A Comprehensive Definition of Technology from an Ethological Perspective

Abstract

Definitions, uses, and understanding of technology have varied tremendously since Jacob Bigelow's Elements of Technology in 1829. In addition to providing a frame of reference for understanding technology, the purpose of this study was to define or describe it conceptually. A determination of dimensions comprising technology was made by critiquing historical and contemporary examples of definition by Bigelow and Volti. An analytic-synthetic method was employed to deconstruct both definitions spanning two centuries to derive aspects of technology. Definitions relying on an anthropocentric "how humans use technology" viewpoint failed to account for different perspectives that were found when an ethological perspective inquiring "how technology is used" served as a framework. Findings support qualification of insulin as technology according to the following comprehensive definition: something inherently intelligent enough to either function, be used to function, or be interpreted as having a function that intelligent beings-human or otherwise-can appreciate, something devised, designed (by primary intention), or discovered (by secondary intention) serving particular purposes from a secular standpoint without humankind creating it, or a significant beneficiary of rationally derived knowledge that is "used for" a purpose without itself necessarily being translated into something material that "does" autonomously, or dependently when used.

Telecommunication Innovations and Human-Technology Interface: A Review

“…The third is the philosophical concept, where Verkerk et al (2015), identified three core areas of philosophy function in technology which are the technology analytical function (function upon which technology can be studied and evaluated), critical technology function (a query on its usefulness), and the directional technology function (what is the future of technology development). Carroll (2017), corroborated the above view of philosophy in technology positing a three-core concern dealing essentially with the purpose, function and benefit of technology to man. The fourth concept area is the entrepreneurial (business) concept, wherein technology is seen as business for profit through the offering of goods (products) and services.…”

Technology in Social Entrepreneurship Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis (1990-2019)

“…Volti (2009, p. 6) defines technology as "a system created by humans that uses knowledge and organization to produce objects and techniques for attaining specific goals". Technology, in this view, shows the ability to perform specific function, purpose and contribute to attaining a well-defined goal (Carroll, 2017), and comprehends information technology (Turban, 2008), digital technology (Giones & Brem, 2017), green technology (Chen, Luo, Sato, Wakatsuki, & Masunaga, 2009;Chen, 2013), and other kinds of technology that are linked to business needs (Phaal, Farrukh, & Probert, 2001). In fact, the core characteristic of technology is its applicability to problem-solving.…”

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a human enhancement story

“…Here Human Enhancement can be seen as a matter of control over natural processes or conditions, which are experienced as undesirable and flawed [ 19 ]. The means by which this control over nature is commonly exercised is technology [ 7 , 22 – 24 ].…”

“…But what is technology? Carroll [ 22 ] carried out a careful and comprehensive ethological analysis of the timeless essence of technology. She argued that any technology consists of three core aspects: the possession or ascription of a function (I.)…”

“…Another important aspect is the ability to comprehend and appreciate the notion of technology, described as reflexivity. Accordingly, this ability is contingent on and carried out through these essential features [ 22 ]. Technology – according to Carroll – comprises anything identifiable by humans as having a specific function to fulfill a certain purpose that will lead to a beneficial outcome, whether or not material or simply knowledge-based.…”