Category: Determinism

The Argument from Determinism Against Free Will

Determinism is the argument that denies the freedom of will and choice. The key idea behind this notion is that “everything that’s happening now and that will happen in the future was already guaranteed to happen by things that happened in the distant past.”

Namely, it states that events of the past and the laws of nature cause a unique future. In this paper, I intend to display the drawbacks of this argument. In the first section, I am going to present the argument and the reasoning and motivation behind it. Section 2 will be devoted to the criticism of a determinist point of view. In part 3, I will question my arguments and discuss the possible responses that may arise to my statements from section 2.

Determinism claims that all current and future conditions of the entire universe are “physically necessitated by the states of the universe in the distant past.” The events that determine our present activity might have happened before we were born, so we could not influence them.

In other words, there is only one possible course of action that the events can take, and humans cannot make choices that are not predetermined. Determinists believe that even when people feel that they are making choices, there is only one way how events can evolve. According to this point of view, people do what they do because of who they are, and they cannot influence their character.

The determinist argument against free will begins from the statement that determinism is true and concludes that if it is so, then not a single one of our actions is performed freely. Breaking up the determinist argument into logical elements, we have the following premises and conclusions:

• (D1) Determinism is true.
• (D2) If it is true, then all our actions are predetermined, and we cannot act otherwise.
• (D3) If we cannot choose another course of action, none of our actions is free.
• (D4) So, we are not free.

The premise D1 can be explained by the example of calculating how physical objects will move knowing the present situation and applying the laws of physics to it. According to D2, for any act a person has done, they could not have decided to do anything else. D3 comes from the assumption that for acting freely, we need to have alternatives to choose from. So, even if it seemed to you that there was a choice, you could not have chosen anything else because of who you are, and in this case, your actions are not free.

Criticism of Determinism

An objection to determinism as the argument against free will may focus on either D1, denying that determinism is true, or on D2 and D3, denying its connection to free will. In this section, I will argue against D1, focusing on its universalism. First of all, we should consider the randomness of the universe proved by the laws of physics. However, it will not be supportive of the objection as random events are neither determined nor free. The conclusion about the actions being caused by previous events and laws of nature is logical and undeniable. Nevertheless, I would argue against the universal applicability of determinism.

The motivation of the determinist argument is the example of the game of pool. Knowing the information about the positioning of balls, their weight, and the speed of the cue ball, we can calculate whether the ball it strikes will hit the pocket. However, this example does not account for the player’s decision on how to strike the ball. Determinism is true when concerning the physical world, but it cannot be applied to human mental actions. They are not subject to physical laws, neither they are random. The idea is that “physical states of the universe… don’t physically necessitate present and future nonphysical states of the universe.”

Most of our decisions are indeed motivated by the events of the past that formed our character, but this fact cannot justify absolute determinism. There is no proof that determining events leave us with no choice at all. They limit the number of options, but it does not mean that they force us to have only one of them.

We often choose from several alternative possibilities, and our choice can sometimes be unpredictable and creative. The creativity that happens in our minds is another factor that rejects absolute determinism. This process is also influenced by inherited features, education, and the environment, but these factors do not justify the limitation of options to one. The human will can decide the course of action choosing from the variants provided by previous experience and determining events of the past.

A Response to Criticism

In the third section of my paper, I will focus on two possible objections that determinism defenders might use to respond to my arguments. The first response is about the actions our physical bodies perform, and the second is based on the factors that form our mentality. Determinists assume that our physical bodies are acting exclusively within the borders of the physical universe, so they are subject to physical laws.

The problem of this argument is that it does not include the mental decision behind these actions. Determinists prefer to look at the game of pool the moment after the ball was struck, and then they see only one possible course of action. If they had decided to look at the situation a couple of seconds earlier, they would see the player who would be considering several options. Each of his decisions would have a different effect on the ball’s trajectory. Thus, I conclude that our physical manifestation of actions depends on our mental decisions, which are free.

Another objection that determinists may raise is that our mental actions are also determined. Their belief implies that the traits of our character determine our decisions, and these features are formed by the number of factors over which we have no control. Namely, they rely on the impact of inhabited traits and the influence of environment and education. However, it is too bold to assume these factors as the only ones that contribute to personality development.

Psychologists have not proved the existence of the soul or other mental forces, but they claim that heredity and external factors are not the only ones. So, the decisions we take may have different contributing factors, such as inner creativity. In general, the defenders of determinism try to operate by the laws applicable to the physical world and transfer them to non-physical entities, and this is the moment where their argumentation fails.

Bibliography

Korman, Daniel Z. Learning from Arguments: An Introduction to Philosophy, 2019.

Introduction

Philosophy of freedom has been explored extensively in the past. Consequently, theorists have come up with different philosophical ideas to explain the occurrence of events. Additionally, theorists have tried to explain human actions and desires. Determinism is usually compared to casualty. On the other hand, compatibilism is commonly weighed against free will. Additionally, libertarianism is often judged against privileges. This paper will try to define determinism, compatibilism, and libertarianism. Furthermore, the paper will compare and contrast the mentioned philosophical positions. Moreover, it will examine the strengths and weaknesses of the positions. Consequently, the paper will decide on the best position (Bratman 14).

