There are some extension thesis.
Aristotle said that "The idea that tells are extensions of soul and body(Body is the soul's matural too.)" We can give slave and the master for an example. With out soul, we can't move our body. The core of idea is that instruments extend the functions of the lobouring body.
Marx said that "It is a productions of Human industry" Such as railways, electric machines..
Kapp sees technology as a form of 'organ projection', by comparing human organ with technology. Such as, telegraphics=nerve system, railways=circulatory system.
Bergson said "If our organs are matural instruments, our instruments must then be artifical organs." For instance, a fake leg last much long than the real leg.
Well.. all of these are their point of view. I think they all are reasonable. They also studied more than me. But the reason why they have a different thoughts is that the environment surrounding them were different. That might brought up all those different ideas. My idea is a little close to Kapp's.
In environmental thesis, by this we can do lot more than that we can do. A good example for this is 'Robocop.' It can do many police works that real human police officers can't do.
In real world we can find out many things like this. Internet allows us to not be in like while we register some things in off-line. We can watch TV anywhere with the help of the cell phone.
There is anti-content thesis. This says "The medium is the message." This means that societies have always been shaped more by nature of the media by which men communicate than by content of communication.
I think this is very interesting point. Sould we focus the contents on the medium? Or should we focus medium on content?
Well.. I think it really depends on the situation. I think if the content is a reall good, we should focus on the contents and put the medium so that we can actualize the content. If the medium is so good(a well developed technology), we should think what kind of content we could put on.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기