The Ideological Essence Of Technology And Its Relationship With Politics

Abstract

The article examines technology as an ideology that replaces today the so-called traditional ideological structures, primarily political, and its impact on society. According to the authors, the ideological role of technology lies in the fact that it serves as the main tool through which social connections and relationships are organized. In particular, modern information technologies have a significant influence and a greater depth of influenceonto all social processes.Based on the analysis of various sources, research by specialists devoted to this topic, a substantiated conclusion was made that social relations are mediated by technology. The authors believe that in a certain sense they are a technique that acts as a condition for the perception of the social world and the world as a whole. Traditional ideologies (political) are losing their relevance and are used only as elements of control in the political sphere, which is formatted by technical rationality. Political practice turns out to be technical practice. The “utopian” projectivity of politics is replaced by technical management.

Keywords: Dominance, ıdeology, man, society, technique

Introduction

The issue of considering technology as an ideology has an established tradition. To a large extent, it is represented in the works of German thinkers of the 20th century. Yunger (2002), Markuze (2003), Habermas (2007) and others. The technique studied in this aspect is a natural step in the development of Western thought. From the middle of the XIX century such traditional ideological structures as religion, morality, political ideology, which ensured the functioning of society, receive a social interpretation. In the XX century technology, like science, becomes the subject of much consideration. Today, the topic is receiving a new impetus for development, modern researchers write about the problematization of the scientific and technical ideology formed in the era of the New Time, which is presented as the liberation of man from nature (Jochum, 2021, p. 37). They point out that technology creates the perception of a person, that, for example, the social and human sciences have created a "technology" of ideas about human nature (Schwartz, 2021, p. 29). Demonstrate how information technology can shape social reality (Reijers & Coeckelbergh, 2018, p. 103). They represent technical reality as a subsystem of social reality, and technology as a set of tools created by people to meet socially recognized needs and used in accordance with social norms (Popkova, 2018, p. 49). The main phenomena of the modern digital era, including marketing and political communication, are investigated (Floridi, 2019).The ethical aspects related to the software development process are investigated (Gogoll et al., 2021). Ethical problems of interaction of users of social networks are investigated (Marin, 2022, p. 114).

In this work, we will try to articulate our understanding of the relationship between technology, man and objective reality. These relations, in our opinion, today provide a basis for presenting technology as a universal ideology that determines political reality.

Problem Statement

The social whole is fenced off from the common man by an impenetrable ideological screen. The resource for rationalization in humans and in a technically armed government is incomparable. The citizen is being "calculated" in more detail, the depth of the calculation increases. Building social relations on the basis of this leads to the fact that human behaviour, motivations, goals and meanings are projected and controlled. This topic is not new, in the XX century it was often discussed, but today we can also talk about an increase in the intensity of this miscalculation, the growing possibilities of technocracy.

Research Questions

The concept of ideology has a number of interpretations, it is characterized as a system of ideas, knowledge and cognitive attitudes in relation to the world and the person in it. In a specific version, ideology is a system of ideas that reflect attitudes towards society, the state, and politics. Expressive, in our opinion, is the definition of Zhizhek (1999), representing ideology as “such a social mechanism, the very homeostasis of which assumes that individuals “ are not aware of what they are doing” (p. 14). This understanding can be extended not only to political reality but to reality in general, that is, ideology is a necessary "protective screen" from the reality (Zhizhek, 1999, p. 15). Security is also provided by the integrating function of ideology since it is such a set of ideas that “serves to unite people into certain social structures” (Mamardashvili, 2018, p. 59). Organizing people into stable, reproducible structures is a major policy challenge.

Ideological research gains a significant boost in the industrial era when mass production relations emerge. Mass production, carried out on the basis of rational and universal rules, reveals the work of the ideological mechanism. Since the chain of production relations cannot be accessible and perceived in its entirety by one person, a person of mass production does not know what exactly he is doing in general. Only a limited social space and a corresponding understanding are available to him. In this case, the very "rigid" structure of production contributes to the fact that every time a person returns to the performance of his functions. As a result, mass production effectively “holds” society. The working rhythm, the implementation of clear, consistent operations at the same time create the stability of social relations, since a person included in this order of production necessity does not drop out of collective interactions, formatted by mass industrial production, but must return to responsibilities every time and be included into this relationship. Social behaviour is determined by a complex of ideas about where a person is, what her purpose is. Such a situation cannot be characterized unequivocally (whether it is correct or not), since “ideology lies outside the question of truth and falsehood” (Mamardashvili, 2018, p. 60). Such a view is, in part, a picture of reality, opening from the point at which the subject fixes it. At the same time, the completeness of real connections that generate a representation accessible to human perception cannot be captured by a single look and a single point of view, such optics does not exist. Consequently, ideology is an integral part of the work of thinking. In traditional society, a person, in organizing its practice, was guided by various types of recurring phenomena, primarily natural, cosmic cycles. The structure of time (religious holidays, seasonal dates) and space (sacred sites) organized social relationships. More precisely, the objectified ideas of people about space, nature, religion had an organizing influence on relationships and activities. In modern society, when the world is "disenchanted", the most important organizing influence is possessed by the society itself, the structure of which is scientifically rationalized and technically controlled. Historically established social practices, which are reflected as ideological structures, have been replaced by rationally organized and technically structured relations. The technogenic order of society becomes not a sacred and symbolic source of power but rationally grounded, based on scientific knowledge and technical capabilities.

