From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Technology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.

Closed deletion listing[edit]

This article was listed for deletion on 11 April, 2005. The discussion was closed with the result of no consensus. This article will not be deleted. You can view the discussion, which is no longer live: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Technocriticism. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 21:31, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article is way too technical[edit]

This isn't intended as a flame but as constructive criticism. I think this article is very opaquely written, I think the root cause is that the field of Science & Tech studies is hugely insular. It seems that your intended audience is one-another; surely as a critique of scientists, your intended audience should be scientists?! As a scientist attempting to gain some perspective through Science and Technology studies (which seems to be essentially a humanities discipline), I have found most texts to be very unclearly written, basically aimed at other members of the community. Widen your possible audience and you might widen your influence! --zrenneh 21:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It uses too much jargon and is very off-putting - very unencyclopedic. What is a "social prosthetic"? What the ****does the following sentence mean?

While technocultural theory and technoethical discourse are distinguishable from one another and irreducible to one another, technocriticism often analyzes associations, tensions, and interdependencies between them.
I deleted the sentence to which you objected. I don't think it is really that difficult to understand that two related analytic modes are definitively different but interestingly interdepenent, but if many people object to the sentence it may look clear to me because of bias or something. As for "social prosthetic," that is a misreading of the sentence which I have now tried to make clearer. The sentence describes an analytic perspective which focuses on the reality of artifacts as practices (personal and social) rather than objects. Both the words social and prosthetic refered to "practices." Hopefully that is clearer in the revised sentence. --Dale Carrico
We should just delete sentences like that if no-one can interpret them. ··gracefool | 03:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I've tried to clean up some of this language. Wikipedia is supposed to be a generally useful resource and so it makes sense we would strive to ensure that the language is as accessible as is compatible with the subject matter. However, before you assume that *no-one* can interpret this entry, read the work of some of the scholars who are listed as exemplars of technocriticism. I doubt people who actually read and are interested in the work of Katherine Hayles, Donna Haraway, Mark Poster, Bruno Latour, et al. would have any trouble interpreting this entry in the least. --Dale Carrico
Thank you, Dr. Carrico. I've always done so clean up. I hope you approve. --Loremaster 00:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Include this view, please[edit]

Well, I think that (sadly) most people in Western Europe and USA (and other higly-developped countries, too) are all becoming dependant on technology. And, as I said before, dependance is worse than independence. Someone should be free to chose. But, if you say to your pals: “I used to like computers, but, since I found the Internet, I got fed up with them…”, they will look at you as you are an idiot. That shouldn’t be like that! Thanks God, that in Eastern Europe people are still much more natural than Eastern Europeans. Well, don’t get me wrong, I like Eastern European people, but they are unable to ‘unplug’ from all that tech stuff. 08:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a point of view that would need to be supported by a academic source. See the Wikipedia:NPOV policy for more details. --Loremaster 00:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)