In my thesis, I will focus on the problem of technology, from an existential perspective. What this
means is that my goal is to explore how we relate to technology, what kind of sentiments are part
of our use of technology and how technology enframes our daily lives. In the first part I analyze
Kierkegaard's thinking, as expressed in his magnus opus Either/Or. Thinking and acting in terms of
either/or, which I call binary, define not only the digital world, but also the entire frame in which we
exist in our modern world. Everywhere, we are called upon to choose between this or that, which
seems to be part of an authentic choice, but not really. Inside the dogma of either/or, Kierkegaard
says, choosing is not real choosing. In his view, we should repent for thinking that our false choices
were real at any point. The only choice to make is the choice to open our eyes to the fact that our
choices in terms of either this or that are always unauthentic choices. One needs religion in order to
be able to recognize that one is wrong at all times.
The second part of my thesis is the bridge between Kierkegaard and Heidegger using
Nietzsche. Nietzsche, the final metaphysician, is important because of his extreme suspicion of
reductionist and oppressive thinking within previous philosophies and religion. His suspicious
philosophy enables us to understand the problem of technology better. It opens up Kierkegaard’s
either/or and adds something else to it: the Dionysian, the concept of an inherent chaos, madness
and ecstasy, which does not fit within the logic of either/or. Considering the problem of
technology, the Dionysian seems to be the anti-technology.
I then analyze Heidegger's critique on Nietzsche in the final part of my thesis. However
highly Heidegger regards Nietzsche, he still concludes that Nietzsche does not really transcend the
either/or question, a question which Heidegger sees as unoriginal because of its metaphysical
tendencies. I continue by revealing Heidegger's own concept of technological enframing, which he
discovers because of his research on truth (alètheia). Heidegger redefines truth as the aesthetic
concept of craftmanship, which appears to be an alternative to technological enframing.
As a conclusion, I will summarize and combine Kierkegaard's and Nietzsche's contributions
to achieve a more complete understanding of the concept of enframing. I conclude with the
statement that the much heralded scientific progress and development of our time is a tendency
which can never truly be ground-breaking, revolutionary, or new, however much it claims to be just
that. Rather, paradoxically, the ground-breaking effect can only be found in repenting for our
content-based technological extremism by relating to the old, to the “prehistoric” darkness, of
what Nietzsche calls the Dionysian. Naturally, this does not mean the destruction of a
technological sub-culture. Yet, the Dionysian “prehistoric” darkness finally puts technology in its
place: a place in the periphery of life.
| Date of Award | 1 Jan 2011 |
|---|
| Original language | American English |
|---|
| Supervisor | F. Suárez Müller (Supervisor) & R. G. A. Kaulingfreks (Supervisor) |
|---|