Now mass production overcome over traditional forms of consciousness and a society that “delivers the goods” this will join together the working class once and for all.
Marcuse also referenced Husserl; Husserl argued that science was rooted in the “lifeworld” of everyday practice. Husserl had hoped that regrounding science in experience would open the way to restoring Enlightenment values. Marcuse took over the notion of the lifeworld but argued that it is fundamentally political, as are the scientific concepts derived from it.
On the other hand Heidegger talks about Morden technology and relates it to the question ’what is logic’ and relates to logic as essential thinking and that we can not grab it because logic can not be anything apart from itself. Logic has its boundaries and can not come outside its boundaries, to grab essential thinking humans have to have self conscious so they can realise that they are thinking. In comparison to what Marcuse said about technology and how we have to be outside the system to change it. Heidegger is emphasising that we have to take control of the situation to understand what is happening. Heidegger in a way wants us to revert to and earlier less developed world, in the sense of “back to the future”. To him, modern technology is making a “sorcerer’s apprentice” and turning man into slaves, with the help of knowledge and technological progression is going to control humanity. Technologies before did not enslave human because man had the common sense to master those machines and not be taken over by them.
Similarities that Marcuse had like Heidegger is that he perceived technology as more than technical and even more political; he claims that it is the modern experience in itself the primary source in which the world is discovered. Marcuse and Heidegger talk about technology far beyond the actual devices; and say that technology ‘signifies a way of thinking and a style of practice’ and that technology is creating relating and giving us technical control.
Heidegger is saying to be mindful of technology ‘what matters to this mindfulness throughout is not a description and elucidation of these sciences but rather the consolidation of the abandonment of being that sciences …’ he is also cautioning us and saying that we should continue questioning technology ‘questioning build a way… a way of thinking’ he believes that we should be open minded towards technology so we can explore it effectively. The term ‘Essence’ for Heidegger means more than just what a thing is, it means the way in which something pursues its course, “the way in which it remains through time as what it is.”
A difference between the two philosophers is that Marcuse said that technology is only avoided by people who are not in the system. Marcuse in his book ‘Repressive tolerance’ explains that Technology is used to dominate the society with the help of economic and political power Important factors like opinions are ignored Effective dispute are blocked when they could be used freely as opinion. He also talks about the media and the news, Marcuse gives an example; that if a positive and a negative statement is written about an FBI the positive statement will stand out as that is what is sett in our minds, we see the FBI as an important and helpful person the ‘hero’ in most films.
Another similarity between Heidegger and Marcuse is they both believed that technology is a means to an end, but Marcuse believed that will be able to control for Heidegger he believed that what ever has a means there is an effect, what ever has an effect there is a cause “wherever ends are pursed and means employed, wherever instrumentality reigns, there reigns causality”
Heidegger said that technology is waving through human existence more faster then anything that has ever been created by that human race, the danger with technology is that it can transform the humans, and that aim, desire, ambition or even our performance and behaviour are turned around, not that machines can ‘run amok’ but instead technology can determine our thoughts and the way we perceive things or even our hopes. Heidegger said that technology is an essence an it also determines human existence and that technology is actually a system of which is invented but the consequence should be avoided which might come out of the blue until computers became a big success.
Marcuse’s view on liberation is that liberation is a social process, which needs a certain level of developing from the creative forces. This can only take place socially and if there is a social struggle. Marcuse also suggests that the benefits that we gain from technology are not part of the technological process as we take granted of social changes.
Heidegger sees modern technology as part of the dilemma and the fact that Morden technology is concentrating on finding a solution to every problem or anything that inspires human beings from media to electronic technology the aim for these inventions was to uncover any secrecy of nature that have been left unanswered. This was to tell the difference on the basic laws that rule the natural world. Heidegger said this leads to misunderstanding and also the essence of technique and these results to a misunderstanding of essence of being. In his writing it suggests that Heidegger is worried about the outcome of modern technology.
One of Heidegger's most famous work was to answer the "Question of Being” In Being and Time Heidegger argued that, to understand the concept of being it is important one should know about 'being there' (Dasein), the kind of Being who asks ‘the question of Being. To even ask the question, remarks Heidegger, implies that at some level the answer is already understood.