Determinism

Determinism refers to the philosophical thinking that antecedent events determine human actions and decisions, as well as human affairs. Determinism is different from determination or pre-determinism. Deterministic events have been found to arise from overlapping or diverse considerations and motives. At times determinism refers to causality. In this regard, it refers to a cause-and-effect phenomenon, a philosophy in physics. The cause-and-effect phenomenon states that events within a specified pattern are guarded by causality, such that any occurrence is influenced by prior situations. In essence, determinism argues that preceding incidences, which may extend back to the creation of the cosmos, have an unbroken chain that links the events (Zimmerman 221).

Compatibilism

Compatibilism is sometimes known as soft determinism. Essentially, compatibilists argue that determinism is right. Additionally, the position implies that every incident is caused. Moreover, it shows that the concept of free will exists. In general, compatibilists argue that events can be both free and caused. Influential philosophers like Daniel Dennett, among others, have advocated for compatibilism. According to Hobbes, individuals’ voluntary deeds are usually the same. However, their people’s actions transpire due to a chain of past events, which can be traced back to the creation of the space. In essence, freedom comes from one’s free will, while limitations are compelled.

Libertarianism

Libertarianism refers to a state of free will. This philosophical thought comes from the word liberty, which is also known as autonomy or sovereignty. Libertarians suggest that people should be left to decide their own fate in whatever they undertake. In essence, libertarianism posits that individuals ought to be allowed to move with their lives as they desire. Libertarianism is a political philosophy that tries to affirm one’s right to liberty. Libertarianism also works to protect an individual’s right to holdings. Essentially, this philosophical thought emphasizes the basics of moral principles. Libertarians also emphasize toleration, justice, and prosperity among individuals. Furthermore, libertarianism works to encourage responsibility, peace, and co-operation.

Similarities

Compatibilism is closely linked to causal determinism in that it agrees with the fact that past events affect future events. The difference only exists when compatibilism posits that people also act as free agents, who are morally responsible. In essence, compatibilism can also be considered as a soft determinism. In essence, for proponents of compatibilism, the fact that human actions are coerced by previous events does not nullify the idea that individuals have choices. In general, deterministic theories postulate that every event must have a cause, which is also similar to compatibility belief that determinism is true (SEP 1).

Differences

While determinism implies that past events define future events (if the laws of nature are fixed), libertarianism implies that past events do not necessarily define future events (even if laws of nature remain constant). This happens because libertarianism holds that people’s decisions or actions come from a free will, and the decisions are not controlled by past events. On the other hand, people’s decisions or actions are coerced by past events indeterminism. It is also necessary to note that incompatibilism, there is a probability of past events affecting future events, although this can also be influenced by the free will.

Compatibilism cannot be assumed as a compromise between determinism and libertarianism. It should be noted that determinism rebuffs the notion of free will. On the other hand, libertarianism posits that people have free will. Additionally, libertarianism rebuffs compatibilism, since it does not advocate for determinism, which is also entailed incompatibilism. This philosophical thought is sometimes called soft determinism, since it agrees with determinism, although it adds that people also act freely. However, it should be noted that compatibilism does not combine with deterministic or libertarian positions. In essence, compatibilism is closely linked to determinism since the latter reinforces the former; however, compatibilism is not closely linked to libertarianism (Arpaly 25).

Strengths

Libertarianism has an advantage in that it enables people to become morally responsible for their actions since they have the free will to decide on their activities. Libertarianism brings about a competitive system, which depends on the choices made by individuals in a society. Moreover, liberty provides freedom and rights for people in a society. Furthermore, libertarianism protects people from the unwarranted force from the government.

Determinism aids people in appreciating the law of nature. Additionally, determinism assists people to understand their environment. Furthermore, determinism eases one’s ability to promote and appreciate the gift of life. Determinism also encourages people to respect each other. In essence, determinism teaches people not to envy, or not to despise, among others. In general, determinism emphasizes the need to appreciate the natural world and fortune.

Compatibilism frees people from arcane scientific theories. In essence, people are not locked to determinism only but also to the fact that people have a free will. Compatibilism attributes moral responsibility in people irrespective of their knowledge of determinism. Compatibilism tries to explain human actions even when past events are not taken into consideration. Additionally, compatibilism tries to explain occurrences, which are complex with determinism.

Weaknesses

Based on the belief of libertarians, it is within one’s power to believe or not. However, it should be noted that there are reasons that make people decide on a particular issue and not on another. For instance, Christians think that they cannot believe the gospel wholly without the help of the Holy Spirit. Clearly, a man does not have a free will as pointed above, there has to be someone or something influencing his/her actions. Additionally, libertarians’ affirmations of a causeless choice are quite weak, since everything seems to happen with a reason. For instance, one decides to eat when he/she is hungry. Additionally, one can run to the office when he/she is late.

