Is technology culture specific?


The relation between culture as philosophy (definition from previous entry) and civilization as a politically, historically, economically and generally geographically bound expression of culture leaves open the question of the status of technology. Techne or practice emerges within the horizon of a civilization usually as a means to solve a practical problem. Different needs, environmental conditions, materials available, etc., all contribute to the determination of the specific techne. Tools, techniques, work strategies can be transfered or exchanged between and among civilizations.

It is possible of course that some techniques or practices can offend cultural values as the Persian practice of eating their dead offended the Greek cultural sense of the meaning and dignity of death. It was not only or even that that the Persian practice was deemed inapplicable or inferior to the Greek practice of burning their dead; it was deeply offensive to philosophically based cultural norms.

So technology transfer is no simpler that cultural exchange. Indeed I have thought that technology has the power to undermine culture when the forces compelling transfer are as powerful as they are in age of globalization. (See my "Globalization and the New Challenges for Ethics .")

Historically China attempted to resist technology transfer. They did not want outward technology transfer simply because they did not want to loose the value of knowing how, e.g., to make something as desirable as porcelain. More interestingly they did not want technology transfer inward because they feared it would undermine the essence of being Chinese. This strikes many as a peculiar notion, but I tend to accept it both in its specific Chinese context and also as a general principle.

HOME

Posted: Mon - December 22, 2003 at 09:45 PM      

©