Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

5. Technological Mediation without Empirical Borders

Chapter of: Phenomenology and the Philosophy of Technology(pp. 121–142)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title5. Technological Mediation without Empirical Borders
ContributorMartin Ritter(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0421.05
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0421/chapters/10.11647/obp.0421.05
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
CopyrightMartin Ritter
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2024-10-16
Long abstractThis chapter provides a critique of the postphenomenological understanding of “technology” as something referring to empirically observable artefacts in reality. He argues that postphenomenology suffers from three main shortcomings: (1) it fails to engage with the question what constitutes a technology, (2) it mistakenly reduces technological mediations to observable interactions between humans and technologies, and (3) its commitment to the empirical turn in the philosophy of technology and its according focus on case studies provides limited access to postphenomenology’s self-proclaimed object of study: human-technology relations. In providing these critiques, the chapter offers a substantial general critique of the empirical turn in the philosophy of technology, as well as points towards the need to find a language to articulate how the notion of “technological mediation” is not bounded to particular empirical circumstances.
Page rangepp. 121–142
Print length22 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Contributors

Martin Ritter

(author)
Deputy Director at the Institute of Philosophy at Czech Academy of Sciences
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7426-7005

Martin Ritter is Deputy Director at the Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences and Senior Researcher at its Department of Contemporary Continental Philosophy. He is also affiliated with the Center for Environmental and Technology Ethics - Prague. From 2007 to 2020, he taught philosophy at Charles University, Prague. From 2020 to 2022, he was a visiting scholar in the research group Philosophy of Media at the University of Vienna. Besides numerous journal articles especially on phenomenology, critical theory, media philosophy, and philosophy of technology, he has recently published two monographs: To Liberate the Future by an Act of Cognition. Walter Benjamin’s Theory of Truth (Filosofia 2018, in Czech), and Into the World. The Movement of Patočka’s Phenomenology (Springer 2019).

References
  1. Achterhuis, H. (Ed.). (2001). American philosophy of technology: The empirical turn (R. P. Crease, Trans.). Indiana University Press.
  2. Adorno, T. W. (2005). Minima moralia. Reflections on a damaged life (E. F. N. Jephcott, Trans.). Verso.
  3. Arzroomchilar, E. (2022). Some suggestions to improve postphenomenology. Human Studies, 45(1), 65–92, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-021-09615-1
  4. Aydin, C., Woge, M. G., & Verbeek, P.-P. (2019). Technological environmentality: Conceptualizing technology as a mediating milieu. Philosophy & Technology, 32, 321–338, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0309-3
  5. de Boer, B. (2023). Explaining multistability: Postphenomenology and affordances of technologies. AI & Society, 38, 2267–2777, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01272-3
  6. de Boer, B., & Verbeek, P.-P. (2022). Living in the flesh: Technologically mediated chiasmic relationships (in times of a pandemic). Human Studies, 45, 189–208, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-022-09625-7
  7. Bosschaert, M. T., & Blok, V. (2023). The ‘empirical’ in the empirical turn: A critical analysis. Foundations of Science, 28, 783–804, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-022-09840-6
  8. Coeckelbergh, M. (2021). Earth, technology, language: A contribution to holistic and transcendental revisions after the artifactual turn. Foundations of Science, 27, 259–270, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09730-9
  9. Heidegger, M. (2001). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Blackwell.
  10. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Indiana University Press.
  11. Ihde, D. (1993). Postphenomenology: Essays in the postmodern context. Northwestern University Press.
  12. Ihde, D. (2009). Postphenomenology and technoscience: The Peking University lectures. State University of New York Press.
  13. Ihde, D. (2011). Husserl’s Galileo needed a telescope! Philosophy & Technology, 24, 69–82, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-010-0004-5
  14. Ihde, D. (2016). Husserl’s missing technologies. Fordham University Press.
  15. Kiran, A. H. (2012). Technological presence: Actuality and potentiality in subject constitution. Human Studies, 35(3), 77–93, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-011-9208-7
  16. Lemmens, P. (2017). Love and realism. Foundations of Science, 22, 305–310, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9471-6
  17. Lemmens, P. (2022). Technologizing the transcendental, not discarding it. Foundations of Science, 27, 1307–1315, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09742-5
  18. Lemmens, P., & Van Den Eede, Y. (2022). Rethinking technology in the Anthropocene: Guest editors’ introduction. Foundations of Science, 27, 95–105, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09772-z
  19. Misa, T. J. (2009). Findings follow framings: Navigating the empirical turn. Synthese, 168, 357–375, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9447-y
  20. Mykhailov, D., & Liberati, N. (2023). Back to the technologies themselves: phenomenological turn within postphenomenology. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-023-09905-2
  21. Ritter, M. (2021a). Postphenomenological method and technological things themselves. Human Studies, 44, 581–593, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-021-09603-5
  22. Ritter, M. (2021b). Philosophical potencies of postphenomenology. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 1501–1516, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00469-0
  23. Romele, A. (2021). Technological capital: Bourdieu, postphenomenology, and the philosophy of technology beyond the empirical turn. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 483–505, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00398-4
  24. Romele, A. (2022). The transcendental of technology is said in many ways. Foundations of Science, 27, 975–980, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09758-x
  25. Rosenberger, R., & Verbeek, P.-P. (Eds). (2015). Postphenomenological investigations: Essays on human-technology relations. Lexington Books.
  26. Scharff, R. C. (2022). On making phenomenologies of technology more phenomenological. Philosophy & Technology, 35, 62, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-022-00544-0
  27. Van Den Eede, Y. (2022). Thing-transcendentality: Navigating the interval of ‘technology’ and ‘Technology’. Foundations of Science, 27, 225–243, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-020-09749-y
  28. Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design (R. P. Crease, Trans.). Pennsylvania University Press.
  29. Verbeek, P.-P. (2006). Materializing morality. Design ethics and technological mediation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(3), 361–380, https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243905285847
  30. Verbeek, P.-P. (2008). Cyborg intentionality: Rethinking the phenomenology of human-technology relations. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 387–395, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-008-9099-x
  31. Verbeek, P.-P. (2010). Accompanying technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 14(1), 49–54, https://doi.org/10.5840/techne20101417
  32. Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. University of Chicago Press.
  33. Verbeek, P.-P. (2016). Toward a theory of technological mediation: A program for postphenomenological research. In J. K. B. Friis & R. P. Crease (Eds), Technoscience and postphenomenology: The Manhattan papers (pp. 189–204). Lexington Books.
  34. Verbeek, P.-P. (2017). The struggle for technology: Towards a realistic political theory of technology. Foundations of Science, 22, 301–304, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9470-7