63
Social Domination
1
terms
3
notes
72
[...] technology can embody valid knowledge and constitute a set of reliable, seemingly neutral tools or points of leverage over nature and at the same time constitute an instance of prevailing, hegemonic social rationality and so be implicated in social power. [...]
on Andrew Feenberg's critical theory, developed to address the mistaken (in his opinion) assumption that technology is predominantly being used to oppress workers simply because capitalism is "scientific"
[...] technology can embody valid knowledge and constitute a set of reliable, seemingly neutral tools or points of leverage over nature and at the same time constitute an instance of prevailing, hegemonic social rationality and so be implicated in social power. [...]
on Andrew Feenberg's critical theory, developed to address the mistaken (in his opinion) assumption that technology is predominantly being used to oppress workers simply because capitalism is "scientific"
76
The idea of hegemonic technological rationality is intended to encompass what the Frankfurt School called instrumental reason and what Weber analyzed as societal rationalization as these apply to technology design as a social practice. Feenberg introduces it in terms that clearly echo the Frankfurt School's definition of modern instrumental reason:
An effective hegemony need not be imposed in a continuing struggle between self-conscious agents but one that is reproduced unreflectively by the standard beliefs and practices of the society it dominates. Tradition and religion played that role for millennia; today, forms of rationality supply the hegemonic beliefs and practices.
In modern societies being instrumentally rational is common sense and capitalist efficiency is a value that we all strive to maintain. Failure to do so is widely perceived as evidence of some kind of defect, perhaps even immorality. [...] Hegemonic technological rationality enframes the judgements made about technology about key players in the design and implementation process, making some technologies appear sensible and obvious to them while others seem inherently less interesting or likely to succeed. The people making these kinds of choices [...] operate within a horizon that is set by this hegemonic rationality; they make decisions and judgements, but always within the parameters set by this ordering of the world. When presented with alternative designs they assess them in terms of the hegemonic technological rationality as it applies to their situation. They look for efficiency and they understand this in terms of enhanced control over the production process because this is the way to reduce costs and maximize desired outputs. [...]
cited from Feenberg's 2002 book Transforming Technology
this is pretty great
link this to the fact that the technologies behind FB/Google et al have BECOME implicated in the production process because a new market was created (for data in order to sell people shit)
The idea of hegemonic technological rationality is intended to encompass what the Frankfurt School called instrumental reason and what Weber analyzed as societal rationalization as these apply to technology design as a social practice. Feenberg introduces it in terms that clearly echo the Frankfurt School's definition of modern instrumental reason:
An effective hegemony need not be imposed in a continuing struggle between self-conscious agents but one that is reproduced unreflectively by the standard beliefs and practices of the society it dominates. Tradition and religion played that role for millennia; today, forms of rationality supply the hegemonic beliefs and practices.
In modern societies being instrumentally rational is common sense and capitalist efficiency is a value that we all strive to maintain. Failure to do so is widely perceived as evidence of some kind of defect, perhaps even immorality. [...] Hegemonic technological rationality enframes the judgements made about technology about key players in the design and implementation process, making some technologies appear sensible and obvious to them while others seem inherently less interesting or likely to succeed. The people making these kinds of choices [...] operate within a horizon that is set by this hegemonic rationality; they make decisions and judgements, but always within the parameters set by this ordering of the world. When presented with alternative designs they assess them in terms of the hegemonic technological rationality as it applies to their situation. They look for efficiency and they understand this in terms of enhanced control over the production process because this is the way to reduce costs and maximize desired outputs. [...]
cited from Feenberg's 2002 book Transforming Technology
this is pretty great
link this to the fact that the technologies behind FB/Google et al have BECOME implicated in the production process because a new market was created (for data in order to sell people shit)
interpellation
(en)
(common Althusserian term) the process by which ideology, embodied in major social and political institutions (ideological & repressive state apparatuses), constitutes the very nature of individual subjects' identities through the process of "hailing" them in social interactions
82
A person described as "mad" is constructed through interpellation by psychiatric discourse and clinical practice.
confirm
7 years, 1 month ago
A person described as "mad" is constructed through interpellation by psychiatric discourse and clinical practice.
confirm
7 years, 1 month ago
83
[...] technical reason and its imperatives are "encoded" in technological artefacts. [...] Rather than coming at a technology and trying to work out how to use it, the human subject is in a sense constituted by the object; produced as a user as an effect of its power. Using technology still involves experimenting with different moves and assessing the artefact's response to see if they are appropriate but in Foucauldian terms this is exploring the margin of manoeuvre allowed us by disciplinary power. Aligning technology with discourse in this way enables Feenberg to view the hegemonic codification of technical elements that defines capitalist ideology as a kind of contestable "truth". [...]
[...] technical reason and its imperatives are "encoded" in technological artefacts. [...] Rather than coming at a technology and trying to work out how to use it, the human subject is in a sense constituted by the object; produced as a user as an effect of its power. Using technology still involves experimenting with different moves and assessing the artefact's response to see if they are appropriate but in Foucauldian terms this is exploring the margin of manoeuvre allowed us by disciplinary power. Aligning technology with discourse in this way enables Feenberg to view the hegemonic codification of technical elements that defines capitalist ideology as a kind of contestable "truth". [...]