Defining technology, according to Heidegger

‘Technology’ is one of those words that’s so commonplace, yet it’s hard to define. Computers and smart devices are technologies, but so are books and notepads. Indeed, the definition of technology may span from simple tools and utensils (hammers and spoons) to powerful machines and media (car factories and artificial intelligence). How are we to say what technology is precisely? Enter Martin Heidegger.

Heidegger was a 20th-century German philosopher, typically associated with existentialism (basically, a school of thought that emphasizes individuality). His writings are notoriously difficult to read, but plow through the dense discourse and you’ll find some valuable insights. Here, I thought I’d highlight his insight about what exactly technology is: not a thing, but a relationship.

Heidegger on the “essence” of modern technology

In his essay “The Question Concerning Technology,” Heidegger asks, what is the “essence” of technology? Directing that question at modern technology, especially powerful machines, he gives the following answer: “enframing.” Let’s unpack the meaning of that word.

Heidegger on “enframing”

For Heidegger, “enframing” [Gestell in German] is using technology to turn nature into a resource for efficient use. Modern technology, says Heidegger, lets us isolate nature and treat it as a “standing reserve” [Bestand]—that is, a resource to be stored for later utility. As an example, he gives the hydroelectric plant, which isolates a river and transforms it into a power source.

In the enigmatic words of Heidegger, this isolation and transformation “sets upon nature … in the sense of challenging it.”

This setting-upon that challenges forth the energies of nature is an expediting [Fordern], and in two ways. It expedites in that it unlocks and exposes. Yet that expediting is always itself directed from the beginning toward furthering something else, i.e., toward driving on the maximum yield at the minimum expense.

Whoa, say what? Told you he was difficult to read. Allow me to translate.

Essentially, Heiddeger is telling us technology is not just a thing. It’s how we relate to the world. Thus, it’s no surprise that different technologies are, in effect, different ways of relating to reality. In particular, modern technologies—namely, powerful machines—are expedient ways of conquering the world, because they objectify nature and turn it into a resource that can be quantified, calculated, and rationed.

In short, we go from seeing nature as the phenomena we’re a part of…

…to seeing it as natural resources for everyday business.

That’s the essence of modern technology: using powerful machines to turn everything into a consumable or disposable resource.

From natural to human resources

Now, if that critique sounds radical, it’s worth mentioning Heidegger was no hippie. (Quite the opposite, but that’s another story.) There’s nothing necessarily wrong with using technology to “enframe” nature this way. After all, civilization requires resources to survive. However, there’s a danger when we take this line of reasoning too far. For instance, we may use technology to enframe ourselves. Says Heidegger,

As soon as what is unconcealed no longer concerns man even as object, but does so, rather, exclusively as standing-reserve, and man in the midst of objectlessness is nothing but the orderer of the standing-reserve, then he comes to the very brink of a precipitous fall;  that is, he comes to the point where he himself will have to be taken as standing-reserve.

In other words, once we take enframing to an extreme, we may use technology to turn one another into “human resources” (which is, of course, how we refer to workers now, as opposed to the more dignified term “personnel”). At this point, we may feel like disengaged, powerless cogs in a machine. Since that feeling of disengagement is not uncommon in high-tech workplaces today (according to Gallup), I suspect Heidegger would have appreciated the movie Office Space.

Rethinking technology

What if some of us object to technology turning us into human resources? Fortunately, there’s an alternative. Instead of seeing technology as the means to turn everything (including ourselves) into resources, we can see technology as art.

Technology as art

Ultimately, Heidegger wanted to revive an earlier understanding of technology. According to Heidegger, understanding technology as enframing—turning everything into a consumable or disposable resource—ignores a more holistic understanding of technology. As he points out, technology, etymologically speaking, means artistic skill or craftsmanship (from the ancient Greek word techne, from which we also get the words technique and technics):

techne is the name not only for the activities and skills of the craftsman, but also for the arts of the mind and the fine arts.

Technology as a relationship

Therefore, Heidegger suggests, if we see technology as art, we come across a valuable insight. As an art, technology is more than a thing. It’s a relationship as well—an aesthetic and ethical way of relating to nature and society.

If that insight is right, then as we use technology to extract resources, we should also make sure we’re not inflicting damage in the process—for instance, on the environment (dumping pollution) or upon each other (treating workers like cogs in machines).

As a philosopher, what Heidegger was implying is that, at the end of the day, we can’t separate technology from human values. And really, that’s what the philosophy of technology is all about.

---

Think Heidegger was onto something? Feel free to leave a comment below, or explore more Technology and Culture articles on this site.