In Being and Time, Heidegger's extra focus on being there the human kind of Being reveals that being there is not right, it is "not-at-home" unlike being' in the world.
Heidegger's suggests that we are "lord of his being" by Modern technology we me replacing magnificence of God. If one believes in God, is not more mesmerized by he wonder of creation in learning of the hugeness of the universe? The knowledge comes only from the search for answers - the search for causes.
According to Heidegger the human notion of being is our understanding of the nothingness that is death. As beings, and in being now, and in being even to the point of death, how can we know that death is in fact nothingness until we experience it?
Heidegger has some relevant points that technology en-frames us and some irrelevant points such as; we should go back to nature. Man has adapted technology to never end its existence by creating technology to make life easier and more comfortable, even making work hours more productive, Technology is made to solve our problems and as a result to this we’ve created dangerous and toxic waste, and polluted rivers which we drink from and we created enough nuclear to destroy our existence completely. But on the other hand some scientific investigation has found cures for diseases. It is also hard to dispute against technology that keeps us in touch with any one around the world. The fact that we can watch other parts of the world at the same time, gives the illusion of the world being a small place, but this is also a discourse and a form of social construct. But the fact that this technology has become a need or a requirement is something that Heidegger is claiming that the 17th century is the start of modern technology.
Technology uses nature as raw materials, not as a world that emerges Jut of Itself; technology is just stuff waiting for transformation into whatever we want. Europe has made many inventions by just understanding reality. Nothing keeps humans away from being exploited by the world. Everything is exposed to an investigative intelligence who will invent something new and useful.
Marcuse agrees to the normal modern view that essence can neither be based on tradition and community standards nor speculatively derived in an a priori metaphysic of some sort. But what he calls "one-dimensional thinking" plays out that modern scepticism by rejecting the idea of essence altogether and remaining at the empirical level. It thereby avoids tradition-bound conformism and outdated metaphysics but only by treating the Logic of technology as an ontological principle.
Marcuse calls the society ‘totally administered’, in his book ‘One Dimensional Man’ he talks about how society creates control and also believed that technology is responsible for liberating us, and here is where you could draw a line between Heidegger and Marcuse differences in relationship towards technology as Marcuse saw technology as a social process. Marcuse also talks about how we need things because we are programmed to desire and want (i.e. designer cloths) and we have lost our sense think clearly. Marcuse is also trying to say that we have not lost our freedom totally its just we have fallen in line with capitalism because of technology and the impact it has on us.
Heidegger died in 1976 but before that he had predicted something which had come in the future such as computers and networks but in 1957 way before the invention of computers or any type of networks, Heidegger predicted that there would be a revolution which now is known as a computers, but he called it a ‘language machine’ the description of the language machine was that it would regulate and adjusts in advance mode of our possible usage of language through automatic functions, the language machine would be bigger then any thing else, it would control the world of language. “Meanwhile, the impress is still maintained that man is the master of the language machine. But the truth of the matter might well be that the language machine takes language into its management and thus masters the essence of the human being”
When Marcuse died in 1979, he wrote about Modern technology and said that the natural environment should be defended from capitalist and communist destruction.
Marcuse believes that technology is social; it is used and invented by people. Humans are making products to make things easier for them selves but it is also being used against them as machines are taking over many jobs and cutting labour. Marcuse’s talks about this and makes a point that that technology is a way for owners to exploit their staff.
Marcuse raises a lot of important question like what will happen to us, if technology is gone nothing like Heidegger who is saying to leave technology and go back to nature. Marcuse offers a solution that we should make use of it and that we should finish vocational training as it is part of a capitalist system. Instead of vocational training we should operate outside of the system and step away from the technological mind set. Marcuse saw technology us liberating us her suggested that we should use technology to release us of the burden of labour. Marcuse also believes that everything is mass produced and machines are invented by social needs.
