[(Roland, 2010)] is a reference to a source that provides further information on the topic.
The document discusses the extent to which it aligns with the concept of Technological determinism. It mentions that the development of V2 Rockets, as discussed in Motivations of V2 Rocket Development, has similarities in direction. Therefore, it can serve as a reference.
During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union, two completely different “societies,” ended up developing similar nuclear weapons, which serves as evidence that technological progress is autonomous. It suggests that they could have competed with completely different types of weapons. Furthermore, the development of similar weapons led to similarities in the shape of society. The document mentions the concepts of “symmetry” and “proportionality,” indicating that if societies are different but similar, it means that there is only one path of progress.
The document argues that superpowers did not choose their weapons, but rather the weapons chose themselves. The strategy was shaped to suit the weapon, rather than the other way around. This aligns with the concept of technological determinism.
Technological determinism is criticized in the SHOT (Society for the History of Technology) community. It is seen as more rhetorical than substantive. The document suggests that instead of asking “Does technology drive history?” it is more appropriate to ask “Why do historical actors believe or argue that technology drives history?”
The document acknowledges that nothing is completely deterministic. All historians reject determinism, and rightly so. However, this does not mean that the discussion ends there. Technology often has a significant impact on the direction of history, so alternative concepts that have been proposed are discussed. The concept of the “technological imperative” is mentioned, which includes the idea that technology can be autonomous and progress independently. The author suggests using the terms “social force” and “directional force” to separate the two essential aspects of technological determinism.
#reference Log [(Roland, 2010)] - https://www.jstor.org/stable/40647108?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents