Technology, Modernity, and the Possibility of Historical Understanding

Abstract This paper traces the meaning of technology in Arendt and Foucault’s work, their historical analyses of technology, and the way that their notions of technology’s role in modernity influence their historical methods. I argue that whilst the two political thinkers approach the idea of technology from different perspectives, there is also substantial overlap in the way that they conceive of technology – often critically – as a wide-ranging set of practices of power interlocked with particular modes of knowledge. This helps to properly situate some aspects of their work that converge, for instance their analyses of what Foucault calls ‘biopolitics’. But their different conceptions of the historical character of technology, and its relationship to modernity, also create divergence: their concepts of ‘technology’ suggest different ways of thinking through the nature of historical continuity and discontinuity and the degree of access that we have to meaningful histories.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Philosophy of History
Published
2024-11-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/18722636-12341538
Primary Topic
Philosophy, History, and Historiography
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Technology, Modernity, and the Possibility of Historical Understanding

Caroline Ashcroft
Journal of the Philosophy of History
Philosophy, History, and Historiography
article

Technology, Modernity, and the Possibility of Historical Understanding

Caroline Ashcroft
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper traces the meaning of technology in Arendt and Foucault’s work, their historical analyses of technology, and the way that their notions of technology’s role in modernity influence their historical methods. I argue that whilst the two political thinkers approach the idea of technology from different perspectives, there is also substantial overlap in the way that they conceive of technology – often critically – as a wide-ranging set of practices of power interlocked with particular modes of knowledge. This helps to properly situate some aspects of their work that converge, for instance their analyses of what Foucault calls ‘biopolitics’. But their different conceptions of the historical character of technology, and its relationship to modernity, also create divergence: their concepts of ‘technology’ suggest different ways of thinking through the nature of historical continuity and discontinuity and the degree of access that we have to meaningful histories.

Journal of the Philosophy of HistoryVol. 18(3)
University of Oxford (GB), Manchester College (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Philosophy, History, and Historiography
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.