Page 158 - Culture Technology Communication

New Kids on the Net 141

between these two activities are extremely superficial. The meanings
of the term “global” in the parlance of media theorists and philoso-
phers are, likewise, related by family resemblance—at best.
The general topic of this conference is the impact of globally dis-
tributed technologies on local communities shaped by history and
custom. Some suggestions emerge from the preceding discussion.
With the benefit of hindsight it is comparatively easy to find a
familiar pattern in my account of give-l and real. Life is not more en-
lightened since electricity is generally available and foreign coun-
tries are not necessarily better known to us since we can get there by
plane. Continental philosophers have warned us all along against
being fooled by formalisms devoid of content and even software de-
signers are beginning to inquire after the needs of particular users
before implementing their programs (Winograd, 1996). It seems to
follow that the entire procedure—establish a mailing list, ask ques-
tions later—was misguided, a typical example of falling prey to mere
appearances. I do not want to dismiss the charge out of hand and I
certainly concede that I’d do things differently the second time. Yet,
such more cautious approaches are themselves built on presupposi-
tions that are at least as dubious as the myth of empowerment by
mere technology.
Conventional wisdom has it that there is a realm of science and
technology which holds great promise for mankind, even though it is
simultaneously perceived to be a dangerous force, quite likely to trig-
ger enormous devastation. In order to check the techno-experts we
need prudence, the power of good judgement, the humanities. This is
because history and the social sciences teach us about the con-
straints every society and every cultural environment imposes on
the machinery it needs for its survival. But notice the dualism
deeply entrenched in this point of view.
The strategic recourse to the powers of the mind is, it seems to
me, just as problematic as unguarded technophilia. In preserving a
domain of detached reflexion it simultaneously renders technology
immune against any direct intervention. “Humanists” are not sup-
posed to meddle with the formalism, their area of competence being
the scholarly assessment of its possible consequences. This attitude,
I suggest, does not do justice to the way technological achievements
capture our imagination and tempt us to explore their potential.
Running a mailing list in the early days of the Internet is a perma-
nent transgression, challenging many established rules of behaviour
and provoking questions that have never been asked before. But this
is the subject matter of a different talk, so I will conclude this section