The philosophy of technology is horrible.

From “Noumenal Technology: Reflections on the Incredible Tininess of Nano“, Alfred Nordmann (Techne, 2005)

The “noumenal technology” referred to in the title of this paper would therefore appear to be a contradiction in terms: Technology is a human creation that involves human knowledge and serves human needs; this firmly roots it in phenomena and it appears absurd to speak of technology that exists beyond human perception and experience among the things-in-themselves. The noumenal world is nature uncomprehended, unexperienced, and uncontrolled; it is nature in the sense of uncultivated, uncanny otherness. By speaking of “noumenal technology” this paper argues that some technologies are retreating from human access, perception, and control, and thus assume the character of this uncanny otherness.

So technology is not even a thing-in-itself. Technology is simply there-for-us.

Nordmann goes on to say that increasingly noumenal technology (ie, nanotech) is a bad thing because it threatens our control over the technology.

Technological interventions, like the nano-guitar, might be operating in the background, unknown and unknowable to us. They therefore do not become objects of experience—and what is no object of experience remains unrepresented and does not prompt the formation of a conceptual image of its working. To the extent that they remain in the unconsidered and unconceptualized background of our actions and lives, these technologies are much like brute and uncomprehended nature—instead of knowing them, we merely know of them. Their looming presence and potential efficacy does not appear as an extension of our freedom or our will, but as a mere constraint, even perhaps as a threat. Where technical and intellectual control come apart, the humanly induced workings of technology no longer signify mastery of nature but take on the character of nature itself.

LOOMING PRESENCE.

Its plain silly to think that technology is or has ever simply been there ‘to serve our needs’, or represents our ‘mastery of nature’. You don’t need to look at nano-guitars to spot the general, widespread ignorance of the details of the technology that already surrounds every aspect of their lives. We are no more in control of cell phone technology than we are over the POTENTIAL THREAT FROM NANOBOTS.

Nordmann’s point is simple enough without bringing in Kantian metaphysics or luddism straight out of a robot rebellion movie. If technology is everything ‘there-for-us’, then the technology that is not available for us is simply no longer technology. It doesn’t serve our needs as an ‘extension of our will’. It just does shit to us, like the rain or the wind or any other part of nature.

My point is even simpler. Technology has always just done shit to us.. Technology changes us in ways that we never forecast or expect, and consequently human history is written in terms of its technology (Bronze Age, Industrial Age, Information Age, etc).

Technology doesn’t suddenly become dangerous because we can’t control it, or because it exists outside the purview of the human mind. Technology is dangerous when it does dangerous things, whether or not those things are under our control, or to serve our needs.

CODA:

From The Matrix Revolutions interpretation by hermeneutic mastermind Wikipedia:

Whether [Smith’s] destruction is caused by the same anomaly that created the One or by will of the machines using Neo as a link between them and Smith is not clear, but by either result both Smith and Neo are removed from the Matrix, resulting in a stable balance. Furthermore, the Architect’s decision to allow freedom within the Matrix, those who accept it live in it, those who don’t can leave if they choose, means that the function of the One is obsolete, as everyone has the power to choose their own fate.