Barry Allen
McMaster University
Scholars have detected hostility to technology in Daoist thought. But is this a problem with any machine or only some applications of some machines by some people? I show that the problem is not with machines per se but with the people who introduce them, or more exactly with their knowledge. It is not knowledge as such that causes the disorder Laozi and Zhuangzi associate with machines; it is confused, disordered knowledge—superficial, inadequate, unsubtle, and artless. In other words the problem is not with machines but with the ethics of engineering and the government of technology. The Daoist argument does not devalue machines or knowledge of them; instead, it sets a new goal, defining an alternative ideal—alternative to techniques held hostage to despotic ideas about efficiency and profit.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11712-010-9158-1
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,657
External links

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

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Internet Addiction and Well-Being: Daoist and Stoic Reflections.Hui Jin & Edward H. Spence - 2016 - Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 15 (2):209-225.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
138 ( #79,849 of 2,462,324 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #299,152 of 2,462,324 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes