Course Name: Philosophy of Technology

Summer 2022
Module 2: May 25
Lecture Notes: Albert Borgmann and the Device Paradigm

Albert Borgmann is a German-born American philosopher, specializing in the philosophy of

technology. He was born in Freiburg, Germany, and is a professor of philosophy at the
University of Montana. In 2013 Borgmann received the Golden Eurydice Award. [Courtesy
Wikipedia]

Borgmann’s essay is going to prove challenging, though we are already beginning to develop
the tools necessary to begin to make sense of it. Let’s keep in mind several important points
about reading.

First and most importantly, we don’t need to understand everything–and we won’t. In this essay,
for instance, Borgmann refers to Martin Heidegger and his critique of modern technology. Now
Heidegger wrote a very influential essay on modern technology [The Question Concerning
Technology] that has influenced a lot of philosophers of technology, including Borgmann. But
since we haven’t read Heidegger, those passages are going to be a bit mysterious. That’s okay.
Just go with it and we’ll discuss some of how Borgmann uses Heidegger in class.

Second, we’ve seen that it can be helpful to focus on some of the less abstract parts of these
harder to understand essays, on the concrete examples that an author introduces for instance.
And Borgmann introduces a series of concrete examples: the wood-burning stove, jogging, the
culture of the table [that is, sitting down with family and friends around a table to enjoy a home
cooked meal]. Think about these examples as you encounter them in Borgmann’s essay. What
seems distinctive about them? What do they share? Why does he find them so attractive? Here
too it might be helpful to think about your own experiences. In fact, at one point in time [p. 8]
Borgmann says he prefers to draw on “practical people” rather than philosophers. How does
your family manage dinner time? Did your parents insist on family meals together? Reflecting on
concrete examples is something Borgmann insists on doing and it can be helpful to
understanding what he’s getting at.
Finally, we should remember to employ some easy [or at least relatively easy] reading
techniques when trying to decipher difficult readings. We saw in the case of Hans Jonas’ essay
that focusing on the contrast between ancient and modern technology was a relatively easy way
to organize our understanding of his essay. The same technique can be applied to Borgmann.
Right at the beginning of his essay, he introduces a distinction between THINGS and DEVICES
and one of our key goals in thinking through this essay is to come to understand this distinction.
So as you read, try and identify some of the key differences between things and devices.

Borgmann is interested in describing our technological pattern of culture–the kind of culture we

are all living in owing to modern technology. As he notes in an interview: “Computers, television
and cars are all part of technology. But technological items and procedures coalesce into a
culture, a way of life, and that’s what I’m interested in as a philosopher.” What is the way of life
defined by modern technology? This is what Borgmann calls the device paradigm. If we want to
understand the pattern of our culture, shaped as it is by technology, then we need to understand
the device paradigm. On pages 1 - 3 of the reading, this is what Borgmann is trying to describe.
He does so through the contrast between a wood-burning stove and a central heating system.
This is the distinction between things [the wood-burning stove] and devices [the heating
system].

Borgmann further develops this distinction by describing the fireplace or hearth as a focal thing.
In what respect is the hearth or the kitchen table a focal thing? What do you think makes it a
focal thing? As you read the section on focal things and practices, try and pick out the key
features of focal things and practices. We’ve already talked about one example: the difference
between playing a musical instrument and playing Spotify. How do they differ? Why might
Borgmann suggest that one is a focal practice and the other is a device? It’s in this context that
Borgmann draws on Heidegger, but we can pay more attention to his discussion of jogging and
the culture of the table. What’s distinctive about playing a musical instrument, jogging, the
culture of the table that seems to be missing from the device paradigm?

In the latter pages of the essay, Borgmann spends some time emphasizing engaging in a
practice. Why do you think he emphasizes engaging in a practice? What is it about a practice
that might be important? Notice the phrase on page 15: “We can now summarize…” Paying
attention to these phrases can help us navigate these complex arguments. There might be a
connection here to Carr’s worries about Google. What skills do we lose by always turning to
Google? Or to social media. What social practices have we lost [and maybe gained?] through
our reliance on social media?

The last thing we might think about as we read is how to bring Borgmann into conversation with
some of the other figures we have been reading and discussing. I wonder, for instance, whether
he would agree with Nye or Ellul more in regard to the autonomy of technology and whether
technology is controlling us. Keep that in mind as you read Borgmann.