View source for Technological utopianism

{{distinguish|Techno-progressivism|Techno-populism}}
{{short description|Any ideology based on the premise that advances in technology could bring a utopia}}
[[File:JPL Visions of the Future, Mars.jpg|thumb|A [[NASA]] poster about a fictional Mars tour. Technological advances in [[Human spaceflight|space travel]] is often a theme in utopias.]]
{{Utopia}}
'''Technological utopianism''' (often called '''techno-utopianism''' or '''technoutopianism''') is any [[ideology]] based on the premise that advances in science and technology could and should bring about a [[utopia]], or at least help to fulfill one or another utopian ideal.

A '''techno-utopia''' is therefore an ideal [[society]], in which laws, government, and social conditions are solely operating for the benefit and well-being of all its citizens, set in the near- or far-[[future]], as advanced science and technology will allow these ideal living standards to exist; for example, [[post-scarcity]], [[Trans-human|transformations in human nature]], the avoidance or prevention of suffering and even the [[immortality|end of death]]. 

Technological utopianism is often connected with other discourses presenting technologies as agents of social and cultural change, such as [[technological determinism]] or [[Imaginary (sociology)#Media imaginary|media imaginaries]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Natale|first1=Simone|last2=Balbi|first2=Gabriele|date=2014-04-03|title=Media and the Imaginary in History|journal=Media History|volume=20|issue=2|pages=203–218|doi=10.1080/13688804.2014.898904|s2cid=55924672|issn=1368-8804|url=https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/19467|hdl=2318/1769720|hdl-access=free}}</ref>

A tech-utopia does not disregard any problems that technology may cause,<ref>[[Segal, Howard P.]] Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology and The American Future, "The Technological Utopians", Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.</ref> but strongly believes that technology allows mankind to make social, economic, political, and cultural advancements.<ref>Rushkoff, Douglas. EME: Explorations in Media Ecology, “Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative”. Hampton Press, 2002, p. 41-57.</ref> Overall, Technological Utopianism views technology's impacts as extremely positive.

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, several ideologies and movements, such as the [[cyberdelic]] counterculture, the [[Californian Ideology]], [[cyber-utopianism]], [[transhumanism]],<ref name="Hughes 2003">{{cite journal| author = Hughes, James | title = Rediscovering Utopia | year=  2003 | url = http://archives.betterhumans.com/Columns/Column/tabid/79/Column/232/Default.aspx  | access-date=2007-02-07 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070927204653/http://archives.betterhumans.com/Columns/Column/tabid/79/Column/232/Default.aspx |archive-date = 2007-09-27 | author-link = James Hughes (sociologist)}}</ref> and [[singularitarianism]], have emerged promoting a form of techno-utopia as a reachable goal. The movement known as [[effective accelerationism]] (e/acc) even advocates for "progress at all costs".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chowdhury |first=Hasan |title=Get the lowdown on 'e/acc' — Silicon Valley's favorite obscure theory about progress at all costs, which has been embraced by Marc Andreessen |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-tech-leaders-accelerationism-eacc-twitter-profiles-2023-7 |access-date=2023-11-20 |website=Business Insider |language=en-US}}</ref> Cultural critic [[Imre Szeman]] argues technological utopianism is an irrational [[metanarrative|social narrative]] because there is no evidence to support it. He concludes that it shows the extent to which [[Modernity|modern]] societies place faith in [[Idea of Progress|narratives of progress and technology]] overcoming things, despite all evidence to the contrary.<ref name="sciencedaily.com">{{Cite news |title=People Generally Do Not Act on Information on the Effects of Oil on the Environment |date=May 28, 2010 |access-date=17 Nov 2010 |url=https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100528150833.htm |work=ScienceDaily}}</ref>

==History==

===From the 19th to mid-20th centuries===

[[Karl Marx]] believed that [[science]] and [[democracy]] were the right and left hands of what he called the move from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. He argued that advances in science helped delegitimize the rule of kings and the power of the [[Christian Church]].<ref name="Hughes 2004">{{cite book| author = Hughes, James | title = Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future | publisher = Westview Press | year = 2004 | isbn = 978-0-8133-4198-9 | author-link = James Hughes (sociologist)}}</ref>

