CAJ | 학술논문

对技术的批判有两个来源：一个是马克思,一个是历史主义派别。马克思对资本市场的分析证实了技术的资本主义应用带来的压抑、剥削和解放的命题。而历史主义学派则通过对技术与权力＂外在化＂的瓦解提出了一种技术的社会批判。近年来后现代的技术政治学也使我们进一步看到技术本身及其在社会关系中更复杂的权力关系。技术不是中立的理性产物,也不是人类和自然的宿命。现代社会可能通过保持技术设计和技术世界斗争的开放性,以实现技术的公正性。
대기술적비판유량개래원：일개시마극사,일개시역사주의파별。마극사대자본시장적분석증실료기술적자본주의응용대래적압억、박삭화해방적명제。이역사주의학파칙통과대기술여권력＂외재화＂적와해제출료일충기술적사회비판。근년래후현대적기술정치학야사아문진일보간도기술본신급기재사회관계중경복잡적권력관계。기술불시중립적이성산물,야불시인류화자연적숙명。현대사회가능통과보지기술설계화기술세계두쟁적개방성,이실현기술적공정성。
Technological critique comes from two aspects.One is Marx.The other is the historical school.Marx confirmed the suppression,exploitage and liberation of technique in capitalism by analyzing capital market.The historical school pointed out a kind of technological critique on society through linking technique and power.Recently post-modern technical politics also makes us realize more clearly technique and its complex relationship with society.Technique is neither neutral nor man and nature’s fate.Modern society will probably make the justice of technique come true by keeping open the possibility of technological design.