Assignment

THREAD 1

We are looking at Langdon Winner's classic essay "Do Artifacts Have Politics?"

What does it mean to say that certain technologies can be designed to embody political and social consequences? These consequences can either be consciously or unconsciously designed in. What is the difference?

Can you give some examples of technologies with designed political consequences? Are these political consequences conscious or unconscious? Are these consequences good or bad? Explain.

Thread 2: Technologies with Inherent Political Consequences

What does it mean to say that certain technologies can have inherent political and social consequences? How do inherent political consequences differ from designed political consequences? What is the difference between a technology that is strongly compatible with certain political arrangements and those that require certain political arraignments? What is the difference between technologies that have consequences that are internal to the technical system and those that have external political consequences?

Can you give some examples of technologies with inherent political consequences? Does this technology require or is it merely strongly compatible with certain political arrangements? Are these political consequences internal to or external to the technology? Are these consequences good or bad? Explain.

THREAD3: Moral vs. Instrumental Reasoning

When designing new technologies engineers are primarily engaged with designing a system that works, that is efficient, and that is practical. As Langdon Winner argues on page 36, however, these practical or technical considerations often eclipse moral or political considerations. This could lead to the creation, for example, of more efficient technologies that have undemocratic consequences at the expense of less efficient technologies that are more friendly to democratic governance. But why should we sacrifice democracy for the sake of efficiency?

How should the engineer weigh the political and moral consequences of their work when compared to the more traditional considerations of engineers?

Do you think engineers are good at foreseeing these supposedly extra-technical consequences of their work? Why or why not?

Winner says that it is characteristic of societies like ours, that rely on large and complex technological systems, to view moral reasoning as "obsolete, ‘idealistic,' and irrelevant." Do you agree with Winner's characterization of our society? Is this a problem? Why or why not? If you see it as a problem, what should be done, and in particular what is the role of the engineer in making moral reasoning more central to our thinking about technology?