Thinking about Technology: How the Technological Mind Misreads Reality by Gil Germain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Thinking about Technology: How the Technological Mind Misreads Realityby Gil Germain Carl Mitcham (bio) Thinking about Technology: How the Technological Mind Misreads Reality. By Gil Germain. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2017. Pp. 161. Hardcover $90. This is an unpretentious book in nine concise chapters that grew out of a series of lectures for a large undergraduate general education class. It aims to restate what has been called a humanities criticism of technology, drawing especially of the work of Jean Baudrillard. The author is professor of political thought at the University of Prince Edward Island, Canada. Chapter 1 begins with interpretative readings of Plato's Phaedrusand [End Page 343]the contemporary novelist George Saunders's short story "Jon" in order to call attention to cultural dissatisfactions with a technological worldview. The thesis is that there is a fundamental difference between an erotic engagement with the world as a whole and technological mediation. "Ultimately, thinking about technology is an exercise in reflecting on eros" (p. 21). Chapters 2 and 3 use technological romanticists such as Ray Kurzweil and Kevin Kelly to illustrate the ethos and problem with technology. This ethos is presented as failing to recognize how instrumentalist attractions delimit human experience. "With modernity, life has been refigured as a solvable problem. Ours aspires to be a tragedy-free age" (p. 31). Chapters 4 and 5 offer expositions and interpretations of Baudrillard to try to drive home the argument so far. These are the least successful chapters, since they try to explain what the author admits from the start can be difficult to understand with the thought of a French theorist who is at least equally difficult to read. Chapters 7 and 8 suggest alternatives to technological thinking. A final chapter 9 summarizes. "The goal [of this book] was to look at the phenomenon called technology as it we were not part of the thing under examination [in order] to loosen the hold of our imagination of ingrained perceptions regarding what technology is and does [and thus] gain a better sense of the true import of our civilizational commitment to the technological ideal" (p. 143). Despite modest strengths, this book insufficiently acknowledges, as alternatives to Kuzweil and Kelly, more nuanced accounts of technological experience. Asides on how the author is making his argument can also distract from the argument itself. Carl Mitcham Carl Mitcham is international professor of philosophy of technology at Renmin University of China in Beijing. His most recent book is Philosophy of Engineering, East and West(2018). Copyright © 2019 Society for the History of Technology
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".