Social technology
 |
This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (January 2012) |
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2012) |
"Social technology" is a term that has historically had two meanings: as a term related to social engineering, a meaning that began in the 19th century, and as a description of social software, a meaning that began in the early 21st century.
Contents |
[edit] Related to "social engineering"
The term "social technology" was first used at the University of Chicago by Albion Woodbury Small and Charles Richmond Henderson around the end of the 19th century. At a seminar in 1898, Small spoke of social technology as being the use of knowledge of the facts and laws of social life to bring about rational social aims[1]. In 1895 Henderson had coined the term “social art” for the methods by which improvements to society are and may be introduced. Social science makes predictions and social art gives directions[2].
In 1901 Henderson published an article titled "The Scope of Social Technology"[3] in which he renamed this social art as 'social technology', and described it as 'a system of conscious and purposeful organization of persons in which every actual, natural social organization finds its true place, and all factors in harmony cooperate to realize an increasing aggregate and better proportions of the “health, wealth, beauty, knowledge, sociability, and rightness” desires.' In 1923, the term social technology was given a wider meaning in the works of Ernest Burgess and Thomas D. Eliot[4][5], who defined social technology to include the application, particularly in social work, of techniques developed by psychology and other social sciences.
Closely related to social technology is the term social engineering. Thorstein Veblen used 'social engineering' in 1891, but appeared to take its meaning for granted, suggesting it was used earlier [6]. In the 1930's both 'social engineering' and 'social technology' became associated with the large scale socio-economic policies of the Soviet Union. The Soviet economist Yevgeni Preobrazhensky wrote a book Preobrazhensky, E. A. (1926). Novaya Ekonomika. Moscow.in which he defined social technology as “the science of organized production, organized labour, of organized systems of production relations, where the legality of economic existence is expressed in new forms.” (p. 55 in the translation of 1963[7])
Karl Popper discusses social technology and social engineering in his book The Open Society and Its Enemies [8] and in the article "The Poverty of Historicism",[9] in which he criticized the Soviet political system and the marxist theory (Marxism) on which it was based. Eventually he combined "The Povery of Historicism" series in a book "The Poverty of Historicism" which he wrote "in memory of the countless men and women of all creeds or nations or races who fell victim to the fascist and communist belief in Inexorable Laws of Historical Destiny" [10]. In his book "The Open Society and Its Enemies", Popper distinguished two kinds of social engineering, and the corresponding social technology. Utopian engineering strives to reach "an ideal state, using a blueprint of society as a whole, is one which demands a strong centralized rule of a few, and which terefore is likely to lead to a dictatorship" (p. 159). Communism is an example of utopian social Technology. On the other hand, there is the piecemeal engineer with its corresponding social technology, which adopts "the method of searching for, and fighting against, the greatest and most urgent evils of society, rather than searching for, and fighting for, its greatest ultimate good" (p. 158). The use of piecemeal social technology is crucial for democratic social reconstruction.
In 1966, the term was used as the title of the book Social Technology, by Olaf Helmer et al.[11]
There are at least two main divisions of social technology, one concerned with the public sector and one concerned with the private sector. For the public sector the main areas of study are human rights and governmental policy. Sometimes a single work, like Human rights & social technology by Rainer Knopff and Tom Flanagan [12] addresses both human rights and government policies which ensure them.[citation needed]
Public policies include aspects of the criminal justice system as well as governmental programs. Theodore Caplow's Perverse incentives: the neglect of social technology in the public sector[13] discusses a wide range of topics, including use of the death penalty to discourage crime and the welfare system to provide for the needy.[citation needed]
Private sector uses of social technology include the organization and management of private companies, and are often taught under the auspices of university business schools. One book with this orientation is The social technology of organization development, by Warner and Hornstein. [14][citation needed]
[edit] Related to "social software"
"Social technology" has also been used as a synonym for "social software", such as in the book Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies, by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff. [15] Jennifer Aaker teaches a course on The power of social technology [1] at Stanford Graduate School of Business.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Small, A. W. (1898). Seminar Notes: The Methodology of the Social Problem. Division I. The Sources and Uses of Material. The American Journal of Sociology, 4(1), 113-144.
- ^ Henderson, C. R. (1895). Review. Journal of Political Economy, 3(2), 236-238.
- ^ Henderson, C. R. (1901). The Scope of Social Technology. The American Journal of Sociology, 6(4), 465-486.
- ^ Burgess, E. W. (1923). The Interdependence of Sociology and Social Work. Journal of Social Forces, 1(4), 366-370. doi:10.2307/3004940
- ^ Eliot, T. D. (1924). The Social Worker’s Criticisms of Undergraduate Sociology. Journal of Social Forces, 2(4), 506-512. doi:10.2307/3005216
- ^ Veblen, T. B. (1891). Some Neglected Points in the Theory of Socialism. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2, 57-74.
- ^ Preobrazhensky, E.A. (1965). The new economics / translated by Brian Pearce; with an introduction by A. Nove (First edition). Oxford: Clarendon
- ^ Popper, Karl (1945). The Open Society and Its Enemies. 1, 2. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- ^ Popper, Karl (1944). "The Poverty of Historicism, II. A Criticism of Historicist Methods.". Economica, New Series 11 (43): 119-137. doi:10.2307/2550285.
- ^ Popper, Karl (1957). The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- ^ Helmer, Olaf (1966). Social Technology. Basic Books.
- ^ Knopff, Rainer; Flanagan, Thomas (1989). Human rights & social technology. Carleton Library Series #156. Carleton University Press. ISBN 0886290880.
- ^ Caplow, Theodore (1994). Perverse incentives: the neglect of social technology in the public sector. Praeger - original from the University of Michigan. ISBN 9780275949334.
- ^ Burke, Wyatt Warner; Hornstein, Harvey A.. The social technology of organization development. Learning Resources Corp. - original from the University of Michigan. ISBN 9780883901267.
- ^ Li, Charlene; Bernoff, Josh (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies. Boston, Massachussets: Harvard Business Press. ISBN 9781422198940.
