Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Technology’s In-Betweeness

Technology’s In-Betweeness Philos. Technol. (2013) 26:111–115 DOI 10.1007/s13347-013-0106-y EDITOR LETTER Luciano Floridi Received: 29 April 2013 /Accepted: 29 April 2013 /Published online: 11 May 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 One of the most obvious features that characterises any technology is its in- betweeness. Suppose you live in Rio de Janeiro, not in Oxford. A hat is a technology between you and the sunshine. A pair of sandals is a technology between you and the beach on which you are walking. And a pair of sunglasses is between you and the bright light that surrounds you. The point may be phrased slightly differently, in terms of what exactly a specific technology relates. Perhaps a pair of sandals relates not you, but just your feet, and not to the beach, but just to some of its sandy surface. Yet this is hair-splitting and, in its essence, the idea of such an in-betweeness seems clear and uncontroversial. However, it soon gets complicated. Because of our anthropocentric concerns, we have a standard term to describe one of the sides of technology’s in-betweeness: it is the interacting user. However, we seem to lack a term for the other side of the relation, what invites a http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Philosophy & Technology Springer Journals

Technology’s In-Betweeness

Philosophy & Technology , Volume 26 (2) – May 11, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/technology-s-in-betweeness-tVRlXfKbqU
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Philosophy; Philosophy of Technology
ISSN
2210-5433
eISSN
2210-5441
DOI
10.1007/s13347-013-0106-y
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Philos. Technol. (2013) 26:111–115 DOI 10.1007/s13347-013-0106-y EDITOR LETTER Luciano Floridi Received: 29 April 2013 /Accepted: 29 April 2013 /Published online: 11 May 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 One of the most obvious features that characterises any technology is its in- betweeness. Suppose you live in Rio de Janeiro, not in Oxford. A hat is a technology between you and the sunshine. A pair of sandals is a technology between you and the beach on which you are walking. And a pair of sunglasses is between you and the bright light that surrounds you. The point may be phrased slightly differently, in terms of what exactly a specific technology relates. Perhaps a pair of sandals relates not you, but just your feet, and not to the beach, but just to some of its sandy surface. Yet this is hair-splitting and, in its essence, the idea of such an in-betweeness seems clear and uncontroversial. However, it soon gets complicated. Because of our anthropocentric concerns, we have a standard term to describe one of the sides of technology’s in-betweeness: it is the interacting user. However, we seem to lack a term for the other side of the relation, what invites a

Journal

Philosophy & TechnologySpringer Journals

Published: May 11, 2013

There are no references for this article.