Catching Up

Macht has several posts that deserve a few comments…

First, he examines the difference between technology and a technological way of thinking. This distinction is quite important in the work of Jacques Ellul–Technique is not simply computers or televisions or radios; it is a way of looking at the world that sees the progression of means as being paramount. I would, however, disagree with Macht’s assessment of a technological way of thinking:

Modern technology has a tendency to hide the process from us while still giving us the result. People often talk about all the problems with fast food – processed food, trans fat, poor work conditions, poor treatment of animals, etc. But rarely do people talk about the problem that fast food is supposed to fix – the burden it is supposed to relieve us from. As Borgmann says above, that is “the burden of preparing a meal and getting everyone to show up at the table and sit down.” Is a meal really just the end result – the ingestion of calories and nutrients? Or is the burden of preparing and finding time to sit down with friends and family part of the meal? Yes, these may not be as efficient and may take more effort than running to McDonald’s, but I’m very inclined to say these aren’t burdens we want to get rid of.

It’s quite the opposite, I think. Technique forever seeks to remove the ends from the process. In the example of fast food, McDonald’s doesn’t simply hide the process, it turns the meal into a means to something else. Eating a burger in your car on the way home from work is a means to making your life more efficient. And this itself isn’t an end–it simply leads to a greater progression of means.

(I believe that what I just wrote is thoroughly confusing. I think the distinction is important, and perhaps I’ll work on this more over the holiday.)

Macht also examines the relationship between philosophy/theology and science. While I do not consider myself Dooyeweerdian (primarily because I do not have the time or energy to seriously study his work), I do agree with his position that (to paraphrase Macht) we all have pre-theoretical religious commitments that shape what we do and how we interact with things. “Religious,” by the way, does not necessarily mean faith as Christians understand it–it is the worldview, the philosophical system that shapes our lives.

And finally, he offers a small tribute to Clyde Bruckman, err, Peter Boyle.