Although determinism encourages appreciation of nature, it also promotes irresponsible behavior. For instance, criminal acts caused by previous events in one’s life can be blamed on such causalities. In this regard, the individual cannot be blamed. This makes the individual irresponsible. Additionally, determinism can undermine the justification for penalties.

Compatibilism presents a complex situation in explaining causal determinism and free will. For instance, determinism posits that one’s choices are determined by past events (when laws of nature remain unchanged). From this argument, when one chooses something different, then the laws of nature must change. In this regard, determinism is incompatible with the free will. It, therefore, becomes difficult for the two to be utilized by an individual.

The position is chosen: Libertarianism

Based on the arguments above, it is clear that determinism is logical. However, libertarianism appeals since it give liberty to people such that they work within their free will. When the concept of physical is taken into account, the laws of the universe are followed in principle. However, it is interesting to note that some laws of the universe have been defined in religious terms; for instance, Jesus walked on water. In this regard, it is only possible to choose libertarianism as the best option since it gives people the opportunity to explore their choices irrespective of past events. Libertarianism offers people an opportunity to be responsible for their behaviors. Additionally, libertarianism enables people to come up with a competitive society, in which people exercise their roles according to their ability and will (Chaffee 44).

Conclusion

A number of philosophical ideas have sprung up over the past. These include compatibilism, determinism, and libertarianism, among others. However, the three named philosophical positions have raised several debates around the world. Determinism posits that each incident must have a cause. On the other hand, libertarianism posits that people have the free will to do whatever they want whenever they wish. Additionally, compatibilism posits that determinism is true, although people have choices. Based on the strengths and weakness of the philosophical positions, libertarianism presents the best offer for freedom, as well as a moral responsibility.

Works Cited

Arpaly, Nomy. Merit, Meaning, and Human Bondage, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2006.

Bratman, Michael. Structures of Agency, New York: Oxford, 2007.

Chaffee, John. The Philosopher’s Way: A Text with Readings: Thinking Critically About Profound Ideas (4^th ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson education, 2013.

SEP. Compatibilism. 2009. Web.

Zimmerman, David. “Reasons-Responsiveness and the Ownership of Agency: Fischer and Ravizza’s Historicist Theory of Responsibility,” Journal of Ethics, 6.1 (2006): 199–234.

The concepts of linguistic determinism, as well as the hypothesis of linguistic relativity, have long been a question of controversy. Linguistic determinism, in general, is the idea according to which one’s native language and its structures limit and identify the speaker’s process of thinking as well as knowledge, thought, perception, and memory. Linguistic relativity, on the other hand, is the form of linguistic determinism.

The authors of the linguistic relativity hypothesis, also known as Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, proclaim that “the speakers of different languages think and perceive reality in different ways and that each language has its own world view” (Hussein 642). That means that very often that are certain concepts or words in one language that can be understood only by its native speakers and cannot be understood by those who do not live and think in it.

As provided by one of the authors of this hypothesis, Edward Sapir, language shapes the speaker’s reality not simply reflects it, that is why people who speak and think in different languages have different perceptions of the world (Hussein 642). The other author, Benjamin Lee Whorf, who was Sapir’s student, went further and believed that the structures of the language, i.e. grammar, define the speaker’s mental activity and how he analyzes impressions but does not determine his worldview (Hussein 643).

Linguistic relativity hypothesis, to my mind, is a controversial concept, but it does explain why people who think in different languages may have a different perception of reality, think and express their ideas differently. It can be proven, for example, by the fact that in one language there may be many words describing one common thing in a variety of its states while there is just one or not a single in the other or a number of words for naming colors depending on the nature of the speakers’ primary activities, etc. That is why I agree that the concepts of linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity do prove that language influences the perception of reality.

Syntax and Semantics

Every language is a system functioning according to a certain set of rules that are known as syntax and semantics. Syntax is a set of grammar rules regarding word order in the sentences or their structure while semantics is about their meaning (Anderson 284). They are interrelated because the correct use of both helps express one’s thoughts in a right and clearly way.

The problem that may arise with syntax and semantics is that they are different for different groups of languages. That means that people thinking and communicating in different languages may face certain difficulties in understanding each other or translating their words. Very often this problem emerges from the distinction between the syntaxes of the languages that may result in the disparities of semantics. For example, misunderstandings begin if the word order in the other speaker’s language differs from those of the English language. Then when this person tries to express his or her thought in English, he or she uses the grammar rules of his native language, thus expressing the idea in a mixed-up way not even knowing it.

From my personal experience, I had a difficulty in understanding my friend whose native language is Italian, who just started learning English. He wanted to practice his English and decided to tell me a story about how a dog bit him. What I understood from his translation into English is that he bit the dog, not the dog bit him. At that time, neither he nor I knew that the syntax in English and Italian was different, and it resulted in a misunderstanding. Now as we know it, we recall this situation with a smile on our faces but it taught us that syntax and semantics play a significant role in being understood while communicating.

Works Cited

Hussein, Basel Al-Sheikh. “The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis Today.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies 2.3 (2012): 642-646.Print.

Anderson, John R. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 8th ed. 2015. New York, United States: Worth Publishers. Print.

Environmental determinism is a concept, which emphasizes the notion that one’s physical environment determines his or her trajectory of growth. In other words, a society or community develops in a manner it does due to its surrounding environment and related influences. Sarmiento’s discussion on civilization and barbarism reflects environmental determinism because an individual living in a city has a different physical environment than a person living in the countryside. For example, he states that there are a certain disdain and hostility of a person from the countryside towards a more educated inhabitant of a city, and similarly, the latter perceives the former as more barbaric (83). In other words, a “barbaric” person experiences different environmental challenges compared to his or her counterpart because he needs to “take down a wild bull,” whereas a more “civilized” person “may have read many books” (83). Therefore, the main reason is rooted in the fact that both of these individuals become such due to their environment, which determined their subsequent development.

Sarmiento describes gauchos as “trackers” because they can identify their domestic animals with a high level of precision as professional trackers. He describes trackers as a “grave and circumspect personage whose declarations are accepted without question by local judges” (86). For example, plainsmen are the trackers because they can identify a mule, which went missing for a year, by its hoof print. The tracker has positive qualities in regards to being skilled in such a way that they recognize small differences and notice, which is unnoticeable by others. In other words, the tracker has a certain set of skills, which can be used for both good and bad deeds, where Calibar helped to track a prisoner, but also helped a group of political prisoners to escape.

Reference

Sarmiento, D. F. (1916). Facundo. Editorial America.

Technological determinism is a theory that assumes that technology drives the cultural and social development in society. Heilbroner believed that the interactions between technology and the sociopolitical status of a society are passive. He held that technology affects how societal evolution takes place. However, the society still has a chance to adjust the effects of technology in the evolutionary history (Heilbroner, 1994).

Technological development assumes a certain sequence. This sequence is ordered in such a way that a more advanced form of technology precedes a simpler version of the same technology (Heilbroner, 1994).

The hand mill had to be invented and used before advancing to the steam mill. Therefore, technological advancements are usually propelled by societal advancements and increased pressure that require enhanced efficiency in order to sustain humanity.

Technological discoveries often follow a systematic accumulation of knowledge (Heilbroner, 1994). It is not an accidental or abrupt process. Furthermore, all available technological discoveries are based on the advancement of previous crude forms of the technology. There is no new technology that has arisen without continued scientific understanding of a given phenomenon.

Moreover, technological advancements have always been predictable. Technology will never exceed the social conditions that exist in society. There is no way massive production of goods and services can exist without a large consumer market for the finished products (Heilbroner, 1994).

Therefore, technology is a display of the knowledge and the understanding of scientific phenomenon in society. Technological advancements depend on the natural evolutionary forces.

As human beings become more intelligent, their ability to develop sophisticated machinery increases. Hence, technological development is a historical process that is controlled by capacity and knowledge (Heilbroner, 1994). It is therefore a predictable historical process.

Technology does not impose a determinate model of social affairs in society. In terms of labor, different technologies require various levels of labor forces. As technology advances, labor also experiences the same effect that eventually results into specialization. Hierarchical systems of organizations came into being as technology continued to advance.

Several orders of coordination and supervision were required for effective management of machines. This resulted into the development of more powerful individuals who were placed at the top management positions (Heilbroner, 1994). These are normal economic processes that are sometimes confused with the development of capitalism.

Technology was also available in the communism society as well. Naturally, human beings are developers of monopoly. Therefore, the technology never resulted into capitalism. It largely fueled the process (Heilbroner, 1994). Social political changes witnessed in the evolutionary history were not triggered by technology.

In fact, capitalism was one of the ways in which technological advancements were fueled. Competition between nations led to increase investments in technological advancements.

Technological advancement is primarily one of the major activities undertaken in society (Heilbroner, 1994). The society controls how technology is advancing.

Some African societies have managed to maintain what they achieved in the prehistoric times to present day. If technology was a determinant in the evolutionary process, then all the locations across the world could be at the same level. Therefore, the society controls the direction of technological changes (Heilbroner, 1994).

The fact that technology has shaped up the society cannot be ruled out. It is obvious that the current lifestyles are depended on technological advancements. However, from the above illustrations, it is true to say that technology is part of the evolutionary history of man and not the major determinant of the social, economical, and political changes in humanity.

Reference

Heilbroner, R.L. (1994). Do Machines Make History? (Eds). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

The debate that surrounds the causes and effects of technological progress can generally be separated into two distinct sides: technological determinists and social constructivists. The former claim that new inventions, especially influential ones, lead to social changes and ultimately cause humanity’s progress. For example, the Industrial Revolution dramatically increased productivity and reduced the need for human labor, eliminating the need for serfs and bringing about the end of feudalism.

By contrast, the latter supports the idea that emerging social changes make it more likely for a new invention to appear because people are interested in the problem that it would solve. People began looking for cheaper alternatives to hard labor, and the combination of many different inventions eventually led to the phenomenon known as the Industrial Revolution. Both positions have valid arguments, and this paper will discuss the primary differences between their paradigms as they are applied to the media.

The first point of the technological determinists can be expressed in Marshall McLuhan’s phrase, “the medium is the message.” It is the claim that the content that is being transmitted using the media matters less than the medium itself (Griffin, Ledbetter, and Sparks, 2015). Each variety of platforms is associated with some specific factors that ultimately determine the nature of the works that appear on it and the reaction of the user.

McLuhan uses the example of print in his lecture available from mywebcowtube (2011a), noting that the effect of any printed work is negligible when compared to that of the invention of the printer. New varieties of media emerge and change society by enabling new possibilities. In this context, the specific ideas that are being expressed are easily replaceable because they ultimately reinforce the overarching paradigm regardless of their content.

The counterpoint from the social constructivist side would be that new media are invented to accommodate new types of a message as they become necessary. Wallace (2016) provides the example of radio, which was the result of a combination of the efforts of numerous engineers, most of whom are relatively unknown compared to Guglielmo Marconi. From a social constructivist standpoint, the radio was invented because humanity began increasingly needing a means of instant communication. As a result, more and more people would put their efforts into the creation of wireless communication until, eventually, one of them succeeded.

The same reasoning can be applied to many other technologies, though the relationship will not always be readily apparent. Effectively, the emergence of new types of content drives the creation of specialized media, hence the difference in their material and effects.

The second difference is in how technological determinists view the effects of media. Their opinion that progress drives social change effectively means that media has the power to shape society. As such, McLuhan expresses the idea that by understanding the media, people would be able to “program the whole environment” to achieve a specific purpose, which is the prevention of illiteracy in his case (mywebcowtube, 2011b).

However, the knowledge could also be used for other purposes, effectively manipulating society to the wishes of those who control the media. McLuhan provides an example of how, due to the media, the image of a politician has become more important than the policies they support (mywebcowtube, 2011c). The prevention of such ill-intentioned manipulation creates a dilemma, as anyone who understands media well enough to oversee it will also be able to control it to their advantage.

Social constructivists tend to disagree and claim that the media reflects the view of society. As a result, attempts at manipulating them will be mostly ineffective, as people will lose interest in media that goes against social norms, both normal and emerging ones. President Trump, who won the election despite continuous negative coverage by a large portion of various media and popularized the term ‘fake news,’ can serve as an example. He was able to recognize the growing frustration of a significant part of the electorate with the traditional media and see the potential of a social media presence. As a result, he was able to secure a dedicated voter base that would be reinforced and expanded by media attempts to decrease his popularity, eventually winning the presidency with a small, self-funded campaign.

With that said, Donald Trump’s victory can also be attributed to the power of the new medium that is social media. Overall, most social phenomena can be partially explained by combining technological determinism and social constructivism to identify the chain of cause and effect. As such, it is generally prudent to view both theories together, with society driving advances in technology, which, in turn, produces unexpected changes in the population.

New media phenomena, such as the Internet, have changed the social discourse. However, despite a relative lack of new creations after the emergence of social media, the discourse has shifted several times after their introduction. As such, both society and technology contribute to new trends, and each should be considered when one is trying to analyze the influence of various media.

References

Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. (2015). A first look at communication theory (9^th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

mywebcowtube. (2011a). Marshall Mcluhan full lecture: The medium is the message – 1977 part 1 v 3 [Video]. YouTube. Web.

mywebcowtube. (2011b). Marshall Mcluhan full lecture: The medium is the message – 1977 part 2 v 3 [Video]. YouTube. Web.

mywebcowtube. (2011c). Marshall Mcluhan full lecture: The medium is the message – 1977 part 3 v 3[Video]. YouTube. Web.

Wallace, P. (2016). The psychology of the Internet (2^nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

McLuhan’s Technological Determinism

• McLuhan argued that media dictates social change.
• He introduced “The medium is the message”.
• McLuhan focused on medium rather than content.
• A Medium is an extension of humans.
• Every medium encourages different habits in society.
• Electronic media has retribalized the human face.
• Digital technology influences the way humans interact.
• Media technologies increases people’s control over time.
• Dominant media alters the social life’s rhythm.
• Electronic media have facilitated social boundaries’ transcension.
• These technologies alter people’s sense of space.
• They also alter people’s sense of community.
• Wireless technologies have led to network societies.
• Electronic media has introduced online communication culture.

According to Marshall McLuhan, technological determinism is the view that media technologies determine processes of social change. It includes books, newspapers, telephone, social networking sites, email, or websites (Croteau & Hoynes, 2018).

Based on his aphorism “The medium is the message”, McLuhan debunks the notion that media is a mere channel delivering messages.

Unlike media content, that the medium has the capability to reform human experience and exert more societal changes than total number of messages they carry (Giotta, 2017).

Unlike in the past where broadcast media required a live audience, nowadays people can download or save content for later viewing, enabling people to have more control over time (Croteau & Hoynes, 2018).

The introduction of cable news channel that air news throughout the day has broken previous monotony of waiting for news updates at specific times of the day, altering social life’s rhythm.

Media technologies have also surpassed social boundaries as minors are now exposed to adult content (Giotta, 2017).

Social Forces

• Critics argue that social forces determine technologies.
• They focus on people rather than medium.
• Human agency dictates usage of media technologies.
• Social dynamics can alter future technological development.
• Media technologies are products of human invention.
• Electronic communications resemble bodily resourced communicative modes.
• Economic pressures greatly influence new media application.
• McLuhan’s critics argue that media technologies are dictated by social forces such as human agency, economic pressures, cultural norms, and legal and policy regulations (Croteau & Hoynes, 2018).
• These technologies are seen as products of human’s invention and they imitate bodily communicative modes such as gestural, visual, linguistic and spatial abilities.
• Economic pressures have been considered to be the major social forces behind technological forces as major media firms seek ways to generate revenue from the opportunities brought by these platforms.

McLuhan’s critics argue that media technologies are dictated by social forces such as human agency, economic pressures, cultural norms, and legal and policy regulations (Croteau & Hoynes, 2018).

These technologies are seen as products of human’s invention and they imitate bodily communicative modes such as gestural, visual, linguistic and spatial abilities.

Economic pressures have been considered to be the major social forces behind technological forces as major media firms seek ways to generate revenue from the opportunities brought by these platforms.

Media technologies such as Netflix, Twitter, and Instagram have offered platforms where marketers and businesses can promote their brands, changing these sites to advertising hubs.

Legal systems are gradually imposing restrictions on social media usage through government regulations. However, Big Tech industry remains largely unregulated.

Cultural norms limit online activities, especially for children through parental mediation strategies such as time restriction and use of shared computers to reduce time spent on internet and alleviate their exposure to explicit content (Shin, 2013).

What Stands Out While Juxtaposing McLuhan’s Technological Determinism and Social Forces?

• New technologies changes society at every level.
• Social phenomena can be shaped by technology.
• Media companies generate their revenue from advertisements.
• Users’ preferences influence evolution of these technologies.
• Importance of media technologies cannot be overemphasized.
• Significance of social forces cannot be underrated.
• New media is interrelated with social forces.

Juxtaposition between McLuhan’s technological determinism and social forces presents numerous outstanding themes. For instance, technologies can change society at every level including science, politics, entertainment, education and health (Giotta, 2017).

While media technologies such as TV and social networking sites may be viewed as mere platforms for communication, they mainly depend on advertisements to gain revenues for their sustainability.

New media such as online stream are interconnected with social forces as they are developed to meet consumer’s changing needs (Shin, 2013).

One Difference Between McLuhan’s Technological Determinism and Social Forces

• Despite the social determinists’ argument that technology is an effect of sociocultural change, McLuhan fails to acknowledge that humans determine its success or failure (Giotta, 2017).
• McLuhan argues that media technologies can change human behaviors independent of social forces, which is widely disputed by his critics who believe that these two areas are mutually dependent.

Technological determinism does not consider human agency while social forces acknowledge inherent capacities of various media. While McLuhan views technology as “the principal mover” of social changes, his critics agree that these platforms have had substantial contributions to society (Giotta, 2017). For instance, their ability to connect people worldwide and act as sources of vast and knowledgeable information (Croteau & Hoynes, 2018). This difference indicates that technological determinism completely ignores the significance of human factors.

One Similarity Between McLuhan’s Technological Determinism and Social Forces

• Social forces and McLuhan’s technological determinism have also contributed to social media addiction as people increasing become over reliant on the internet.
• Both have facilitated the growth of international trade and are also designed to alter people’s behaviors (Giotta, 2017).

Technological determinism and social forces are crucial agents of sociocultural change. For instance, media technologies have created a culture where online communication has become primary, especially for younger generation. Similarly, social forces have altered people’s perspective of technology. For instance, business enterprises have embraced it as a perfect platform for marketing their products and services. Moreover, the two have contributed to changes in business operations where the need to shift to online shopping has led to the emergence of such platforms as Amazon and Alibaba.

Personal Position/Perspective Of Mcluhan’s Technological Determinism and Social Forces

• Technological determinism and social forces are inter-dependent.
• The two lead to significant sociocultural changes.
• Effects of both to society are inevitable.
• Social forces are superior to technological determinism.
• Technological determinism supports usage of media technologies.
• Social forces can discourage new technology’s adoption.
• Technological determinism should not ignore social forces.

Based on my perspective/position of technological determinism and social forces, I believe that the two are inter-dependent. This association means that they media technologies cannot exists in the absence of such human factors as economic factors and changing cultural norms. Similarly, social forces depend media technologies due to their inherent capacities to numerous solutions to users.

