走向技术民主和文化多元

【作者】 孙浔；

【导师】 周昌忠；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 科学技术哲学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 自上世纪七十年代末至今,技术哲学的发展进入了一个新阶段。一方面,人类社会技术化的程度越来越高,产生了各种全新的技术现象,技术哲学的研究对象日益复杂、研究领域日益扩大;另一方面,哲学家依据当今西方哲学各种流派的思想,从不同角度研究技术及其对社会的各种作用,对技术与社会的相互影响提出了各种观点加以解释。结合了西方哲学传统和当前社会学研究方法,技术哲学的研究领域出现了现象学技术哲学、实用主义技术哲学、技术的社会建构论等流派。本文所要研究的安德鲁·芬伯格的技术哲学便是在这个大背景下产生并发展起来的。芬伯格法兰克福学派的批评传统,在吸收马尔库塞、马克思、海德格尔、SSK思想和方法的基础上,形成了独具特色的技术批判理论,该理论从历史、社会、政治、文化等向度对技术哲学做了卓有成效的研究。芬伯格认为,技术工具论和技术实体论在如下观点上是相同的:技术是不可改变的,有其固定不变的本质和自主的发展逻辑,人类不能干预和改变。因此在他看来,二者都是非历史主义的技术观。芬伯格的历史主义技术观则认为,技术进步是一个有很多可能方向的偶然过程,而不是一个确定的发展序列;技术的中立性和自主性只是人为建构的假象,技术的发展有多种可能方向;技术并没有固定不变的本质。在芬伯格看来,现有的技术是偶然的,代表了技术霸权阶层的利益。正是揭开了技术的历史性,才能打破技术不可改变的偏见,才能为研究技术的社会向度打开大门,进而揭示技术的社会建构属性。芬伯格借鉴了SSK的社会建构思想,他认为技术包含了技术本身的和社会的两种因素,对这些因素的研究不但需要社会科学的经验主义方法,也需要人文科学的解释学方法,只有这样才能揭示技术对象和活动的根本意义。技术作为社会建构物,它负荷的价值和利益可以通过解释学方法得以展现,它的多种可能性也可以通过转化而得到具体实现。因此芬伯格提出了一种全新的技术观:工具化理论。这种理论认为技术必须从两个层次上来分析,在第一层次,对象被剥离了原初背景,以利于人类对其进行分析和操作。在第二个层次,设计被结合了其他已经存在的设备和系统,以及诸如伦理的和审美的原则等各种不同的社会限制。第二层次正是社会建构技术的过程:无论第一层次中原料的定位是如何的抽象,通过在第二层次中对原料的处理,它们还是负载了利益、价值等社会内容。技术的社会性具体展示了技术的建构过程,从微观层面表明了转化技术的可操作性。芬伯格技术哲学的政治向度指的是他的技术政治学研究。从结构层面和形成过程来研究技术的政治属性,芬伯格揭示了体现在现有技术中的霸权和利益,阐明了技术本身具有的民主潜能,并把推行技术民主作为自己的目标。通过“民主的合理性”概念和技术的社会建构特性对技术的民主潜能提供的理论辩护,以及对现实中技术民主活动的实证研究,芬伯格完成了对技术民主理论和实践两个层面的辩护和说明。技术的社会建构研究和技术可结合多元文化背景表明,技术设计可有多种选择。技术的多元化意味着可选择的合理性,可选择的合理性则为现代性展开了多种可能。当前以强调效率和控制为特征的西方现代性并不是唯一模式,建立在技术多元化发展基础之上的、一种可选择的现代性是完全可能的。这种可选择的现代性表明西方现代性的霸权并不具有必然性、只是偶然的历史产物,不同的民族国家结合自身文化背景可以实现技术的多元化。多元化的技术实现了各种民族文化的现代化,为不同的民族国家提供不同于西方的可选择的现代性。这种可选择的现代性不仅发展了合理性的多种可能,更促进了全球文化的多元发展和共存。在介绍芬伯格基本思想的基础上,本文重点比较他的技术哲学与其他技术哲学的区别以及互补性,并探讨了芬伯格技术批判理论的尚需完善之处和未来发展方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 Philosophy of technology has been entering into a new phase from 1970s till today. On the one hand, human society became more and more technologized, and various new technological phenomena appeared as results. Therefore, the philosophy of technology was impelled to research into more and more complicated objects, and its domain was also gradually enlarged. On the other hand, philosophers made study of technology and its impacts upon society, and furnished a variety of viewpoints to illustrate the reciprocal influence between technology and society on the basis of different schools of contemporary western philosophy. Fused with western philosophical tradition and methods of current sociological studies, phenomenological philosophy of technology, pragmatic philosophy of technology and social construction of technology came into being.As the topic of this paper, Andrew Feenberg’s philosophy of technology formed in such a background. Feenberg’s criticism of Frankford School obtained its characteristic critical theory of technology on the ground of Marcuse, Marx, Heidegger and SSK, and researched fruitfully into the philosophy of technology on the dimensions of history, society, politics and culture.Feenberg argues that, instrumental theory of technology and substantive theory of technology cross their paths on the following point: technology can not be changed; it has its own changeless essence and independent logic in its evolution, which can not be intervened and changed by human being. In this way both of the theories are not of historicism. Feenberg’s technological view of historicism contends that technological progress is a contingent process that can take many possible paths, instead of a fixed one. For him, the neutrality and independence are nothing but illusions constructed by people, and the existing technology is contingent, representing the interest of class of technological hegemony. With the illustration of historical essence