RESPONSE TO CARL MITCHAM

RESPONSE TO CARL MITCHAM I feel honored to be asked to respond to the text of Carl Mitcham’s Van Riessen lecture. Although philosophy of technology is not my field, there is much to make this task attractive, as Hendrik Van Riessen’s personality and philosophy have been formative influences on my own development, and this Lecture contains so much that is stimulating (as well as debatable). The setting in which Mitcham situates Van Riessen’s contribution seems to be the right one. Van Riessen’s seriousness and analytic depth are praised. Mitcham is also very positive about his focus on the internal structure of technology (techniek),1 and is convinced of the fruitfulness of this approach. He not only holds that it deserves greater attention than it has received, but also that it is still relevant today, comparing favourably with the now prevalent ‘social constructionist reflection on science and technology’. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Philosophia Reformata Brill

RESPONSE TO CARL MITCHAM

Philosophia Reformata, Volume 75 (1): 36 – Nov 17, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/response-to-carl-mitcham-6Tz52xrMj0
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© Copyright 2010 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0031-8035
eISSN
2352-8230
DOI
10.1163/22116117-90000480
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

I feel honored to be asked to respond to the text of Carl Mitcham’s Van Riessen lecture. Although philosophy of technology is not my field, there is much to make this task attractive, as Hendrik Van Riessen’s personality and philosophy have been formative influences on my own development, and this Lecture contains so much that is stimulating (as well as debatable). The setting in which Mitcham situates Van Riessen’s contribution seems to be the right one. Van Riessen’s seriousness and analytic depth are praised. Mitcham is also very positive about his focus on the internal structure of technology (techniek),1 and is convinced of the fruitfulness of this approach. He not only holds that it deserves greater attention than it has received, but also that it is still relevant today, comparing favourably with the now prevalent ‘social constructionist reflection on science and technology’.

Journal

Philosophia ReformataBrill

Published: Nov 17, 2010

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off