×

From an interview with media ecologist Read Schuchardt:

What’s bad and good about technology?

It’s fast, cheap, effective, and cool. That’s the good part.

The bad part is that it’s fast, cheap, effective, and cool.

If we become what we behold, my concern with technology is not what we do with it, but what it does to us.

The analogy I’ve been using most recently is the question of prostitution. What’s wrong with prostitution is fairly obvious, but in general it’s always going to be there, from being the world’s oldest profession to being increasingly legalized all around the globe. The answer to the “problem” of prostitution is, I believe, not actually to be engaged on the mass or group level, but on the individual level. This is why neither Jesus nor Thomas Aquinas (for example) argue against prostitution, but do argue against the personal effects. The Ten Commandments obliges the individual to “not commit adultery”—it never suggests that thou shalt outlaw prostitution. Jesus forgives the woman caught in adultery, on the one hand, but on the other he doesn’t makes light of her sin and he gives a far sterner warning to men: if you have lusted after a woman internally then this is tantamount to adultery. So he both raises the personal bar and lowers the group cost.

And this gets to the heart, I think, of both real freedom and how real freedom in the face of technological determinants should be conceived—we don’t want sobriety by outlawing alcohol, we want sobriety by achieving self-control while in a bar with friends. Which is to say, freedom comes on the individual level, which is always highly contextualized, contingent, and culturally framed.

People in Singapore aren’t free from the negative effects of chewing gum; they are free from the temptation of chewing gum because the whole country has outlawed it. That’s not real freedom, which always involves a choice. In the same way, there is no technology, even those that are inherently “bad,” that should be eliminated (okay: maybe nuclear weapons could go), but there are collective effects of technology that individuals can be made aware of and can personally resist.

So I can walk while texting and call it multitasking, but if it makes me bump into things or people I can also be conscious of this likely effect and thereby choose to text only when I’m not moving so I don’t pose a risk to myself or others.

What technologies are good and helpful?

This is an unanswerable question, because it forces a non-existent dichotomy. All technologies have a “good and helpful” aspect and they also have a harmful and debilitating effect. I like chairs, which seem utterly neutral or positive as a technological invention—especially nice big, comfy chairs. But cultures that sit on chairs experience more colon cancer than cultures that squat. Neil Postman argued that all technologies are a “Faustian bargain”—they give something, and they take something away. Freedom, I think, comes in knowing what these two things are, and in making the choice of which you value more. In our household, we’re still not squatting.

One of my favorite technologies is the bicycle, since I can hardly think of anything bad that could come from it, and since it increases, health, happiness, and enjoyment of the outdoors in almost all its uses. But if you’re Lance Armstrong, chances are good you know precisely what can go wrong if you ride a bike too much.

How does one discern between good and bad technology? Discernment is the key, and it is discernment not that tells you which is good and which is bad, but tells you that every technology has both a good and a bad side, and then lets you discern whether or not you want to use it.

My favorite example of this is the Bruderhof community who noticed that after using television for a year, their children had stopped singing the community songs and spiritual hymns they used to sing on the playground. So the decision was not over the question, “Is television good or bad?” The question became, “Which do we value more: good television or singing children?” And that to me is true discernment.

(HT: First Things)

LOAD MORE
Loading