“The
examined life is not worth living,” Socrates declared. Today,
philosophers are finding that to examine life, we must also examine how
technology is changing the way we live.
With an array of new gadgets at our disposal, digital tech has become
part of nearly everything we do – from gaming to shopping to
videoconferencing at work. In the IP-enabled domains we now increasingly
inhabit, Socrates’s famous dictum must be paired with Apple’s equally
famous catchphrase: “there’s an app for that.”
When considering how interactive, immersive, and virtual technology
is redefining what it means to be human, philosophers of technology use
the term
technological mediation. But what does this term imply, exactly? And why is it important?
Dr. Frank Scalambrino, a distinguished philosophy professor and author, and
Dr. Jason M. Pittman, a cybersecurity professor who is co-leading the
Brain-Machine Interface program at Capitol Technology University, share their respective takes on the topic.
Frank Scalambrino: In
general, “mediation” is a kind of relation. That means, when we relate
to something, someone, some activity or its outcome through some
“medium,” then we can say that the relation is “mediated.” On the one
hand, this is very simple and easy to understand. If you use a shovel to
shovel snow, then the shovel is mediating your relation to the snow. On
the other hand, mediation can be trivialized. Though there are two
quite popular ways to trivialize “technological mediation,” they both
may be described as stemming from a kind of absurd reduction.
The first trivialization suggests that it is impossible to relate to
anything without some form of mediation. This is a kind of
trivialization because even if it is true, which in some way it of
course is, it does not eliminate the issues revolving around the types
of mediation – specifically technological ones – being used in the
world. It would be like saying that there’s nothing wrong with humans
consuming anti-freeze, since humans have to consume something. And,
that, of course, is an absurd suggestion.
The second trivialization suggests that to question the use of
technology to mediate the experiences of our daily lives is to suggest
that we should return some primitive form of existence, for example,
returning to “back-breaking field work” without even employing a horse.
However, were it true that criticizing technological mediation is
tantamount to desiring some primitive form of existence, then we would
have never invented a more ergonomic version of the snow shovel, since
every critical interrogation of the original snow shovel would merely
have been a veiled attempt to get us to “use our hands instead.” We, of
course, want to avoid both of these trivializations.
As an alternative, I would suggest there is value in awareness. Just
as it is beneficial to be aware of the effects of certain behaviors –
smoking, for example – there is value in becoming aware of the social
and psychological effects of technological mediation. When a
manufacturer markets a product for children, there are criteria they
need to meet before the product can be marketed. By contrast, products
such as “social media” aren’t required to meet certain criteria, nor do
they come with warning labels. In some cases, the effects can be
insidious or difficult to see.
One effect of the technological mediation of life is the apparent
loss of privacy. On the one hand, we may be complicit in this loss
insofar as we have become our own paparazzi. However, on the other hand,
it is also clearly the case that incentives exist, financial among
others, to appropriate our personal information.
Jason Pittman:
Dr. Scalambrino has introduced the notion of “technological mediation.”
In relation to computer science, it’s interesting to consider mediation
as it relates to the underlying computing paradigms. My thinking has
led me to view computing in terms of two paradigms: traditional and
modern.
In traditional computing, the goal has been to process alphanumeric
data. That is, we consume alphanumeric input in algorithmic functions to
produce alphanumeric responses. However, modern technology increasingly
requires mixed data sources that incorporate space and time dimensions.
This is the basis for
experiential computing and the
foundation for how we interact with immersive technologies such as
virtual assistants, artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and
virtual reality.
Now, we often don’t consider what is going on between us and the
technology we interact with. We assume that the output is tightly
coupled to our input and little concern is reserved for how the relation
with technology is mediated. Take brain-machine interface technology
for example; the EEG input is mediated by the brain-machine interface to
enact a user’s agency in the experiential computer. However, the user’s
sense of agency can be manipulated when the brain-machine interface
relation is compromised or corrupted. That is, we can be fooled into
thinking we are in control of an experiential computer when in fact we
have no control. Further, because the relation is implicit, and the
mediation hidden, we do not have a means to certify whose
thoughts are serving as input to the brain-machine interface.
Thus, the value in discussing technological mediation is that we can
develop the means to investigate such relations and mediations. Indeed,
investigating these relations and mediations may help us develop more
resilient or robust user experiences, user interfaces, and cybersecurity
principles for our experiential computers.
Dr. Frank Scalambrino has taught undergraduate and graduate-level
coursework in the philosophy of technology, and his publications
include an edited volume, Social Epistemology & Technology, published by Rowman & Littlefield International (2015),
an anthology, Philosophy of Technology: A Reader, published by Cognella
(2014), and an edited special edition of a journal of the Social Epistemology Review & Reply Collective (2017).
While living in Paris, France, he opened his first social media account
and, ever since, he has been interested specifically in the social and
psychological effects of the use of technology to mediate life. His work
explicitly engages philosophers such as Jacques Ellul, Jean
Baudrillard, Ernst Jünger, Martin Heidegger, and Plato.
In determining his projects as an author, Dr. Scalambrino believes:
“Empty is the word of that philosopher by whom no affliction of
men is cured. For as there is no benefit in medicine if it does not
treat the diseases of the body, so with philosophy, if it does not drive
out the affliction of the soul.” ~Epicurus, “Fragment #54.” Learn more
about Dr. Scalambrino at https://www.linkedin.com/in/frank-scalambrino-ph-d-7b25165b.
Dr. Jason Pittman
is a scholar, professor, and cybersecurity thought leader. He teaches
in the cybersecurity program at Capitol Technology University and has
earned numerous awards for his teaching and research. His
interests include pedagogy and cognitive science issues related to
cybersecurity education, as well as the evolution of computing systems
in trans-humanistic scenarios. “I see the stars as our inevitable
destination and work to do my part is helping our species get there,”
Pittman writes.
