Philosophies Of The Aristotle, Marx, And Heidegger In Relation To Technology

There are three philosophical ways to deal with technology: the teleology of Aristotle, the materialism of Marx and the existentialism of Heidegger. Every one is hypothetically unique. The mind-boggling days remain the most gainful rationalities of Marx and the underlying foundations of Heidegger in the technology for the media and the hypothesis of the correspondence essentialness.

Rationality of technology

There are two essential uses to the media hypothesis and Mass Communication: Triadic speculations and social coherence. In the logic of technology, Marx's materialism and Heidegger's existential authenticity were educateAristotle’s instrumentalism The concept of Aristotle is as follows, what we, today, call technology. According to Aristotle,’’ tools, machines, instruments, materials, and science is for to serve human ends’’ but these are an indispensable part of our lives and technology. Technology has to be used by people. What's really important is how it's used. When the time comes, humanity will be shaped by how technology is used. As per Aristotle's structure, closes are essential, however, they fall outside the space of technology itself, imagined as a way to another person's finishes.

In this theory of technology, the present complex instruments ought to be utilized for suitable purposes, yet those planning and making innovative items will appropriately think about technology in mechanical terms. Government officials may presume that sustenance creation, as opposed to military hardware, should be expanded. Instructors may battle that electronic technology ought to be utilized to enhance guidance, as opposed to for political purposeful publicity or business. Open transportation moving the majority to occupations may be accentuated rather than yachts and sports autos for the tip top. Be that as it may, such should and ought to and suggested are outside the technologist's area. The impartial view perceives that a blade in a specialist's hands spares lives and among criminal groups it slaughters, yet the decision to utilize it one way or the other isn't the duty of this current technology's designer or maker. As far as ı am concerned, what Aristotle complains is that technology is not worth the misuse of the technology that Aristotle's actual complainant is. If technology is used in a good way, there can be tremendous progress for mankind. Marx's evaluate of entrepreneur financial relations is seemingly simply this sort of basic hypothesis.

As members in an entrepreneur advertise economy, we fall into thinking about the economy as far as private property rights, free trade, the laws of free market activity, and so forth. , and, in this manner, we fall into considering industrialist monetary relations as supported, as to how things ought to be. Marx contends that thusly of reasoning is only belief system: it clouds, even from those people who endure them, the inescapable and ruinous types of estrangement, frailty, and abuse that, in Marx's view, characterize entrepreneur financial relations. In the more humble moderate postulation, machines can be updated on qualities other than unimportant proficiency. Similarly, industrialized society can be reconfigured far from those entrepreneur esteems that just propagate a precise mechanical technology – and, by expansion, the subordination of work. In Feenberg's moderate show, mechanical society contains a store of hidden potential, which can be tapped through an alternate mechanical and social association.

In Martin Heidegger’s existentialism, technology isn't a person creation, however, it develops inside the characteristic and social universes that people possess. Creatures are never essentially given all things considered; they come to nearness in a positive way, which relies upon the aggregate field of uncovering, where they are arranged. Technology shows up inside civilizational givens that are underestimated. In the contemporary age, the exposure of technology happens under states of logical and business ability, logic, and secularism. People in modern social orders today end up in another interpretive circumstance. For Heidegger, in the cutting edge innovative time, being is technicized. Accordingly entering the embodiment or state of technology turns into a focal philosophical concern, in the event that we are to comprehend the cutting edge period effectively. A lot of things change in people's lives because of technology, so if we give examples, we can call it society, culture, and politics.

For example, people lose their culture because of technology. Now, instead of talking to face to face, the conversation ends with a two-minute phone call or a message. We're going to lose our traditional cultures. We could not say that technological innovations are neutral. Since then, the advancement of technology has become natural, but we cannot say that all technological developments are natural. when a general public's convictions about the characteristic world, about mastery, and about advancement are changed and virtuosity esteems are supplanted by wellbeing and superfluity, at that point innovation practice can turn out to be on a very basic level humanocentric. We require the humanities to build up the human condition in a mechanical age that clouds it from view. For a humanistic theory of innovation, our help of the humanities is imperative. Instruction concentrates on the qualities that drive the innovative request, requiring a change in our responsibilities to them. Also, just when these qualities, these measurements of the instrumental perspective, are upset will radical changes happen in innovative administrations.