Technology
Technology has somehow become an indicator of an advanced culture. Wikipedia defines technology as “a broad concept that deals with a species' usage and knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects a species' ability to control and adapt to its environment.” Yet, this is not the definition that most people would consider. Technology has recently evolved and become synonymous with scientific advancement. Computers, cell phones, and GPS units are what spring to mind when technology is mentioned. For some reason long-standing tradition, the creation of the pen and paper to record the spoken word for instance, is not thought of technology, but rather the new and innovative gadgets like the BlackBerry or touch iPod are.
When a particular culture does not have these technological devices, they are often labeled as “primitive”. This idea is emphasized over and over again in the media today. Disney’s Pocahontas, for example, contains European settlers actually calling the Native American people “primitive savages.” Perhaps it is our own dependence on technology that leads us to believe that all other cultures without it must be diminished in some capacity. But the question then becomes, is this distinction between primitive and advanced so clear cut? As mentioned above, the literal definition of the word technology is simply the use and knowledge of tools. By this definition every human culture contains sort of “technology”. Even though the issue becomes ambiguous based on the definition of technology, it becomes clear that one culture is no more advanced, or more civilized than another.

1 Comments:
I am fascinated by the definition of technology on Wikipedia—why the use of the term “species,” for example? In some ways, this relates to our discussion about the keyword “writing” and the binary between speech/writing and primitive/advanced. Species, at least to me, evokes an evolutionary connotation and a notion of biological development. The keyword for “technology” in our book also acknowledges the relationship of this concept to a longer history of economic development. In some ways, then, the definition in Wikipedia is not completely unrelated to your citing technology’s correlation with scientific advancement, right? I want to encourage you to think further about the relationship between so-called “scientific” and “economic” development? Is it no accident, in other words, that we are seeing BlackBerrys and iPods in a heightened moment of economic globalization? You are also very right to trouble the distinction between so-called “primitive” and “advanced” cultures; however, I want to know more about what you mean by “culture.” Admittedly, we could spend the whole class on this one term because it is so complicated. But, give it some thought and see where it takes you.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home