Persuade Into What? Why Human-Computer
Interaction Needs a Philosophy of Technology
Daniel Fallman: Persuade into What? Why Human-Computer Interaction Needs a Philosophy of Technology.
This article brought up so interesting points about HCI and why it is relevant to have a philosophy in place to understand its impact on humans. This idea of having a philosophy with technology in itself is quite important with the immersion of computer softwares into our society. It is as if they just appeared and started to manage our budgets, edit our photos, and interact with our social lives. It is something that we need to be conscious of understand the psychological effects that these computer interruptions created in our daily lives. With that in mind I would like to refer to the article and touch upon a few of the points that were brought out by Fallman about the philosophies of both Idhe and Borgmann on HCI.
IDHE’s philosophy is to understand the persuasive natures that are being implemented in HCI’s to manipulate humans into acting in a predictable manner. For instance he brings up the example of a HCI that influences the computer user into instant buying. He states that these technologies are non-neutral because they all come with a consequence. His examples were odd in the fact that they were so expansive starting with the idea of optical technology and the invention of glasses. Glasses are non-neutral because they impact the wearer by altering the wearer’s site, and possibly the wearer’s actions. He then goes on to speak about hermeneutic representation in technologies which means that the technology is text base like measuring tools or the speedometer in the car. Many software’s are also Hermeneutic in nature but they also have alterity relation with humans in that though most of the software is understood there is an otherness that makes it seem like it is magic or from another world.
Borgmann has also a somewhat dystopian view of HCI with the argument that there is no focal thing associated with modern technologies. He uses the example of the fireplace as being a once focal thing in country houses where all action took place. The fireplace is where the family gathered for warmth, and cooked meals. The fireplace needed to be maintained, by cutting wood and keeping the fire going. It also connected the user with the environment in that it needed wood as its fuel and signified seasonal change with the amount of its use. He compares the fireplace with central heating saying that because the user has a passive relationship with this technology by simply turning it on that he or she does not have any other in depth connection with the device or with the elements that surround it. In fact the mechanics are hidden so the user in most cases has no idea even how it works. He then goes on to say that technology needs to be defined between whether it is good or useful. Many of the technologies today are developed as devices to be consumed and then disregarded and trashed. This use of technology has developed a dis-connect between what the user expects to what is actually produced. Because of this it has created isolation between the individual with the community as well as with the individual with humanity.