Representation of Technology in the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School: J. Habermas’ Techno-Philosophical Conception

I. Bondarenko

Abstract


Research methodology. The purpose of this research is to identify Frankfurt School theorists’ main philosophical approaches to the phenomenon of technology. This research strategy relies on the general scientific research methods of systematic review, modelling by analogy as well as concretizing and comparison to reconstruct the controversy on the essence of technology and particular characteristics of modernity among the Frankfurt school thinkers of the first and second generations.

Results. This study looks at the background to the mainstreaming of communication in the study of fundamental social processes of modernity. The analysis revealed that J. Habermas’ techno-philosophical conception had shown a new communicative approach to the phenomena of technology and rationality. This research highlights that J. Habermas represented essential social processes of modernity through the analysis of the communication mechanisms, given that his critical theory sees a space of communication as an authentic form of social reality. Author’s model of rationality falls into two independent, yet interlinked levels: it covers purpose-rational actions (work) and interaction (communicative act). J Habermas saw technology as a «generic» phenomenon genetically instilled in the human code which is reflected mainly in the mechanisms of purposive-rational action. The researcher regards «scientization of technology» resulted from scientific and technological progress as an exclusive fact of modern society. J. Habermas substantiated reconstruction of society through an open public debate and live communication.

Novelty. With this study, a systematic analysis of J. Habermas’ techno-philosophical conception described in his essay «Technology and Science as “Ideology”» (1968) is presented for the first time. The research also introduces such key concepts of J. Habermas’ critical theory as «traditional society», «modernity», «institutional structure», «technocratic consciousness», «human engineering» and «technology». The study compares J. Habermas’ and H. Mrcuse’s technocratic models.

The practical significance. The findings may be used as a methodological model for further research in the applied science. They may also promote the formation of transdisciplinary theory in the study of social communication technologies.

Key words: ideology, interaction, communication, communicative action, rationality, technology, purposive-rational action.

 


References


Feenberg, А. (2011). Means as meaning: rationality and action in the critical theory of technology. Jepistemologija & Filosofija nauki, XXVIII: 2, 16–36. (in Russian).

Furs, V. (2001).The paradigm of critical theory in modern philosophy: An attempt at explication. Logos, 2: 28, 49–75. Retrieved from http://www.ruthenia.ru/logos/number/2001_2/03_2_2001.htm. (in Russian).

Feenberg, А. (1996). Marcuse or Habermas: Two Critiques of Technology. Inquiry, 39, 45–70. Retrieved from: https://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/books/¬Marcuse_or_Habermas_¬Two_Critiques_of_-Technology.pdf. (in English).

Habermas, J. (1968). Technik und Wissenschaft als ″Ideologie″. Frankfurt am Main : Suhrkamp Verlag, 169 р. (in German).

Habermas, J. (1970). Technology and Science as ″Іdeology″. Towards a Rational society,

–266. Retrieved from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz8cVS8LoO7OUUxJQ0hyUWRaMGc/edit. (in English).

Kauppinen, А. (2005). Habermas on Technology and Ideology. Brief encyclopedia entry on Jürgen Habermas for Ethics, Science, Technology, and Engineering. Ed. J. Britt Holbrook and Carl Mitcham. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/22157126/Habermas_on_-Technology_and_Ideology. (in English).

Poster, М. (1981). Technology and Culture in Habermas and Baudrillard. Contemporary Literature, 22: 4, 456–476. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1207878Accessed. (in English).

Sikka, Т. (2011). Technology, Communication, and Society: From Heidegger and Habermas to Feenberg. Review of Communication, 11:2, 93–106. DOI:10.1080/15358593.2010.551781. (in English).

Voskuhl, A. (2016). Еmancipation in the Іndustrial Аge: Technology, Rationality, and the Cold War in Habermas’s Early Epistemology and Social Theory. Modern Intellectual History, 13: 2, 479–505. DOI: 10.1017/S1479244314000717. (in English).

Wagner, P. (2008). Modernity as Experience and Interpretation: A New Sociology of Modernity. Cambridge : Polity, 296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004165694.i-450.74. (in English).


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Since 2013, all electronic versions of the journal are stored in the National Library of Ukraine named after VI Vernadsky of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and presented on the portal in the information resource "Scientific Periodicals of Ukraine".

Indexing of the journal in scientometric databases:

The publication is indexed by Citefactor: 2019/2020: 4,54.

The journal is indexed by Google Scholar.

In 2020, the journal was included in the Index Copernicus.

The journal is indexed by Innospace Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF): 2016: 5,899, 2017: 6,435, 2018: 7,037, 2019: 7,431

From 2020, the collection is indexed by ResearchBib.

Journal included in the PKP Index.