Technological determinism is inferior to social forces due to the fact that some factors such as government regulation can completely bar usage of media technologies.

References

Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (2018). Media/Society: Technology, industries, content, and users. SAGE Publications.

Giotta, G. (2017). Teaching technological determinism and social construction of technology using everyday objects. Communication Teacher, 32(3), 136–140. Web.

Shin, W. (2013). Parental socialization of children’s Internet use: A qualitative approach. New Media & Society, 17(5), 649–665. Web.

Introduction

Adherents of the deterministic school of thought believe that managerial strategic choice has little to do with organisational actions. They affirm that managers attribute strategic decisions to themselves if they succeed but are quick to distance themselves from them if they fail. Therefore, all determinists claim that organisational fit occurs due to external factors and not choice.

Three key theories exist in the determinist school of thought, and they include population ecology, institutional theory, as well as resource dependency theory. It is essential to unravel how each of these theories contributes to an understanding of the notion of organisational fit outside of free choice.

Population ecology

The population ecology organisation theory came from Charles Darwin’s theory on natural selection. He affirmed that resources on earth were exhaustible, yet organisms had the potential to grow exponentially. Therefore, a force known as natural selection intervened in order to maintain the balance between resources and the species.

In natural selection, organisms with desirable variations would survive while those with undesirable traits would die. Organisations also exhibit such characteristics. Hannan and Freeman (1977) explain that an organisational life cycle exists for all firms such that they can grow, change or die depending on certain external factors.

Inertia and change is one of the sub theories of the population ecology theory. It hypothesises that change is the external factor that can either lead to an organisation’s survival or demise.

During natural selection, highly reliable firms differentiate themselves from their competitors and increase their chances of survival. However, when change occurs, these leading organisations often exhibit high levels of inertia. As a result, a number of them will undergo mortality.

The niche theory is also another subset of population ecology. Here, Hannan and Freeman (1977) explain that organisations can either specialise or generalise. The specialists exploit a market and expect fewer risks. Conversely, the generalists do not exploit their environment considerably but tend to embrace greater risks.

In this sub-theory, the industrial environment determines how effective an organisation will be. If a specialist organisation operates in an uncertain environment, then it is likely to undergo mortality while its generalist competitors will possess favourable characteristics that will allow them to survive.

Resource partitioning is a model of population ecology that defines the relationship between specialists and generalists in a concentrated market. It explains that specialist organisations do well at the margin of a concentrated market because of the profusion of resources. On the other hand, generalists flourish at the heart of the market. Those that do not consider these market forces will have to exit (Carroll 1987).

The density dependence theory dwells on the rate of survival of organisations based on the density of a certain market. Companies must strike a balance between legitimacy and competition. Most firms have a low level of legitimacy during industry formation, (public recognition), but they also enjoy minimal competition.

However, as the number of organisations reaches peak levels, then legitimacy increases while competition reduces. Therefore, Hannan and Freeman (1977) believe that market density has an adverse effect on organisational mortality.

Carroll (1987) talks adversely about the age dependence sub theory. In this model, firms will risk mortality depending on their age. New organisations have a high failure risk while this reduces as they continue to mature. In the adolescent stage, a company initially experiences low mortality risk then this reduces. As it ages, the organisation may also experience high mortality rate due to obsolescence.

The theory of population ecology is thus useful in understanding some of the natural market or industrial forces that cause organisations to die or survive. It sheds light on the concept of fit by illustrating that external factors, like change, market density, industry concentration and partition, can determine the fit of an organisation.

Institutional Theory

As a deterministic theory, the institutional school holds that an organisation’s institutional environment has an adverse effect on its formal structures. Innovations that take place within an organisation’s environment have a profound influence on the legitimacy of the innovation. It then becomes irrational for an organisation to ignore these influences.

Thus, firms must adopt certain trends even when those trends do not increase efficiency. Organisations often embrace certain organisational structures in order to win the trust of institutional stakeholders. However, at a point in time, these structures may actually impede efficiency. Firms will publicise the external aspects of a program and neglect the most crucial parts so as to preserve efficiency (Meyer and Rowan 1977).

Organisations often embrace institutional isomorphism in order to survive. Every environment has certain beliefs and rules that have gained acceptance amongst stakeholders. Therefore, this school of thought does not focus on individual motives; it dwells on aggregate leanings by all organisations.

It should be noted that three types of pressure may prompt an organisation to adopt an institutional structure: coercive, normative and mimetic. Coercive pressures emanate from legal forces, where authorities require all companies to implement a certain policy or face legal punishment. Normative pressures reflect homogenous attitudes among members of similar associations.

Mimetic ones arise when organisations imitate successful firms (DiMaggio and Powell 1983). These factors will play a large role in organisational actions when firms depend on their institutional environment tremendously. If uncertainty or ambiguity of goals is common, then these factors also come into play. Furthermore, the existence of a high number of professionals may also make a company vulnerable to these pressures.

