Technology and the Good Life? ed. by Eric Higgs, Andrew Light, David Strong (review)

HUMANITIES 167 ness,= the Power of Context), but is not precise about the balance of factors in any given case. As well, the book relies too heavily on labels like >Connectors = and >Salesmen= which seem more suited to a motivational seminar than a text about social change. On the other hand, who doesn=t need some motivation from time to time? This book will speak to entrepreneurs, writers, teachers, artists, and anyone whose work requires creativity and social interaction. The range of examples (from Hush Puppies to New York crime to Sesame Street to bestselling books) is exhilarating. In an age where multinational corporations dominate, The Tipping Point places individual human agency in the centre of intellectual and social endeavour. Many readers will be inspired by Gladwell=s vision of epidemic social change. (CARRIE HINTZ) Eric Higgs, Andrew Light, and David Strong, editors. Technology and the Good Life? University of Chicago Press. xii, 392. US $65.00, US $25.00 The eighteen essays that make up this volume present an extended discussion between philosopher of technology Albert Borgmann and a group of his respectful critics. The dual mandate of the book is to evaluate critically Borgmann=s philosophy and to make philosophy of technology better known among academics and the general public. Borgmann=s discussion of focal and device technologies (the >device paradigm=) is the unifying thread for the essays in the book. Borgmann divides technologies into two broad categories, focal technologies (>things=) and non-focal technologies (>devices=). Devices conceal their operations from us and simplify aspects of our lives; things allow us to experience the >commanding presence= of reality, to feel continuity with our world, and to centre ourselves through a feeling of connection with physical objects and labour. For example, the telephone conceals its operation from us, and denies us the opportunity for meaningful interactions in the presence of others. Wood stoves, however, allow us to be involved in the process of heating and cooking by maintaining the stove through labour (gathering, cutting, drying, storing, and burning of wood), thus leaving open the possibility of a focal experience. Borgmann=s crucial normative claim is that we need more things in our life; they are part of the >good life= in the title. He does not advocate the wholesale rejection of concealing and simplifying devices in order to improve our lives. Rather he argues for a better balance of both kinds of technologies (along with a redistribution of labour and industry to use device technologies and focal technologies where they are appropriate). Borgmann=s critics cite historical examples of devices at the centre of focal practices (e.g., film, the telephone, and the Internet), and they question 168 LETTERS IN CANADA 2000 whether or not his examples of focal technologies are cross-culturally representative (e.g., jogging, meal preparation, and fly fishing), leading to charges of ethnocentrism. Borgmann accepts some of the counter-examples given in the book (though he questions whether they are representative) and he rejects others outright. In both cases, however, he argues that exceptions are less important than the more general >currents= in the history of technology that he has captured with his device paradigm. I am very sympathetic to normative work in the philosophy of technology, and I respect Borgmann=s approach to his critics on this level. Disagreements over historical details and local variations in practice should not paralyse normative work. However, this sort of professional dispute looks to the uninitiated public (a target audience for the book) very much like the observation that technology is neutral, neither bad nor good, depending on how it is used. For example, in his >Reply to My Critics,= Borgmann concedes that certain device technologies (e.g., film) can be the object of focal practices for certain groups. It is not a great leap from this point to the conclusion that other device technologies are used in unintended ways by local communities as part of focal practices (e.g., Mitchfelder=s discussion of the telephone). In this case, the crucial question is individual or local use of the technology, not the technology itself. Technology is not neutral in Borgmann=s account, but concessions such as these combined...