The Essence of Technology according to Heidegger (Repeat)

This group conversation will explore the way of thinking about the essence of technology in an important 1954 essay "The Question Concerning Technology" by Martin Heidegger (1889–1976). Although this copy of the essay has a few typos, it prints out as 14 compact pages (if you search other versions are also available): http://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil394/The%20Question%20Concerning%20Technology.pdf . Here are some guiding questions for your optional, but recommended, reading of the essay and for our exploration of the topic:

● Heidegger writes "the essence of a thing is considered to be what the thing is". Is this a good characterization of "essence"?

● Heidegger adopts the commonly accepted definition of technology as "a human activity" and as "a means to an end". This is the so-called instrumental definition of technology. Do you accept this starting point for an inquiry into the essence of technology?

● How and why does Heidegger connect instrumentality to causality?

● How does Heidegger describe the four causes? What do these considerations reveal about the essence of technology as instrumentality?

● What is the importance for the essence of technology of bringing forward into appearance (logos)? "Being responsible"? "Presencing [Anwesen]"? "Poiesis, bringing-forth [Her-vorbringen]"? Are these qualities what technology is? How and why does technology embrace and embody each of them?

● Why does the bringing-forth happen through unconcealment, aletheia, and truth? Wikipedia summarizes: "This truth has everything to do with the essence of technology because technology is a means of revealing the truth." How can this be understood? Does it make sense?

● Why does Heidegger explain modern technology as "enframing" as "the gathering together which belongs to that setting-upon which challenges man and puts him in position to reveal the real, in the mode of ordering, as standing-reserve." How does this characterization help reveal the essence of technology?

● If "Enframing is an ordaining of destining" and as a "granting", what does this disclose about the essence of technology?

● Why is the essence of technology as destining "the supreme danger"? How can it also be a "saving power"?

● How can the arts help us uncover the saving power and the danger of the ambiguous (paradoxical?) mysteries of technology?

● What are the strengths of Heidegger's way of thinking about the essence of technology?

● What are the weaknesses and shortcomings of Heidegger's perspective on technology?

This optional 10 minute video resource led me to the topic: Peter-Paul Verbeek introduction and interpretation of Martin Heidegger's perspective on technology: https://view.vzaar.com/10211741/video

To help understand the essay, this summary in Wikipedia may be useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Question_Concerning_Technology .

Heidegger's way of thinking is complex, but each step seemed to me clear. I found the essay to be utterly fascinating and profoundly revealing.

This is a repeat of the event held on Saturday January 12th. If you attended that event https://www.meetup.com/thinkingsociety/events/wpwcfqyzcbqb , please do not RSVP unless you have carefully read the Heidegger essay and defer your RSVP until after March 2nd so others have a chance to get a spot.

——————————————————————

According to Peter-Paul Verbeek of the University of Twente in his course Philosophy of Technology ( https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/philosophy-of-technology ), Martin Heidegger was one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century. Heidegger was also an unapologetic Nazi. He was a fanatical Nazi in 1933–1934 and used his position of authority to legitimize the Nazi party and harmed the lives and careers of many Jews through his University position and by reporting them to the police and the Gestapo. Although by 1934 he became disillusioned with politics, he was a member of the Nazi party until it dissolved in 1945 and never apologized for his Nazi activities. However Verbeek, and I, and as far as I'm aware no one who has read "The Question Concerning Technology" has identified any trace of his Nazi sympathies in this essay.

So in consideration of Thomas Jefferson's sage advice: "Every human being must be viewed, according to what it is good for; for none of us, no not one, is perfect; and were we to love none who had imperfections, this world would be a desert for our love." I hope we can enthusiastically and unabashedly read and value Heidegger's contributions in this penetrating essay while condeming his political actions. If you identify any fascist or anti-Semitic aspects of the essay, please let me know right away.