The institutional theory is essential in illustrating how organisations fit with their institutions. Meyer and Rowan (1977) found that public schools in California often adopted innovative structures steadily when there was a high degree of cooperation. However, when contentions existed, then these innovative structures took a long time.

The study is proof of the deterministic nature of an institutional environment. These schools did not focus on the usefulness of the innovation; it was the level of consensus that mattered. Several other industries also exhibit the same patterns and decisions.

Tolbert and Zucker (1983) have shown that coercive pressures play a role in organisational fit. They analysed civil service organisations and found that most of them were quick to adopt new structures if state mandate (coercive pressure) existed. They reported low levels of adoption among organisations that operated in a non – coercive environment.

These findings prove that isomorphism is a crucial factor in determining performance. Sometimes it may cause firms to pursue outdated strategies even when they need to be moving forward. It also minimises the rate of innovation.

Resource Dependency Theory

Pfeffer (1981) explains that firms, which lack resources, will seek to make up for it through the establishment of various relationships amongst each other. They may also act in a manner that increases others’ dependence on them and reduces their dependence on others. The central assumptions of the theory are that organisations engage in social exchanges, which represent organisational coalitions.

This theory also rests on the premise that the organisational environment has scarce resources, which determine a company’s survival or death. It stems from uncertainties in the process of acquiring these resources. Additionally, another assumption is that organisational power increases when a firm acquires resources. This reduces its dependence over others and increases others’ dependence on the firm.

Therefore, autonomy is a desirable trait while uncertainty is not (Ulrich & Barney 1984). A case in point is the existence of large American corporations such as Wal-Mart. The firm has consolidated resources in a manner that has given it power and autonomy. It controls its suppliers and can dictate prices to them. Additionally, Wal-Mart distributes commodities for small firms, so they lack autonomy.

Companies may reduce resource dependence through a myriad of approaches such as mergers and acquisitions, board of directors, executive successions, corporate political action and joint ventures or different forms of inter-organisational relations. Companies often form alliances or participate in joint ventures with firms that create constraints in order to facilitate the coordination of resources or knowledge.

This may occur through franchising, licensing or equity investments. Such an approach is common in intermediately saturated industries. Alternatively, companies may pursue resource dependency through the board of directors. This approach creates a vested interest of the constraining firm within the dependent one. It also adds legitimacy, increases funding, and may even boost a firm’s contacts (Scott 2004).

An organisation also has the option of using mergers and acquisitions. However, this is a constraining method because of the legal and structural implications involved. In this approach, companies can either merge vertically with their suppliers and buyers, horizontally with their competitors or diversify with divergent partners.

The strategy allows firms to save on costs, reduce competitive uncertainty and operational uncertainty (Medcof 2001). This explains why several organisations are merging with seemingly unusual partners. Some of them work together in order to strengthen their resource positions.

An executive succession occurs when a company replaces its President or CEO with a person who can handle the challenges inherent in the environment through alteration of organisational behaviour. The environment plays a role by affecting the rate of turnover in an organisation.

If a firm has a high dependence level on the environment, then it is more likely to exhibit a high level of turnover. The market responds positively to CEO replacement when a company performs poorly (Pfeffer & Salancik 1978).

Political action manifests through participation of organisations in law and government. Companies cannot eliminate their dependence on the system of government; consequently, they opt to reduce uncertainty by creating their own environment. These firms use political action to bring change.

Resource dependency is useful as a determinist theory because, just like the institutional and ecological theories, it illustrates that organisations must amend their structures because of turbulent environments. It emphasises the need to consolidate power as well as control resources among firms.

Conclusion

All determinist theories illustrate that the environment highly influences organisational decisions; these may affect a company’s survival or not. The sources of environmental pressure depend on the determinist theory under consideration, so one may think of market forces, institutional structures or resource dependence as determinants of organisation fit.

References

Carroll, G 1987, Publish or perish: The organizational ecology of newspaper industries, JAI Press, Greenwich.

DiMaggio, P and Powell, W 1983, ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields,’ American Sociological Review’, vol. 48 pp.147-160.

Hannan, M & Freeman, J 1977, ‘The population ecology of organisations’, American Journal of Sociology’, vol. 82 no. 5, pp. 929-964.

Medcof, J 2001, ‘Resource-based strategy and managerial powers’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 22 no.11, pp. 15-38.

Meyer, J and Rowan, B 1977, ‘Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony,’ American Journal of Psychology, 83: 340-363.

Pfeffer, J 1981, Power in organizations, Pitman, NY.

Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective, Harper & Row, New York.

Scott, R 2004, “Institutional theory” in K Smith and M Hitt (eds), Great Minds in Management, Oxford Press, Oxford, pp. 1-15.

Tolbert, P & Zucker, L 1983, ‘Institutional sources of change in the formal strucrure of organisations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935’, ASQ, vol. 28, pp. 22-39.

Ulrich, D & Barney, J 1984, ‘Resource dependence, efficiency, and population’, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 9 no. 3, pp.471.