Heidegger on Technics, Power, and the Planetary (original) (raw)
Related papers
There are three particular aspects of Heidegger’s argument upon which this paper will be focused. Firstly, this paper will analyse the way in which Heidegger traces the development of technology from the Ancient Greek conception of technê, which constituted a form of knowledge rooted in the reshaping and utilization of the resources and gifts of nature, to the modern conception of technology, which is rooted in a radically different relationship with the natural world where, rather than working with the gifts of nature, man sets-upon nature in order to break it down into composite parts, extract the energy or material that man needs, and transform these into a standing reserve. Secondly, this paper will analyse the account provided by Heidegger of what one might describe as the “logics” of technology and the way in which modern technology and the natural sciences have, in gaining hegemony over the way in which people understand truth, served both to enframe the natural world within this logic and also to transform the way in which man understands himself and others within this paradigm. Finally this paper will focus upon the last element of Heidegger’s argument. Heidegger does not merely want to gain an understanding of technology, he feels that we are in danger of being overcome by technology and that it is necessary for man to re-assert his mastery of technology so that it can serve as his tool, and as one more in a number of ways in which man can bring the concealed into unconcealment in pursuit of truth. In Heidegger’s words, “Everything depends on our manipulating technology in the proper manner as a means. We will, as we say, “Get” technology “spiritually in hand”. We will master it. The will to mastery becomes all the more urgent the more technology threatens to slip from human control.” (Heidegger, 1977, p. 6).
Lost in the World of Technology with and after Heidegger
Epoché, 2015
Is Heidegger's theory of the era of technology a sufficent hermeneutics of contemporary globalization? It remains invaluable because it understands technology in terms of transcendence, and transcencence in terms of being-in-the-world. But should it nevertheless be revised in the context of contemporary social and technological environment? This article shows firstly how Heidegger's general idea of being-in-the-world is specified in his theory of technology, and how technology reduces man and nature into "natural resources" and being into elemental techno-nature. Secondly, the article presents two types of critique to Heidegger's idea: on the one hand, Ihde, Latour and Stiegler question Heidegger's understanding of technology as a total system; on the other hand, Foucault and Eldred question Heidegger's understanding of technology independently of social and economical structures. The article suggests that re-interpreted through these critiques, the theory of technology gives a good basis for an ontology of contemporary "uprooted" existence.
Abstract: “Never has such a succession of non sequiturs played such an important role in the history of philosophy!” That is Andrew Feenberg’s (2005) opinion of Heidegger’s contribution to the philosophy of technology. He is seconded in his disproval by Don Ihde (2010) who rejects Heidegger’s “völkisch techno-romanticism” and “reactionary modernism”. Along with Peter-Paul Verbeek (2011), Ihde also berates Heidegger’s “externalist”, “high altitude”, “one size fits all” analysis of the “essence” of technology. And his view that Heidegger’s philosophy of technology is an apologia for inhumanity is echoed, inter alia, by Soren Riis (2011). Faced with assessments as damning as these, some readers will conclude that the days when Heidegger was a legitimate reference for the philosophy of technology are over. Others will be less rash and conclude that philosophy of technology readers would benefit from a fresh ‘close reading’ of Heidegger. First to see why and to what extent the views expressed above are ill-informed, reductive, self-defeating and largely groundless. Second to see how disturbingly oblivious their authors are to the limitations, compromises and risks posed by the “descriptivist”, “empiricist”, “bottom up” perspectives they oppose to Heidegger’s “top down perspective”. Finally, and above all, a patient re-reading of Heidegger’s philosophy of technology creates an opportunity to make the case that his estimation of the role of technology in degrading modern humanity’s ecological life support systems is as relevant today as ever and the solutions he proposes are altogether appropriate. Desirous to be of service to such a readership, this paper offers a summary of Heidegger’s philosophy of technology. It focuses in particular on the enigmatic claim that technology is “supremely perilous” and for that very reason a source of “salvation”. Along the way it looks at the way the extra-technological aspects of his thought inform and condition his discourse on technology. Particular attention is paid to what Heidegger says about the Sacred, Ethics, “Ethology”, Art and how his views on these things are factored into what he says about technology. To conclude it considers whether a determination of technology that conforms to Heidegger’s thought is viable in practice and if it is would adopting it entail adjustments 21st century humanity could accept in principle. We also consider if it is acceptable and viable to NOT embrace Heidegger’s philosophy of technology.
Towards the origin of modern technology: reconfiguring Martin Heidegger’s thinking
Continental Philosophy Review, 2011
Martin Heidegger's radical critique of technology has fundamentally stigmatized modern technology and paved the way for a comprehensive critique of contemporary Western society. However, the following reassessment of Heidegger's most elaborate and influential interpretation of technology, ''The Question Concerning Technology,'' sheds a very different light on his critique. In fact, Heidegger's phenomenological line of thinking concerning technology also implies a radical critique of ancient technology and the fundamental being-in-the-world of humans. This revision of Heidegger's arguments claims that ''The Question Concerning Technology'' indicates a previous unseen ambiguity with respect to the origin of the rule of das Gestell. The following inquiry departs from Heidegger's critique of modern technology and connects it to a reassessment of ancient technology and Aristotle's justification of slavery. The last part of the paper unfolds Heidegger's underlying arguments in favor of continuity within the history of technology. According to these interpretations, humans have always strived to develop ''modern'' technology and to become truly ''modern'' in the Heideggerian sense. The danger stemming from the rule of das Gestell is thus not only transient and solely directed toward contemporary Western society, but also I will argue that humans can only be humans as the ones challenged by the rule of das Gestell.
Heidegger and the Question Concerning Technology
In the 1950’s Martin Heidegger published the essay “The Question Concerning Technology” which has proven to be difficult to decipher for many contemporary thinkers engaged in extracting the meaning of his work. This is often attributed to his poetically composes and unconventional rhetoric which conceals his equally complicated philosophical perspective. This essay we will primarily highlight Heidegger’s vocabulary regarding the trajectory that our technological-modern age traces, which observes and criticizes the dangerous path that humanity pursues, thereby providing valuable insight into what the future holds. I will organize the sequence of Heidegger’s thoughts by addressing his essay and interlinking his ideas that respond to answering the question concerning the status and essence of technology. The valuable meaning is embedded within the interpretation of the terms with relation to the text and an effort for constructing an organized understanding has created obstacles. By looking beyond his unique writing style and focusing on his language I will organize Heidegger’s thoughts and grasp the valuable existential characteristics of technology. I will provide a comprehensive understanding of Heideggerian language and thought in order to synthesize his philosophy into an organized manner for clarification purposes.
"Only a God can Save Us": An analysis of Heidegger's critique of modern technology
In this master’s thesis, I will make an analysis of Heidegger’s philosophy of Technology as it is presented in his Bremer Vorträge and Die Frage nach der Technik. My research focuses on the following question: ‘how does Heidegger define modern technology and its influence on our contemporary society? In order to answer this question, I will approach Heidegger’s writings on technology in a systematic way. An indispensible foundation to understand the core of Heidegger’s philosophy is found in the topics he discusses in his later works, consequently I will begin by covering some of the topics from Heidegger’s later philosophy (such as ‘historicity of Being’ and his thing-philosophy). Heidegger’s philosophy of technology is articulated in both Bremer Vorträge and Die Frage nach der Technik, but with a slightly different focus in each of the works. To understand Heidegger’s critique of technology it is important to gain insight into his thing-philosophy: for Being to disclose itself, we should create space for the thing-being of the thing. In ancient causality the thing is allowed this thing-being, since the bringing-into-presence of things is characterized by a ‘letting’. In modern technology it is no longer a bringing-into-presence but rather a challenging-forth and ordering that is characterized by a ‘stellen’. Modern technology has a character of force rather than nurturing or encouraging. The essence of modern technology is a gathering of all these concepts that hinge on this ‘stellen’, which Heidegger defines as the Ge-stell, or: enframing. After defining the essence of modern technology as enframing, I will examine the consequences this has. Enframing estranges us from the essences and leads to the completion of the forgetting of Being. In this way, enframing is the danger. However, enframing is also our saving power. As it is our way of revealing, our getting-ready for readiness is found in enframing itself. The influences on contemporary society are manifold, two that Heidegger names are, for instance, the bio-industry and nuclear warfare. In order to change our fate and move past enframing, Heidegger argues, we can only wait for the appearance of a God.
