Martin Heidegger had no problem defining technology as a human activity that is a means to an end (The Question Concerning Technology, 1954). His search for the "essence" of technology, however, was much more complex. The Greek root of the word, technē, refers to both the works of craftsmen and the works of philosophers and artists. The word means a deep knowing, through which a revealing of truth is possible. Therefore, the essence of technology lies within the realm of art.
How are technology and art connected today? Surely, something that is especially useful as a means to an end can be considered beautiful or artful. Entire technological projects are undertaken to create a "new" goods that are more aesthetically pleasing but serve the same purpose as the previous generation (See: iPods - how many ways are there to play a digital music file?) In this case, the technology is serving another function other that a simple means to an end. We use technological advances to make ourselves more beautiful (cosmetic surgery, Accutane, the Shake Weight). Technology is a form of art. According to Heidegger, this has always been the case.
Technology is also changing what art is and how it is produced today. According to Neal Gabler of the Los Angeles Times, art has changed from discrete to evolving creations. Comparing the current art climate to a Wikipedia-like environment in which anyone can edit works, the authorship of art is in a transition from a single artist to the population as a whole.
Because they are intimately connected, could a possible singularity in art foreshadow a coming singularity in all technology?
No comments:
Post a Comment