Listening to: Morning after - Howie Day

The Communicative Affordances of Technological Artefacts - I. Hutchby (2001)

Q Hutchby says in his article that he tries not to 'assume that an era of "technologized interaction" is already upon us. However, this is a very interesting question to ask ourselves. Are we already living in a world that is shaped by technologized communications?

A Obviously this is true; it's virtually impossible for inhabitant of Western society to function properly in this community without the use of communication technologies. Still we shouldn't jump the gun here and assume that our whole way of life is based on these technologies. Although the Internet has become a very much present and useful way of communicating with people it is clear that we need more than that. Face-to-face communication still plays an important part in our social interactions. Just look at the hundreds of thousands of people that took to the streets last Saturday to celebrate Queen's Day. We need other people and we need to be around other people, not just a computer screen and a fast modem connection.

Q Hutchby asks his reader whether the actor-network theory is the way to go. What are my feelings about this theory?

A I have serious doubts about using this particular theory. Because everything (people and material goods alike) can been seen as an actor in a particular process humans are reduced to being a cog in the machine. Shouldn't the basis of all science be the need for insight into the real world around us, making human beings the starting point of this exploration?

Q The last question that came to mind after reading this article was the following: Is the reality of artefacts something that imposes itself on the passive human user?

A This is a very difficult question to answer. Hutchby cleverly avoids having to answer at all by saying: 'It is none of these things' (page 33). He utilises the concept of affordances to circumvent the question in its entirety. This doesn't change much about the fact that it is an interesting discussion subject. Is the way we see things decided for by our own perception of the world or by the intrinsic properties of the world around us? Unfortunately I don't have an answer either. I think it must lie somewhere between the two extremes I have just mentioned. Further philosophical research into this subject will be needed.