19th-century [[Classical liberalism|liberals]], [[Socialism|socialists]], and [[Republicanism|republicans]] often embraced techno-utopianism. [[Radicalism (historical)|Radicals]] like [[Joseph Priestley]] pursued scientific investigation while advocating democracy. [[Robert Owen]], [[Charles Fourier]] and [[Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon|Henri de Saint-Simon]] in the early 19th century inspired communalists{{who?|date=May 2022}} with their visions of a future scientific and [[technological evolution]] of humanity using reason. Radicals seized on [[Darwinism|Darwinian evolution]] to validate the idea of [[social progress]]. [[Edward Bellamy]]’s [[Utopian socialism|socialist utopia]] in ''[[Looking Backward]]'', which inspired hundreds of socialist clubs in the late 19th century [[United States]] and a national political party, was as highly technological as Bellamy’s imagination. For Bellamy and the [[Fabian Society|Fabian Socialist]]s, socialism was to be brought about as a painless corollary of industrial development.<ref name="Hughes 2004"/>

Marx and [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]] saw more pain and conflict involved, but agreed about the inevitable end. [[Marxism|Marxists]] argued that the advance of technology laid the groundwork not only for the creation of a new society, with [[social ownership|different property relations]], but also for the emergence of new human beings reconnected to nature and themselves. At the top of the agenda for [[Empowerment|empowered]] [[proletarian]]s was "to increase the total [[productive forces]] as rapidly as possible". The 19th and early 20th century Left, from [[Social democracy|social democrats]] to [[Communism|communists]], were focused on [[industrialization]], [[economic development]] and the promotion of reason, science, and the idea of [[Progress (history)|progress]].<ref name="Hughes 2004"/>

Some technological utopians promoted [[eugenics]]. Holding that in studies of families, such as the [[The Jukes family|Jukes]] and [[Kallikaks]], science had proven that many traits such as criminality and alcoholism were hereditary, many advocated the sterilization of those displaying negative traits. Forcible sterilization programs were implemented in several states in the United States.<ref>Haller, Mark ''Eugenics: Hereditarian attitudes in American thought'' (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1963)</ref>

[[H.G. Wells]] in works such as ''[[The Shape of Things to Come]]'' promoted technological utopianism.

The horrors of the 20th century – namely Fascist and Communist dictatorships and the world wars – caused many to abandon optimism. The [[Holocaust]], as [[Theodor Adorno]] underlined, seemed to shatter the ideal of [[Condorcet]] and other thinkers of the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]], which commonly equated [[scientific progress]] with social progress.<ref name="Adorno1983">{{cite book|last=Adorno|first=Theodor W.|title=Prisms|url=https://archive.org/details/prisms0000ador|url-access=registration|access-date=31 March 2011|date=29 March 1983|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-51025-7|page=[https://archive.org/details/prisms0000ador/page/34 34]}}</ref>

===From late 20th and early 21st centuries===

{{quotation|The Goliath of totalitarianism will be brought down by the David of the microchip.<ref>{{Cite news |date=1989-06-14 |title=Reagan Gets A Red Carpet From British (Published 1989) |work=The New York Times |language=en |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/14/world/reagan-gets-a-red-carpet-from-british.html |access-date=2023-08-12 |last1=Rule |first1=Sheila }}</ref>|[[Ronald Reagan]]|14 June 1989}}

A movement of techno-utopianism began to flourish again in the [[dot-com company|dot-com]] culture of the 1990s, particularly in the West Coast of the United States, especially based around [[Silicon Valley]]. The [[Californian Ideology]] was a set of beliefs combining [[Bohemianism|bohemian]] and [[Anti-authoritarianism|anti-authoritarian]] attitudes from the [[counterculture of the 1960s]] with techno-utopianism and support for [[Libertarianism|libertarian]] economic policies. It was reflected in, reported on, and even actively promoted in the pages of ''[[Wired Magazine|Wired]]'' magazine, which was founded in San Francisco in 1993 and served for a number years as the "bible" of its adherents.<ref name="Borsook 1996">{{cite journal|author = Borsook, Paulina|author-link = Paulina Borsook|title = Cyberselfishness|year = 1996|url = https://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1996/07/borsook.html?welcome=true|access-date = 2007-02-06|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070929125249/https://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1996/07/borsook.html?welcome=true|archive-date = 2007-09-29}}</ref><ref name="Borsook 2000">{{cite book|author = Borsook, Paulina|title = Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech| publisher = PublicAffairs|year = 2000|isbn = 978-1-891620-78-2}}</ref><ref name="Barbrook and Cameron 2000">{{cite journal|author1=Barbrook, Richard |author2=Cameron, Andy |title = The California Ideology|year = 2000 |url = http://www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/theory-californianideology.html| access-date=2007-02-06}}</ref>