Technology and the Problems of Freedom: Phenomenological Reflecttions of Martin Heidegger
2015
Inspired by the impact of science and technology on Western society, many Eastern leaders requested their societies to learn and live in by logic of science and technology. In this instrumentalist point of view, we control technology, or technology, as tool, can be controled to serve human interests. The article, however, wishes to suggest that our existence can be technologically textured (with respect to the rhythms and spaces of our daily life), or that technology controls us. This article, following the phenomenological reflections of Martin Heidegger, proposes a thesis that the relationship between technology and humans are ambiguous. On the one hand, technology can become a stock which is ready to use for our interests, but on the other hand, it can enframe human beings according to its created systems. In such a situation, the thinking or questioning, of this essence of technology, can be seen as a way towards human freedom and salvation.
Don Ihde: Heidegger’s Technologies: Postphenomenological Perspectives
Minds and Machines, 2012
Heidegger is undoubtedly one of the most discussed philosophers of technology, and Ihde is certainly right when he says that, among European philosophers talking about technology in the first half of the twentieth century, Heidegger remains ''virtually the only one of these to continue to draw major comment'' (p. 1). It is almost unthinkable nowadays to imagine an introductory course in philosophy of technology that does not discuss his views on technology in one way or another. According to Ihde, Heidegger has two phases of such views. In the 1920's with the publication of Being and Time, Heidegger proposes an analysis of the relation between human beings and technology as a distinction between the ''present-athand'' and ''ready-to-hand'' and Ihde says that even today this analysis is still valid among many philosophers of technology. The ''present-at-hand'' is the kind of relation that happens when the human is being conscious of the tool he has at his hand, as when he realizes that he is holding a hammer, for example. The ''ready-tohand,'' on the contrary, is a kind of flowing relation where the human as tool user is not aware of the tool at all but is focused on whatever task that he is using the tool for. That is the first phase. The second phase, however, takes place after World War II with the publication of his major work on technology, The Questions Concerning Technology, in the 1950's. Ideas in the latter work are also rather familiar to the student of philosophy of technology. Heidegger talks about new, modern technology enframing nature, with the result that nature itself becomes a ''resource well'' to be exploited by humans through their technologies. Heidegger's favorite example is the river Rhine and the attempt to dam it. The dam represents an attempt to enframe the river, making it a ''standing-in-reserve'' for human consumption. The river ceases its primordial being as an integral part of nature within which the human being is also a part, and becomes a dead resource, so to speak.
Bernanos, Heidegger and the Redemption of Technology
International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE), 2022
For Bernanos, the civilization of technology is symptomatic of a deliberate enslavement of man to the "collective owners of machines". A comparison can be made with Heidegger's analysis of the essence of technology as Enframing (Gestell), the mode according to which the real is revealed as a standing-reserve (Bestand). Like Bernanos, Heidegger points out the danger of a civilization where man cannot conceive of himself without this mode of revealing which becomes indispensable and invisible. Although the two men take a different approach, we will show that, for Heidegger and, more surprisingly for Bernanos, the civilization of technology can be saved if it recognizes the danger it faces (that of an exclusive mode of revealing) and if it rediscovers that technology takes part in an exercise of much greater scope, that of poetic art.