Social relations are mediated by technology, in certain sense they are technology. Moreover, “machines are the only real standard of order, and they are made so that they are easy to manage” (Sennett, 2004, p. 108). The complex of intricate social relations, including industrial ones, is to a large extent “sewn up” into the structure of the technical device. Technique, which primarily provides social communication, on the one hand, is addressed to a person, seemingly simple to operate, on the other hand, it is complex in terms of its internal structure, repeating and reproducing the structure of relations of increasingly complex social communication. This provision forms in a person an idea of the multiplicity of choice provided by technical means. Ease of use, the possibilities of technology and the freedom of choice of social relations, based on it, creates a feeling of inappropriateness, independence from technically determined circumstances and social relations themselves. However, as Zhizhek (2014) writes, “ideological identification has the greatest impact on us when we fully realize that we are not identical with it, that under the mask is a human essence with a rich inner world” (p. 64). Not everything is ideology, under this ideological mask I am - also a living person. “This is the form of ideology that is most “effective in practice” (Zhizhek, 2014, p. 64). Confidence in their own independence, in the simplicity and illusory comprehensibility of the social system and existing relations speaks of the opposite, of the dependence and involvement of consciousness in the existing order.

Purpose of the Studу

The aim of the work is to develop an argument about the existence of such relations between technology, man and objective reality (primarily social and political), which give grounds to present the former as a total ideology replacing all traditional ideological structures.

Findings

Thus, two aspects are revealed that contribute to the transformation of technology into the basis of modern political management. The first is the moment of simplification of actions on the part of an ordinary person. In this case, technology performs one of the main ideological functions, which consists in simplifying and “schematizing” reality. An equivalent complication is not required from a person, a participant in a relationship, that is, a corresponding increase in the understanding of the complexity of society; he is not required to bring up his culture. This function is assumed by technology, embodying the increasing complexity of social ties, and it also ensures the controllability of the social system.

The second aspect is the ability and capacities of the authorities to manage the intricate chains of social relations, real relations that affect the state of the social system. From the position of the subject of power, the illusion of a non-ideological view arises, the picture, in our opinion, appears to be completely transparent. It is assumed that there are no “blind” spots in the structure of the social system that are not available for rationalization, control and management. This is a consequence of the scientific picture of the world, which underlies technocratism. Exists only what is available to registration and what can be done. If something can be done, then it must be done. Technical rationality, which focuses on the maximum possible explication of potentials, coincides with political rationality. If politics is the “art of the possible”, then the technique is the practice of realizing, that is, “setting” possibilities (Hajdegger, 1986, p. 48). As a result, one cannot but agree with the thesis that now “we are not politicians, but “technicians” are the functionaries of progress” (Fishman, 2017, p. 10).

Conclusion

Technique becomes a condition for "seeing" the world, sets the appropriate optics. On the one hand, it "shrinks the world" in its scale, reducing space, speeding up time, and on the other, it increases the intensity and complexity of social communications. This effect can be observed in modern information technology. All tools, primarily the network, from a technical point of view, in terms of their internal structure and organization, are not available for a complete and comprehensive perception by the subject. The variety of connections cannot be captured by a person. As in the traditional social system, most of the real relations that produce a certain vision and a certain ideology are hidden from the subject, so in the network, all the fullness of connections and relationships is technically available, but impossible mentally, that is the understanding and building an exhaustive picture reflecting reality.

