In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • The Device Paradigm:A Consideration for a Deweyan Philosophy of Technology
  • Eric Mullis

In John Dewey's Pragmatic Technology (1990) and Philosophical Tools for Technological Culture: Putting Pragmatism to Work (2001), Larry Hickman takes significant steps in articulating a Deweyan philosophy of technology.1 This project is important since Dewey's account of technology has gone largely unnoticed by both classical and contemporary philosophers of technology. One way to remedy this problem is to bring Dewey's account into dialogue with prominent philosophers of technology such as Martin Heidegger, Jacques Ellul, Albert Borgmann, and Langdon Winner. Hickman follows a particular strategy as he develops this dialogue. The philosopher's central idea is explicated and criticized, and Dewey's philosophy of technology is shown to be immune from such criticism.2 The conclusion that the reader draws from both texts is that, since Dewey's philosophy of technology avoids such pitfalls, it is more robust than those that do not.

With this said, I have a criticism that concerns the manner in which Hickman explicates the accounts given by other philosophers of technology. More specifically, I believe that certain philosophers of technology (classical and contemporary) are given rather short shrift and that if their accounts were given a fair shake, Hickman would need to spend much more time defending Dewey's philosophy of technology. In order to make this point clear, I will focus on the philosophy of Albert Borgmann, which, I believe, provides an important criticism of Dewey's philosophy of technology. More specifically, Borgmann's account of the device paradigm highlights a difficulty with Dewey's instrumentalism, in that instrumentalism, in light of the device paradigm, poses problems for the development and appreciation of consumatory experience. If Borgmann is right, the instrumentalism that modern technological devices are grounded in hinders the pursuit and appreciation of focal things and practices that characterize consumatory experience.

I will begin by briefly assessing Hickman's treatment of Borgmann and will go on to discuss the elements of Borgmann's philosophy that need to be taken into account by the proponent of Dewey's philosophy of technology. I will then [End Page 110] discuss what bearing Borgmann's account has on Dewey's notion of consumatory experience. My hope is that this will encourage a more rigorous discussion concerning the viability of Dewey's philosophy of technology.

Since technology is a slippery term, at the outset I should clarify what I take it to mean. When I use technology I follow common usage and refer to the science-based devices of the sort that began to emerge in the nineteenth century. Technology is distinct from the technical in that the latter term refers, more generally, to the techniques that produce technological devices and processes.3

I. Hickman on Borgmann and the Device Paradigm

Hickman's most sustained discussion of Borgmann occurs in chapter 6 of Philosophical Tools for Technological Culture ("Literacy, Mediacy, and Technological Determinism"). There, Hickman discusses Borgmann's account of information and information technology and comes to the conclusion that Borgmann is a reductionist who believes that information technology determines human behavior (see TC, 115–19). I do not disagree with Hickman's assessment; however, my concern is that Borgmann's most significant contribution to the philosophy of technology has been overlooked. Indeed, Borgmann's discussion of information technology warrants serious discussion, but I believe that his earlier work is more comprehensive and deserving of serious consideration by any philosopher of technology.

In Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life , Borgmann advances the notion of the device paradigm.4 Devices are technological mechanisms that have the capacity to make a commodity or product available to a consumer on demand. Devices are currently paradigmatic in the sense that they characterize much of contemporary life. The television set, cell phone, iPod, laptop, BlackBerry, and microwave are examples of the devices that we use throughout the day in everyday life. Indeed, devices such as these are ubiquitous to the extent that the social consequences of their widespread use usually go unnoticed. Why is this?

The consequences of widespread device usage go unnoticed since we have adopted Enlightenment ideals that reflect an optimistic attitude about science...

pdf