This form of techno-utopianism reflected a belief that technological change revolutionizes human affairs, and that digital technology in particular – of which the [[Internet]] was but a modest harbinger – would increase personal freedom by freeing the individual from the rigid embrace of bureaucratic big government. "Self-empowered knowledge workers" would render traditional hierarchies redundant; digital communications would allow them to escape the modern city, an "obsolete remnant of the [[industrial age]]".<ref name="Borsook 1996"/><ref name="Borsook 2000"/><ref name="Barbrook and Cameron 2000"/>

Similar forms of "digital utopianism" has often entered in the political messages of party and social movements that point to the [[World Wide Web|Web]] or more broadly to [[new media]] as harbingers of political and social change.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Natale|first1=Simone|last2=Ballatore|first2=Andrea|date=2014-01-01|title=The web will kill them all: new media, digital utopia, and political struggle in the Italian 5-Star Movement|journal=Media, Culture & Society|language=en|volume=36|issue=1|pages=105–121|doi=10.1177/0163443713511902|s2cid=73517559|issn=0163-4437|url=https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/14858/1/2014-Natale_and_Ballatore-The_Web_will_kill_them_all.pdf}}</ref> Its adherents claim it transcended conventional "[[Left–right politics|right/left]]" distinctions in [[politics]] by rendering politics obsolete. However, techno-utopianism disproportionately attracted adherents from the [[Right-libertarianism|libertarian right]] end of the political spectrum. Therefore, techno-utopians often have a [[Economic liberalism|hostility toward government regulation]] and a belief in the superiority of the [[free market]] system. Prominent "[[oracles]]" of techno-utopianism included [[George Gilder]] and [[Kevin Kelly (editor)|Kevin Kelly]], an editor of ''Wired'' who also published several books.<ref name="Borsook 1996"/><ref name="Borsook 2000"/><ref name="Barbrook and Cameron 2000"/>

During the late 1990s dot-com boom, when the [[Dot-com bubble|speculative bubble]] gave rise to claims that an era of "permanent prosperity" had arrived, techno-utopianism flourished, typically among the small percentage of the population who were employees of Internet [[Startup company|startups]] and/or owned large quantities of high-tech stocks. With the subsequent [[Stock market crash|crash]], many of these dot-com techno-utopians had to rein in some of their beliefs in the face of the clear return of traditional economic reality.<ref name="Borsook 2000"/><ref name="Barbrook and Cameron 2000"/>

According to ''[[The Economist]]'', [[Wikipedia]] "has its roots in the [[techno-optimism]] that characterised the internet at the end of the 20th century. It held that ordinary people could use their computers as tools for liberation, education, and enlightenment."<ref>{{Cite news |date=9 January 2021 |title=Wikipedia is 20, and its reputation has never been higher |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/international/2021/01/09/wikipedia-is-20-and-its-reputation-has-never-been-higher |url-status=live |access-date=29 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221231224550/https://www.economist.com/international/2021/01/09/wikipedia-is-20-and-its-reputation-has-never-been-higher |archive-date=31 December 2022 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref>

In the late 1990s and especially during the first decade of the 21st century, [[technorealism]] and [[techno-progressivism]] are stances that have risen among advocates of [[technological change]] as critical alternatives to techno-utopianism.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://technorealism.org/|title=TECHNOREALISM|website=technorealism.org}}</ref>{{primary inline|date=September 2022}}<ref name="Carrico 2005">{{cite web|    author = Carrico, Dale|    title =  Technoprogressivism Beyond Technophilia and Technophobia|    year = 2005 |   url = http://amormundi.blogspot.com/2005/06/technoprogressivism-beyond.html| access-date=2007-01-28|    author-link = Dale Carrico}}</ref>{{SPS|date=September 2022}} However, technological utopianism persists in the 21st century as a result of new technological developments and their impact on society. For example, several [[Technical journalism|technical journalists]] and social commentators, such as [[Mark Pesce]], have interpreted the [[WikiLeaks]] phenomenon and the [[United States diplomatic cables leak]] in early December 2010 as a precursor to, or an incentive for, the creation of a techno-utopian [[Freedom of information laws by country|transparent society]].<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/42148.html |title=The state, the press and a hyperdemocracy |work=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |author=Mark Pesce |date=December 13, 2010}}</ref> [[Cyber-utopianism]], first coined by [[Evgeny Morozov]], is another manifestation of this, in particular in relation to the [[Internet]] and [[social networking]].

==Principles==
Bernard Gendron, a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, defines the four principles of modern technological utopians in the late 20th and early 21st centuries as follows:<ref name="Gendron 1977">{{cite book|    author = Gendron, Bernard|     title = Technology and the Human Condition| publisher = St.Martin's Press|      year = 1977|        isbn = 978-0-312-78890-2}}</ref>

#We are presently undergoing a ([[post-industrial]]) revolution in technology;
#In the post-industrial age, [[technological change|technological growth]] will be sustained (at least);
#In the post-industrial age, technological growth will lead to the [[post scarcity|end of economic scarcity]];
#The elimination of economic scarcity will lead to the elimination of every major [[social issues|social evil]].