in technology, and bias of an unchangeable technology was broken, and technology was researched in social dimension, and its feature of social construction was thus disclosed.In reference to SSK’s thoughts of social construction, Feenberg believes that technology contains two elements: technology itself and the society. Not only the empirical approaches in social science studies, but also hermeneutic approaches in humanity science studies, should be employed in the studies of these elements, in order to cast light on the essential meaning of the objects and activities of technology. As a social construction, technology can express its value and interest in hermeneutic approaches, and realize its multiple possibilities through transformation. Therefore Feenberg puts forward a brand-new view of thchnology: the theory of instrumentalization, which argues that technology should be analyzed on two levels. First, the object is alienated from its primary background in order that people can analyze and operate it. Second, design is put into combination with other existing facilities and systems, as well as sundry social restrictions, such as ethical and aesthetic principles. The second level is the process that the society constructs technology. No matter how abstract the raw materials on the first level are defined, they bear social contents like interest and value through the disposal on the second level. The social attributes of technology exhibit the construction process of technology, and show microcosmically the possibilities in transformation of technology.The political dimension in Feenberg’s philosophy of technology refers to his research in technological politics. With his study in the political attributes of technology in the perspective of its structure and formation, Feenberg illuminates hegemony and interests embodied in existing technology, and expounds the democratic potentials in technology itself. He also takes democratic technology as one of his objectives. Feenberg accomplishes vindication and explanation for both theory and practice of democratic technology through theoretical vindication for democratic potentials in technology with the notion of "democratic rationalization" and the attributes of social construction in technology, as well as through the positive studies of activities of democratic technology in reality.The studies of social construction of technology, together with the fact that technology can be put into combination with multiple cultural contexts, hint that there are diverse choices for technological design. The diversity of technology intimates rationality of choice, which furnishes sundry possibilities for modernity. The current western modernity, with stress on efficiency and control, is not the only pattern; on the contrary, an optional modernity is possible on the basis of diverse development of technology. This optional modernity indicates that the hegemony of western modernity is not inevitable, but contingent historical product, and different states and peoples can create diverse technologies in their own cultural background. Diverse technologies produce modernity of different cultures, and offer optional modernity for various states that is different from the western modernity. The optional modernity not only gives rise to multiple possibilities of rationality, but also promotes the development and co-existence of diverse cultures.Based on the introduction of Feenberg’s principal thoughts, the paper makes a comparison between his philosophy of technology and others’, and discusses deficiencies in his theory of technology, as well as the direction of its future development.更多还原