As before, many are inclined to think that the human world is arranged in accordance with the ideas of justice, good, and the common good. In concrete political practice, such outdated ideological constructions, with which the aspirations of the people or certain groups in society are associated, should become, from the point of view of power, one of the parameters of governance and be used to symbolically ensure domination. In fact, the only criterion and attitude to ideological constructions is the effectiveness of achieving the goal. If these ideologies cannot be ignored when making management decisions, then it is necessary to treat them as relevant. Goal-setting also has a technical nature, it comes down to homeostasis of the socio-political system and the preservation of the existing status quo. Let us recall the thesis of G. Marcuse that “technological rationality becomes political rationality” (Markuze, 2003, p. 262). Real process control and decision making are technical issues. Traditional ideologies are becoming an atavism. They are taken into account solely as one of the order parameters. In reality, the complex relationship between man and the world is mediated by technology.

The technique is an organized activity directed “outside” (Engelmejer, 2013, p. 14), an activity on the “inorganic organization of things” (Stiegler, 1998, p. 46). Only what exists can be organized and used politically. Exists only what is technically realized. Only that which is rationally conceptualized and scientifically substantiated is feasible. Thus, political practice fits into the framework of the logocentric picture of the world and technical rationality. It is logical to agree with the opinion that “the disappearance of transcendence in history is symptoms of the rationalization of the world, the “end of politics” and its replacement by“governance”(Samarskaya, 2017, p. 26). Political projects of the future social order, the prospects of some “bright future”, utopias, which can be understood as “an alternative to the existing society”, are disappearing (Samarskaya, 2017, p. 26). A "sealing of the technical-political universe" took place (Markuze, 2003, p. 38), in which there is no and cannot be opposition to the existing order, where everything can be brought under control.

References

• Engelmejer, P. K. (2013). Filosofiya tekhniki [Philosophy of technology]. Izdatelstvo "Lan".

• Fishman, L. G. (2017) Sushchestvuet li sovremennoe massovoe soznanie? [Does a modern mass consciousness exist?]. Politiya, (3(86)), 6-24.

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Floridi, L. (2019). Marketing as Control of Human Interfaces and Its Political Exploitation. Philosophy and Technology, 32, 379–388

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Gogoll, J., Zuber, N., Kacianka, S., Greger, T., Pretschner, A., & Nida-Rümelin, J. (2021). Ethics in the Software Development Process: from Codes of Conduct to Ethical Deliberation. Philosophy and Technology, 34, 1085–1108.

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Habermas, Yu. (2007). Tekhnika i nauka kak «ideologiya» [Technology and science as an "ideology"]. Moscow: Praksis. [In Russ.]

• Hajdegger, M. (1986). Vopros o tekhnike [The question of technology]. In P. S. Gurevicha (Eds.), Novaya tekhnokraticheskaya volna na Zapade [A new technocratic wave in the West] (pp. 45-67). Progress.

• Jochum, G. (2021). Dialectics of Technical Emancipation — Considerations on a Reflexive, Sustainable Technology Development. NanoEthics, 15(1), 29–41.

• Mamardashvili, M. K. (2018). Ocherk sovremennoj evropejskoj filosofii [An essay on Modern European Philosophy]. Azbuka.

• Marin, L. (2022). Enactive Principles for the Ethics of User Interactions on Social Media: How to Overcome Systematic Misunderstandings Through Shared Meaning-Making. Springer.

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Markuze, G. (2003). Eros i civilizaciya. Odnomernyj chelovek [Eros and civilization. One dimensional man]. Izdatelstvo: AST.

• Popkova, N. V. (2018). Socialnaya priroda tekhniki [The social nature of technology]. Filosofiya nauki i tekhniki, 23(2), 49–60.

• Reijers, W., & Coeckelbergh, M. (2018). The Blockchain as a Narrative Technology: Investigating the Social Ontology and Normative Configurations of Cryptocurrencies. Philosophy & Technology, 31(1), 103–130.

• Samarskaya, E. A. (2017). Politicheskie ideologii i tekhnika [Political ideologies and techniques]. Filosofskie nauki, (11), 22–39.

• Schwartz, B. (2021). Idea Technology and Ideology. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry,

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Sennett, R. (2004). Korroziya haraktera [Corrosion of character]. Fond socio-prognost. issled. "Trendy".

• Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and Time 1. The Fault of Epimetheus. Stanford University Press.

• Yunger, F. G. (2002). Sovershenstvo tekhniki. Mashina i sobstvennost [Perfection of technology. Car and property]. "Vladimir Dal'".

• Zhizhek, S. (1999). Vozvyshennyj ob`ekt ideologii [The Sublime Object of Ideology]. Izdatelstvo «Hudozhestvenny`j zhurnal».

• Zhizhek, S. (2014). Chuma fantazij [A plague of fantasies]. Izdatelstvo Gumanitarny`j Centr.