標題: 資通科技的工具面向-從科技決定論談起
The Instrumental Dimension of ICTs: Starting with Technological Determinism
作者: 賴曉黎
Shau-Lee Lai
Department of Communication and Technology
傳播與科技學系
關鍵字: 科技決定論;科技工具論;資通科技;賽博空間(cyberspace);中介;Technological Determinism;Technological Instrumentalism;Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs);Cyberspace;Mediation
公開日期: 2012
摘要: 從製造與使用器物的角度而言,技術與人類的歷史一樣古老。但相對於這個久遠的歷史,現代以來技術與科技研究才逐漸進入人的視野。從勞動的面向看來,科技是人對自然的目的性改造,為的是改造自然,創造一個讓人可以活在不受自然壓迫的人造世界。科技被認作是合於人類目的的工具或手段,這種科技工具論主張工具的中立性以及科技規律的自主性,並樂觀的以科技發展作為人類進步的指標。另一方面,以海德格為代表的科技實質論強調科技本身就是一種實質的力量,這種獨立存在的自主性將有力地擴張並入侵社會的其他場域,人不可避免地只是科技的工具。作為科技工具面向的兩種表現形式(科技是人的工具或者人是科技的工具),無論科技工具論或它的對立面科技實質論,這兩者都相信科技最終不可避免的會成為自己的目的,即具有自主性,因而他們都容易與科技決定論有選擇的親近性(elective affinity)。這是因為科技決定論興起的特殊的歷史社會條件,即:科技進步的速度遠快於社會控制機制的進展,人們將科技認作某種決定社會的力量,甚至是唯一的或終極的力量。然而,當代資通科技的發展讓工具面向的解釋面臨困境。早期電腦網路主要還是工業時代的延續,資訊世界的底層是由程式碼(code)支配著。通過電腦中介的通訊為基礎,我們建立了一個特殊的溝通模式,是一個由電腦中介的、由抽象資訊構成的賽博空間。這個既依賴電腦網路但又超出電腦網路的構造物,是一種新的社會交流、新的生活方式、新的文化特徵。賽博空間的出現是真正意義不同於工業時代的標誌:依勞動面向解釋的科技工具論或科技實質論只展現部分的、片面的科技面貌。在資通科技底層的基礎架構與程式碼的控制下,用戶間共同建構的賽博空間必須經由相互主觀的互動面向才能得到妥當的詮釋。從互動的觀點來看,在資通科技之上成立的賽博空間就是中介與延伸。作為中介的資通科技增加我們選擇的自由、提高我們創造的能力。事實上,賽博空間就是人們生活的延伸領域,是我們開拓的新疆域,更是我們必須以不同於科技工具面向觀點重新詮釋的新對象。
In view of tool-making and tool-using, the history of technics is as old as human history. Contrary to that long history, not until the modern times did the study of technics and technology attract people's attention. From the perspective of labor/work, technology is people's teleological transformation to model nature in their ends and to create an artificial world free from oppression of nature. Technological instrumentalism considers technology as a tool or an instrument to achieve people's end, and advocates the instrumental neutrality and autonomy of technological rules. Under this approach, technological development is equal to human progress. While technological instrumentalism takes technology optimistically, Heidegger's technological substantivism emphasizes technology is an independent automatic power, which can expand itself and invade other fields in the society. Both instrumentalism and substantivism assume technology will unavoidably have its own end, which means autonomy. Therefore, both standpoints easily have elective affinity with technological determinism, which appeared in the specific historical social condition: the technological advancement leads social control mechanism and technology is regarded as the only or the final power to determine society.However, the instrumental dimensional explanation has been challenged by the contemporary development of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). The infrastructure of information world is dominated by the code in the early computer networking, which follows the industrial age. Laying foundation in transmission mediated by computer networking, we have built a special communication model, that is, a cyberspace constructed by abstract information and mediated by computers. This construct, not only dependent on the Internet but also beyond it, is a new social interaction, fresh life style, and a novel culture. Cyberspace is a symbol telling we are in an age different from the industrial age. Based on the approach of labor/work, both technological instrumentalism and technological substantivism give us only partial explanation of technology. It is only by perspective of interaction that we can understand the cyberspace adequately in the infrastructure of IT and under control of code. In the view of interaction, cyberspace is mediation and extension. ICTs as mediation extend our freedom of choice and improves our ability to create. In fact, cyberspace is an expanding sphere in human life. Cyberspace is not only a new territory to be explored, but also a new object to be reinterpreted.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11536/123705
期刊: 資訊社會研究
Journal of Cyber Culture and Information Society
Volume: 23
起始頁: 1
結束頁: 35
顯示於類別:資訊社會研究


文件中的檔案:

  1. 2012070135.pdf