"[
ABSTRAKTeknologi bisa memiliki dampak terhadap masyarakat setara dengan pengaruh
undang-undang atau kebijakan pemerintah, karena itu keputusan teknis, menurut
Andrew Feenberg, harus masuk dalam ranah demokrasi. Yang menjadi perintang
demokratisasi teknologi adalah pandangan bahwa pengembangan teknologi
sepenuhnya mengandalkan nalar tanpa pengaruh faktor-faktor sosial, sehingga
teknologi dianggap mempengaruhi tetapi tidak dipengaruhi nilai dan budaya
masyarakat. Kajian teknologi dan pemikiran konstruktivisme sosial membuktikan
bahwa teknologi dan masyarakat memiliki hubungan saling mempengaruhi.
Feenberg berusaha memadukan esensialisme teknologis dan konstruktivisme
sosial dalam teori dua-tingkat. Namun, disertasi ini berargumen bahwa
esensialisme teknologis tidak perlu dipertahankan karena peristiwa
dekontekstualisasi yang mengambil obyek alam dari konteksnya untuk menjadi
obyek teknis tetap mempengaruhi lingkungan manusia, dan dalam reduksionisme
yang memangkas sifat-sifat yang tidak diperlukan suatu obyek teknis
menghasilkan limbah yang bisa berbahaya bagi manusia. Sebagai gantinya penulis
mengajukan teori yang menjelaskan perkembangan teknologi secara serentak
dipengaruhi oleh susbistem teknologis, ekonomi dan sosial, yang masing-masing
memiliki dualitas struktur-kepelakuan dan semua subsistem ini saling
mempengaruhi yang menyebabkan spiral perubahan teknologi, ekonomi dan
masyarakat.;
ABSTRACTTechnology may have a significant impact comparable to the impacts of
regulations or policies of a government, therefore technical decision, according to
Andrew Feenberg, should belong to the democratic sphere. The constraint to
democratization of technology is the thought that technology is fully developed
based on reason, without experiencing the influence of social factors. It implies
that technology is influencing but not being influence by society. The field of
technology studies and social constructivism prove that technology and society
are constituting each other. Feenberg has reconciled technological essensialism
and social constructivism in his two-level theory. But, the dissertaion argues that
we should not keep technological essentialism because the moment of
decontextualization, which takes object from its natural context, influences the
environment, and the moment of reductionism, which strips technically useless
qualities of technical object, disposes wastes that may be harmful to human
beings. Therefore the dissertation suggest an alternative theory that explains that
the development of technology is simultaneously influenced by technological,
economic and social subsystems each of which has the duality of structure-agent
and all subsystems are influencing each other which in turn cause the spiral of the
development of technology, economy and society;Technology may have a significant impact comparable to the impacts of
regulations or policies of a government, therefore technical decision, according to
Andrew Feenberg, should belong to the democratic sphere. The constraint to
democratization of technology is the thought that technology is fully developed
based on reason, without experiencing the influence of social factors. It implies
that technology is influencing but not being influence by society. The field of
technology studies and social constructivism prove that technology and society
are constituting each other. Feenberg has reconciled technological essensialism
and social constructivism in his two-level theory. But, the dissertaion argues that
we should not keep technological essentialism because the moment of
decontextualization, which takes object from its natural context, influences the
environment, and the moment of reductionism, which strips technically useless
qualities of technical object, disposes wastes that may be harmful to human
beings. Therefore the dissertation suggest an alternative theory that explains that
the development of technology is simultaneously influenced by technological,
economic and social subsystems each of which has the duality of structure-agent
and all subsystems are influencing each other which in turn cause the spiral of the
development of technology, economy and society, Technology may have a significant impact comparable to the impacts of
regulations or policies of a government, therefore technical decision, according to
Andrew Feenberg, should belong to the democratic sphere. The constraint to
democratization of technology is the thought that technology is fully developed
based on reason, without experiencing the influence of social factors. It implies
that technology is influencing but not being influence by society. The field of
technology studies and social constructivism prove that technology and society
are constituting each other. Feenberg has reconciled technological essensialism
and social constructivism in his two-level theory. But, the dissertaion argues that
we should not keep technological essentialism because the moment of
decontextualization, which takes object from its natural context, influences the
environment, and the moment of reductionism, which strips technically useless
qualities of technical object, disposes wastes that may be harmful to human
beings. Therefore the dissertation suggest an alternative theory that explains that
the development of technology is simultaneously influenced by technological,
economic and social subsystems each of which has the duality of structure-agent
and all subsystems are influencing each other which in turn cause the spiral of the
development of technology, economy and society]"
