Reaction paper

docx

School

University of Akron *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

241

Subject

Information Systems

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BaronPenguin3928

Jean Dieuvil Technology & Human values 12/4/22 Technology and Democracy Reaction Paper Winner Langdon Winner, author of “Do Artifacts Have Politics,” conveys the main theme to be the way in which artifacts contain political properties. First, are when “the inventions, design, or arrangement of a specific device or system become a way of settling an issue in a particular community” and second are the “inherently political technologies, man made systems that appear to require… or be strongly compatible with, particular kinds of political relationships'' (Winner, 123). The purposes of technological development goes beyond the immediate use, typically holding bias or favor for certain social interests. Winner states that attention and evaluation needs to be given to the building of structures, creation of networks, and tailoring of features on machines similarly to how one would give consideration to the “rules, roles, and relationships of politics” (Winner, 128). This article highlights a central premise of a theory called social determination of technology. Meaning that what matters is not technology itself, but the social or economic system in which it’s integrated (Winner, 123). This premise works to correct those who have not recognized the ways technology is shaped by social and economic forces. Society is accustomed to viewing these artifacts as neutral tools that can be used. As time progressed, attention was brought upon the fact that many examples of technology have political consequences. If one were to look at historical architecture, city planning, and public works you would see multiple

ways in which lower class and minorities were systematically excluded from public life. Winner acknowledges a movement of handicapped people in the 1970's that stood up against the structural designs that are unsuited and made it impossible for handicapped people to move freely (Winner, 125). Robert Moses, a master builder in New York, exhibited this racial discrimination towards “poor people and blacks, who normally use public transit”. Bridges over parkways were built very low to discourage buses on his parkways. Machinery and technological changes were also replacing the work of humans and being constructed with motives where"people were bound to receive a better hand than others" (Winner, 126). The mechanical tomato harvester; "replace(s) the system of handpicking", was the subject of a lawsuit by an attorney that was arguing against "private interests to the detriment of farmworkers, small farmers,consumers, and rural California generally" (Winner,126). In changing to a system based more around public transportation and trains, controversy would arise with those who are socially more fortunate and benefitted. Europe is more densely built and has more older cities, whereas, our system has a highly growing dependence for our booming automobile age. Transit systems are an alternative option for getting around, although if this were to become a main means of transport, society would need to develop ways to accommodate and ensure that all persons are benefited. Moses' claim of how mainly poor people and minority groups ride these exemplifies how transportation would not be a logical form of political life anymore. Our current system better connects us internationally and makes exchange, getting resources, and interaction between others more economical and productive. In changing this system, our society could potentially struggle to find ways of making public transportation just as efficient as our current system which could cause economic slowdowns in the long run. Sclove

Sclove, author of "Technology And The Future", establishes a main theme throughout the article about how in order to have a strong democracy, society needs to take into consideration the compatibility of technologies with the basic structure and political engagement of citizens.Technological innovations were described to be one of the culprits of American political disengagement which are exemplified through greater inequality, community disintegration, and political disempowerment (Scolve, 104). The author states how technological design and practice should "initially and foremost'' strengthen democracy and that society should take into consideration certain criteria necessary in determining technological (and non-tech) decision making (Sclove, 105). Isolated technological changes are not anticipated to bring improvements in the overall democratization of society (Scolve, 105). Things that are isolating are less democratic due toisolation's ability in restricting or limiting opportunities within social and political life, dividing communities, and the diminishment of incentives among citizens to be involved and their capabilities in doing so. "Most technological choices made are by experts, bureaucratic machination, or unregulated market interactions" (Scolve, 113). This signifies how if isolation is present then, citizen's continue to lack a shared understanding, political equality, and social commitment (Sclove, 105). Isolation can result in social alienation where groups do not necessarily speak out on decisions that need to be made in advancements towards a strong democracy. Technology and power is an example of a less democratic use that isolates us more so isolates us than brings us together. Women are a major group that often get the short end of the stick in these circumstances. Neighborhood designs and public transit systems, marketing techniques that degrade women and set beauty standards, and the workplaces are all examples of

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

where women are at risk of isolation and limited opportunities to engage equally in their community (Scolve,108). Technology in an egalitarian community works at enhancing citizen's mutual respect,shared understanding, and political equality in a way that brings society together in a more democratic way (Sclove, 105). Democratic values such as respect create a more interactive network because people feel more free to speak on opinions and commonalities emerge between communities, bringing society together (Sclove, 107). Jones and Reinecke Jones and Reinecke, authors of "Infrastructure and Democracy", bring to light the main theme of how private investors aggravate inequality through targeting their infrastructure developments towards communities that "are already well off and exclud[ing] low-income areas"(2017, 2). Railroads, electricity, and the internet are all examples of where a lack of fairness of rates and inequality for the "underserved populations'' are present. Homeowners, small consumers, and poorer populations experienced higher rates for the same wattage and shipments and a lack of access to advanced connections. With the histories of these infrastructures in mind,one can see that although social and economic returns on investments were being offered,networks rarely had the wider public in consideration when being built (2017,9). "Access is the hallmark of great infrastructure" (2017, 1). We should define success for infrastructure as delivering services in a way that enables all persons to engage in social and economic decision making and developmental changes. The authors state how "infrastructure may be good for democracy, but democracy [is] necessary to create good infrastructure" (2017,2). The Internet is a good example of this due to the digital divide from "race, income, education,geography, and content" that continues to persist throughout time (2017, 7).

Availability to the internet is "an essential platform for social and economic opportunity" and with restricting the access to certain demographics or for other reasons our country is not exercising complete democracy (2017, 8). The importance of fair access is to encourage having cross cultural connections and access to all information, without this we are withholding ourselves as a country to full success in infrastructure. Everyone needs to be included in the decision making so that all aspects that could potentially be affected in these developments can be considered. As citizens, advocating, regulating, and innovating is part of our duty in making sure everyone in the country has access to quality infrastructure. Privatizing components within infrastructural development allows those already better off to continue to have the upper hand.Fair treatment was only really acknowledged when debates and advocacy about the discriminatory policies were illuminated. Farmers pushed legislators to alter regulationsoutlawing these forms discriminatory rates and behaviors for railroads, citizens invested in"municipally owned" or even built their own networks for electricity, and avocation forexpanding federal involvement to eliminate high cost disadvantages associated with broadbandinternet are all examples that argued for all persons to have quality infrastructure (2017, 4,5,9). Ifour country focuses more on the amount of revenue gained through these infrastructures, then underserved areas will continue to not be benefitted and our country will not experience equal quality infrastructure (2017, 10). As citizens, our duty needs to work towards improving the accountability, structure, and monitoring of how these manners are approached in order to keep the good of the public in mind before other aspects in social and economic life.

Work Cited (PDF) do artifacts have politics? - researchgate. (n.d.). Retrieved December 3, 2022, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/213799991_Do_Artifacts_Have_Politics Issues. (2021, June 17). Infrastructure and democracy. Issues in Science and Technology. Retrieved December 2, 2022, from https://issues.org/infrastructure-and-democracy/ Democracy & Technology, by Richard E. Sclove. New York and London - JSTOR. (n.d.). Retrieved December 3, 2022, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/689896

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Reaction paper

Related Documents