Rushkoff presents us with multiple claims that surround the basic principles of Technological Utopianism:<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rushkoff|first1=Douglas|title=Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative|journal=Explorations in Media Ecology|date=2002|volume=1|issue=1|pages=21–32|doi=10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1}}</ref>

#'''Technology reflects and encourages the best aspects of human nature''', fostering “communication, collaboration, sharing, helpfulness, and community.”<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite journal|last1=Rushkoff|first1=Douglas|title=Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative|journal=Explorations in Media Ecology|date=2002|volume=1|issue=1|page=26|doi=10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1}}</ref>
#'''Technology improves our interpersonal communication, relationships, and communities.''' Early Internet users shared their knowledge of the Internet with others around them.
#'''Technology democratizes society.''' The expansion of access to knowledge and skills led to the connection of people and information. The broadening of freedom of expression created “the online world...in which we are allowed to voice our own opinions.”<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rushkoff|first1=Douglas|title=Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative|journal=Explorations in Media Ecology|date=2002|volume=1|issue=1|page=24|doi=10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1}}</ref> The reduction of the inequalities of power and wealth meant that everyone has an equal status on the internet and is allowed to do as much as the next person.
#'''Technology inevitably progresses.''' The interactivity that came from the inventions of the TV [[remote control]], video game [[joystick]], [[computer mouse]] and [[computer keyboard]] allowed for much more progress.
#'''Unforeseen impacts of technology are positive.''' As more people discovered the Internet, they took advantage of being linked to millions of people, and turned the Internet into a social revolution. The government released it to the public, and its “social side effect… [became] its main feature.”<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
#'''Technology increases efficiency and [[consumer choice]].''' The creation of the TV remote, video game joystick, and computer mouse liberated these technologies and allowed users to manipulate and control them, giving them many more choices.
#'''New technology can solve the problems created by old technology.''' Social networks and blogs were created out of the collapse of [[dot.com bubble]] businesses’ attempts to run pyramid schemes on users.

==Criticisms==
Critics claim that techno-utopianism's identification of [[social progress]] with [[scientific progress]] is a form of [[positivism]] and [[scientism]]. Critics of modern libertarian techno-utopianism point out that it tends to focus on "government interference" while dismissing the positive effects of the [[regulation]] of [[business]]. They also point out that it has little to say about the [[environmental impact of technology]]<ref name=Huesemann2011>Huesemann, Michael H., and Joyce A. Huesemann (2011). [http://www.newtechnologyandsociety.org ''Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment''], New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada, {{ISBN|0865717044}}, 464 pp.</ref> and that its ideas have little relevance for much of the rest of the world that are still relatively quite poor (see [[global digital divide]]).<ref name="Borsook 1996"/><ref name="Borsook 2000"/><ref name="Barbrook and Cameron 2000"/>

In his 2010 study ''System Failure: Oil, Futurity, and the Anticipation of Disaster'', [[Canada Research Chair]]holder in cultural studies [[Imre Szeman]] argues that technological utopianism is one of the social narratives that prevent people from acting on the knowledge they have concerning the [[environmental issues with petroleum|effects of oil on the environment]].<ref name="sciencedaily.com"/>

Other critics of a techno-utopia include the worry of the human element. Critics suggest that a techno-utopia may lessen human contact, leading to a distant society.

Another concern is the amount of reliance society may place on their technologies in these techno-utopia settings.<ref name=Huesemann2011/> For example, In a controversial 2011 article "Techno-Utopians are Mugged by Reality", L. Gordon Crovitz of ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' explored the concept of the violation of free speech by shutting down social media to stop violence. As a result of [[2011 England riots|a wave of British cities being looted]], former British Prime Minister [[David Cameron]] argued that the government should have the ability to shut down social media during crime sprees so that the situation could be contained. A poll was conducted to see if Twitter users would prefer to let the service be closed temporarily or keep it open so they could chat about the famous television show [[The X Factor (British TV series)|''The X-Factor'']]. The end report showed that every respondent opted for ''The X-Factor'' discussion. Clovitz contends that the negative social effect of technological utopia is that society is so addicted to technology that humanity simply cannot be parted from it even for the greater good. While many techno-utopians would like to believe that digital technology is for the greater good, he says it can also be used negatively to bring harm to the public.<ref>{{cite web |last=Crovitz |first=L. Gordon |date=August 15, 2011 |url=  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903918104576506393735675856.html#articleTabs%3Darticle |title=Techno-Utopians Are Mugged by Reality |work=Wall Street Journal }}</ref> These two criticisms are sometimes referred to as a technological anti-utopian view or a techno-dystopia.

