Technocentrism

Abstract: Modern management theory is constricted by a fractured epistemology which separates humanity from nature and truth from morality. Reintegration is necessary if organizational science is to support ecologically and socially sustainable development. This paper posits requisites of such development and rejects the paradigms of conventional technocentrism and antithetical ecocentrism on grounds of incongruence. A more fruitful integrative paradigm of sustaincentrism is then articulated and implications for organizational science are generated as if sustainability, extended community and our academy mattered.

Abstract: The growth of the internet has been spectacular There are now more 15 billion internet users across the globe, about one quarter of the worlds population This is certainly a new phenomenon that is of enormous significance for the economic, political and social life of contemporary societies However, much popular and academic writing about the internet takes a technologically deterministic view, assuming that the internets potential will be realised in essentially transformative ways This was especially true in the euphoric moment of the mid-1990s, when many commentators wrote about the internet with awe and wonderment While this moment may be over, its underlying technocentrism the belief that technology determines outcomes lingers on, and with it, a failure to understand the internet in its social, economic and political context Misunderstanding the Internet is a short introduction, encompassing the history, sociology, politics and economics of the internet and its impact on society The book has a simple three part structure: Part 1 looks at the history of the internet, and offers an overview of the internets place in society Part 2 focuses on the control and economics of the internet Part 3 examines the internets political and cultural influence Misunderstanding the Internet is a polemical, sociologically and historically informed textbook that aims to challenge both popular myths and existing academic orthodoxies around the internet

Abstract: Publisher Summary The presence of computers and other new technologies in learning will play a determining role in the way that both technology and culture evolve in the coming generation. The future of computer could be made in many different forms. It will be determined not by the nature of the technology, but by a host of decisions of individual human beings. Thinking of the future as an information age certainly focuses on some exciting new developments. There is more access to more information than there has ever been before. But, there is also a dangerous side to it from an educator's point of view—the danger of seeing the most important aspect of education as the provider of information or even the provider of access to information. The chapter presents a critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future. The author has coined the word technocentrism from Piaget's use of the word egocentrism. Technocentrism is the fallacy of referring all questions to the technology. Questions regarding whether technology have this or that effect, whether using computers to teach mathematics increases children's skill at arithmetic, or whether it will encourage children to be lazy about adding numbers because calculators can do it, reflect technocentric thinking. The issues about how to use the computer in education reflect deeper issues of educational theory and philosophy.

Abstract: Scholars have argued that transitions to more sustainable and just mobilities require moving beyond technocentrism to rethink the very meaning of mobility in cities, communities, and societies. This paper demonstrates that such rethinking is inherently political. In particular, we focus on recent theorisations of commoning practices that have gained traction in geographic literatures. Drawing on our global comparative research of low‐carbon mobility transitions, we argue that critical mobilities scholars can rethink and expand the understanding of mobility through engagement with commons–enclosure thinking. We present a new concept, “commoning mobility,” a theorisation that both envisions and shapes practices that develop fairer and greener mobilities and more inclusive, collaboratively governed societies. Our analysis introduces three “logics” of mobility transition projects. First, the paper discusses how a logic of scarcity has been a driver for mobility planning as the scarcity of oil, finance, space, and time are invoked across the world as stimuli for aspiring to greener, “smarter,” and cheaper mobilities. The paper then identifies two responses to the logic of scarcity: the logics of austerity and the logics of commoning. Austere mobilities are examined to problematise the distribution of responsibility for emissions and ensuing injustices and exclusion in low‐carbon transitions. The logics of commoning shows a potential to reassess mobility not only as an individual freedom but also as a collective good, paving the way for fairer mobility transitions and a collaborative tackling of sustainable mobility challenges.