Skip to main content
Log in

What Things Still Don’t Do

  • Book Review Essay
  • Published:
Human Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper praises and criticizes Peter-Paul Verbeek’s What Things Do (2006). The four things that Verbeek does well are: (1) remind us of the importance of technological things; (2) bring Karl Jaspers into the conversation on technology; (3) explain how technology “co-shapes” experience by reading Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory in light of Don Ihde’s post-phenomenology; (4) develop a material aesthetics of design. The three things that Verbeek does not do well are: (1) analyze the material conditions in which things are produced; (2) criticize the social-political design and use context of things; and (3) appreciate how liberal moral-political theory contributes to our evaluation of technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For another version of the empirical turn in philosophy of technology, see Achterhuis (2001, pp. 1–9).

  2. For an excellent analysis of Winner, see (Smits 2001, pp. 147–169).

  3. Ihde (2006, pp. 278–279).

References

  • Achterhuis, H. (Ed.). (2001). American philosophy of technology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgmann, A. (1984). Technology and the character of contemporary life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. G. (1989). Truth and method (2nd ed.) (J. Weinsheimer, Trans.). New York: Continuum.

  • Husserl, E. (1983). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy (F. Kersten, Trans.). New York: Springer.

  • Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihde, D. (2006). “Forty years in the wilderness,” in postphenomenology. In E. Selinger (Ed.), Postphenomenology: A critical companion to Ihde. Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaspers, K. (1951). Man in the modern age (E. Paul and C. Paul, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • Jaspers, K. (1963). The atom bomb and the future of man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smits, M. (2001). Langdon Winner: Technology as a shadow constitution. In H. Achterhuis (Ed.), American philosophy of technology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P. P. (2006). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David M. Kaplan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaplan, D.M. What Things Still Don’t Do. Hum Stud 32, 229–240 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-009-9116-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-009-9116-2

Keywords

Navigation