According to Ronald Adler and Russell Proctor, mediated communication such as phone calls, instant messaging and text messaging are steps towards a utopian world in which one can easily contact another regardless of time or location. However, mediated communication removes many aspects that are helpful in transferring messages. As it stands {{as of|lc=y|2022}}, most text, email, and instant messages offer fewer nonverbal cues about the speaker's feelings than do face-to-face encounters.<ref>{{cite book|last=Adler & Proctor II|first=Ronald B. & Russell F.|title=Looking Out Looking In|year=2011|publisher=Wadsworth Cengage Learning|location=Boston, MA|isbn=978-0-495-79621-3|pages=203}}</ref> This makes it so that mediated communication can easily be misconstrued and the intended message is not properly conveyed. With the absence of tone, body language, and environmental context, the chance of a misunderstanding is much higher, rendering the communication ineffective. In fact, mediated technology can be seen from a dystopian view because it can be detrimental to effective interpersonal communication. These criticisms would only apply to messages that are prone to misinterpretation as not every text based communication requires contextual cues. The limitations of lacking tone and body language in text-based communication could potentially be mitigated by [[videotelephony|video]] and [[augmented reality]] versions of digital communication technologies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tcworld.info/e-magazine/technical-communication/article/augmented-reality-in-technical-communication/|title=tcworld.info - technical communication|website=www.tcworld.info}}</ref>{{Dubious|date=June 2021}}{{Dead link|date=April 2022}}

In 2019, philosopher [[Nick Bostrom]] introduced the notion of a ''vulnerable world'', "one in which there is some level of technological development at which civilization almost certainly gets devastated by default", citing the risks of a [[pandemic]] caused by a [[Do-it-yourself biology|DIY biohacker]], or an [[arms race]] triggered by the development of novel armaments.<ref name="Bostrom 2019">{{Cite journal |last=Bostrom |first=Nick |date=2019-09-06 |title=The Vulnerable World Hypothesis |journal=Global Policy |language=en |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=455–476 |doi=10.1111/1758-5899.12718 |s2cid=203169705 |issn=1758-5880|doi-access=free }}</ref> He writes that "Technology policy should not unquestioningly assume that all technological progress is beneficial, or that complete scientific openness is always best, or that the world has the capacity to manage any potential downside of a technology after it is invented."<ref name="Bostrom 2019" />

==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=22em}}
*[[Accelerationism]]
*[[Creative disruption]]
*[[Crypto-anarchism]]
*[[Eschatology]]
*[[Extropianism]]
*[[Historicism]]
*[[Immanentize the eschaton]]
*[[Luddite]]
*[[Millennialism]]
*[[Nanosocialism]]
*[[Neo-Luddism]]
*[[Post scarcity]]
*[[Singularitarianism]]
*''[[Star Trek]]''
*[[Techno-progressivism]]
*[[Technocentrism]]
*[[Technogaianism]]
*[[Technocracy]]
*[[Technological dystopia]]
*[[Technological singularity]]
*[[Technological supremacy]]
*[[Technophilia]]
*[[Technorealism]]
*[[Towards a New Socialism]]
*[[Transhumanism]]
*[[Yellow socialism]]
*[[Jacque Fresco]]
{{div col end}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
* Dickel, Sascha, and Schrape, Jan-Felix (2017): ''[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313178460_The_Logic_of_Digital_Utopianism The Logic of Digital Utopianism]''. Nano Ethics
*Huesemann, Michael H., and Joyce A. Huesemann (2011). [http://www.newtechnologyandsociety.org ''Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment''], New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada, {{ISBN|0865717044}}, 464 pp.
* Segal, Howard P. ''Technological Utopianism in American Culture.'' Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1985. ({{ISBN|9780226744360}})
* Segal, Howard P. ''Technological Utopianism in American Culture: Twentieth Anniversary Edition.'' Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.  ({{ISBN|0-8156-3061-1}}) ([http://www.syracuseuniversitypress.syr.edu/fall-2005-catalog/technological-utopianism.html Syracuse UP catalog page])

{{Spoken Wikipedia|En-Technological_utopianism-article.ogg|date=2018-11-03}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Technological Utopianism}}
[[Category:Technological utopianism| ]]
[[Category:Ideologies]]