Marcuse talks about the differences between needing things and wanting things for instance we need to eat, but technology is becoming something we need even though it’s just something we want. One example of machines and the thought of being free is of ‘automobiles’ which are designed to make us feel free but instead it is the opposite we are given instructions through out our journey, but apparently this is ok, (us) human do not complain about this because we have lost our ability to be free this is called ‘fashitnism’ we are so use to signs and government telling us what to do, we find it normal.
On the other hand Heidegger said that enframing is a powerful source which is destroying us; it has finished our ability to think or solve anything because we need to go back to enframing to solve anything. He also said that the world is going to destroy itself but we have to still rely on science (for example humans have created enough nuclear weapons that if they explode, it will wipe out the whole of the oceans and sea in the universe and the world would be hot like the sun). Heidegger said that we have banned common sense because of technology as we take for granted certain things because we use them everyday for instance cloths we do not realize how important they are because we have them on but instead we are more concerned with the latest technology. Heidegger explains that we need to see technology beyond its essence which is beyond common sense otherwise technology will destroy us. Heidegger said we are in this journey were technology is being used and we need to go back t nature.
Both philosophers are trying to say is that technology has become of our everyday life, but we have to be smarter then that, we need to still think for our selves and do things for ourselves instead of relying on these technology otherwise we will loose control of life, but on the other hand they also seem like it is to late, as we have already lost our independence to technology. The main problem is the concept of essence. Heidegger’s reservation is an outcry for help against the evils of technology. Maybe Heidegger is right in saying that we have allowed ourselves to be bond to a mind set and en-framed for instance we rather use a calculator then solve a simple sum by our selves. As the world is surrounded by technology we become wrapped in its anxiety. Heidegger solution to these problems is return to a simple way of living’ a germen way of living’ – but how do we return back to nature, it can not be done, he believes that without technology it will bring us together but one example of his theory being practiced is in the New York black which happened in 2003, where there was no technology, but instead of humans working together there was a chaos everything was dysfunctional there was a lack of civilisation but us as a nation are not prepared to go back to nature we are so use to a system that tells us what to do i.e. traffic lights.
Heidegger and Marcuse’s theory are not that convincing but they are bringing to our attention that we should not get to attached to technology. All though both philosophers were writing in different time period, but now technology has become of everyday life. Technology seems to be the villain, reforming social life around mechanical, inanimate forms with the terrible consequences.
Bibliography
- Marcuse, Herbert (1941) Einige gesellschaftliche Folgen moderner Technologien [Some social implications of modern technologies]. In: Herbert Marcuse Schriften Band 3: Aufsätze aus der „Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung“. 1979. Frankfurt am Main. Suhrkamp.
- Marcuse, Herbert (1964) One-Dimensional Man. Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. London. Routledge.
- Latour, Bruno (1987) Science in Action. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press
- Marcuse, Herbert (1967) Kunst in der eindimensionalen Gesellschaft [Art in the One-Dimensional Society]. In: Peter-Erwin Jansen (Hrsg.) (2000) Herbert Marcuse Nachgelassene Schriften Band 2. Kunst und Befreiung.
- Marcuse, Herbert (1972) Konterrevolution und Revolte [Counterrevolution and Revolt]. In: Herbert Marcuse Schriften 9. Frankfurt/Main. Suhrkamp
-
by Mark Wrathall (Paperback - 3 Oct 2005
- http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xKhUyU8UQEI
Fiza Elahi
New Media Environment
Herbert Marcuse, one dimensional man:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Dimensional_Man
http://grace.evergreen.edu/~arunc/texts/frankfurt/marcuse/tolerance.pdf
by David Woodruff Smith 2006
uni-erfurt.de/.../p0es1s/english/partcipants/amerika-f.htm
MARTIN HEIDEGGER THE QUESTION CONCERNING TEHCNOLOGY 1953
MARTIN HEIDEGGER THE QUESTION CONCERNING TEHCNOLOGY 1953
MARTIN HEIDEGGER THE QUESTION CONCERNING TEHCNOLOGY 1953(Heidegger page 294)
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. February 1982.
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. February 1982.
Herbert Marcuse, one dimensional man: studies in the ideology of advance industrial society, Rotledge & Kegan, Paul 1964
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. February 1982.
Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. February 1982.,