers (ed.), Defining Technological Literacy: Towards an Epistemological Framework. Palgrave Macmillan
Andrew Feenberg (2000). Constructivism and Technology Critique: Replies to Critics. Inquiry 43 (2):225 – 237.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #145,316 of 1,792,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #282,298 of 1,792,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?