In this blog post, we will examine the meanings of technological determinism—the idea that technology drives social change—and social constructivism—the idea that society determines the direction of technological development. We will also explore how the influence of these two perspectives has shifted throughout history and how the relationship between them might change in the future.
In a complex and intertwined society like ours today, it may be risky to support any single theory absolutely. Moreover, choosing only one of these two contrasting theories through black-and-white reasoning could result in an excessive oversimplification of the complexity of human society, which has developed on the basis of diversity. Nevertheless, if asked which of technological determinism and social constructivism plays a greater role in explaining modern society, it can be said—at least today—that technological development exerts a very powerful influence on social structures and human lifestyles. However, this influence does not arise from technology alone but constantly interacts with social, economic, and political conditions. By first examining the meanings of technological determinism and social constructivism, and then looking at how these two perspectives have intersected throughout human history, we can gain a clearer understanding of this relationship.
Ancient texts, including the Bible, were inevitably influenced by the knowledge and worldview of the people living in the era in which they were written. While the origins and meaning of the Bible may be interpreted differently from a religious perspective, an examination of the text’s expressions and view of nature from a historical and scientific standpoint reveals that the world observable to people at that time had a significant influence on its content. A prime example is microorganisms. In the past, it was widely believed that the human body contained about 10 times more bacteria than human cells; however, more precise estimates—based on a typical adult male—suggest there are approximately 30 trillion human cells and about 38 trillion bacteria. Therefore, viewing the number of human cells and bacteria as roughly comparable is more in line with current research. It was only after the development of observational technologies, such as the microscope, that humans were able to properly understand the existence of microorganisms invisible to the naked eye. If ancient societies had possessed microscopes and microbiological knowledge comparable to those of today, the way people at that time explained life and nature would likely have been quite different from what we know today. This demonstrates that the scope of the world people can observe varies depending on the level of technological development, and consequently, the content recorded in books, human ways of thinking, and even society’s worldview can change. From this perspective, technological determinism views technological progress as a key driving force behind social change.
In contrast to technological determinism—which views technology as one of the key forces driving social change and regards technological development as the primary cause of social change—social constructionism places significant emphasis on the political, economic, organizational, and cultural factors that intervene in the process of technological change. Technology does not develop independently of society but is shaped within the interests, values, and institutional environment of the social groups that create, select, and use it. Therefore, technology can also be understood as a social construct created within a specific social context. As the common saying goes, “Necessity is the mother of invention,” and in many cases, technological change and development are driven by explicit or implicit social demands. For example, ABS (Anti-lock Braking System) was developed and widely adopted to reduce the problem of wheels locking up during braking, which causes a loss of steering control and stability. Similarly, cameras and various driver-assistance systems designed to monitor the driver’s blind spots and rearview have become more widespread through the convergence of social demands for traffic safety and technological advancements. ABS is a system that detects the rotational status of the wheels and adjusts braking force to prevent the wheels from locking up during braking. As such, the process of creating and disseminating technology involves not only technical feasibility but also various social factors, such as safety requirements, laws and regulations, and market demand.
So, do new technologies or inventions arise solely from social necessity or political, cultural, and institutional demands? It is difficult to say that this is always the case. As illustrated by the case of genomics researcher Craig Venter, featured in ‘We Are All Stardust’, scientists sometimes explore new knowledge even while clashing with existing social norms or religious and ethical boundaries. In fact, human curiosity and the quest for truth have been among the key driving forces behind scientific progress. Even if social norms and institutions exert a strong influence on determining the direction and scope of research, it is difficult to completely control human curiosity itself. In particular, the driving forces behind technological advancement become even more complex when research is linked to substantial economic benefits or national competitiveness. Today, in fields such as biotechnology, artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and space exploration, pure academic curiosity, economic interests, national strategies, social regulations, and ethical debates all interact simultaneously. Therefore, it is difficult to explain technological development solely as a result of social demands, and conversely, it is also difficult to explain it solely as the independent force of technology itself.
This complexity becomes even more apparent when we examine the relationship between these two perspectives through the lens of history. Ancient Greece was an era of great advancement in knowledge and thought. Scholars of that time estimated the size of the Earth and explored the origins of matter, while figures such as Archimedes left a profound impact on mathematics, physics, and engineering. However, in ancient societies, political power, religion, and communal norms exerted a powerful influence on individuals and scholarship. Socrates, too, was sentenced to death in Athens on charges of corrupting the youth and refusing to acknowledge the gods recognized by the city. Later, as Christianity established itself as the primary religious and cultural foundation of European society, religion came to exert immense influence over politics, society, and scholarship. In medieval Europe, religious authority and secular power were closely intertwined, and even in large-scale historical events such as the Crusades, religious, political, and economic interests interacted in complex ways. While this era cannot be simply defined as one dominated by social constructivism, it is clear that new knowledge and technology could hardly develop in isolation from social and religious institutions.
The process leading up to the modern scientific revolution also clearly illustrates the interaction between technology and society. Copernicus systematized the heliocentric theory based on ancient astronomical observations and mathematical calculations; he did not establish it through the use of a telescope. The use of telescopes in astronomical observation came later, and Galileo Galilei’s telescopic observations provided crucial evidence that shook the existing astronomical worldview. At the same time, the spread of the Renaissance and humanism fostered a new attitude toward humanity and nature. New questions were raised about established authorities in philosophy, art, religion, and science, and technological changes—such as the spread of printing, navigation technology, and gunpowder weapons—also had a profound impact on people’s lifestyles and political and economic structures. Navigational technologies, including the compass, contributed to long-distance voyages and the expansion of trade; the spread of metal-type printing significantly reduced the costs of reproducing and distributing knowledge and ideas; and the development of gunpowder weapons transformed the nature of warfare and the military organization of states. However, these technologies did not develop in isolation from society; rather, they were intertwined with various social changes, such as competition among nations, the expansion of trade, the Protestant Reformation, and the demand for education and knowledge. Ultimately, it is more accurate to view post-modern history as a process in which technology transformed society, while society, in turn, reshaped the direction of technological development.
This relationship becomes even clearer when we consider the scientific discoveries that have had a profound impact on modern society. Imagine an unknown young scientist working as a patent office clerk who published a paper that shook the existing notions of time and space. That person was Albert Einstein. Through the special theory of relativity, Einstein revised the classical notion that time and space were an absolute framework independent of the observer’s state of motion; later, in the general theory of relativity, he explained the relationship between gravity and spacetime in a new way. In the theory of relativity, measurements of time and length for moving objects vary depending on the observer’s relative state of motion, and in the general theory of relativity, mass and energy are related to the geometric structure of spacetime. These discoveries fundamentally changed the way time and space are understood in the natural sciences. However, it would be an overinterpretation to view the theory of relativity in physics as having directly given rise to philosophical and ethical relativism. The theory of relativity is a theory concerning physical measurements and the laws of nature; it is a separate issue from the claim that ethics and values are all relative. Nevertheless, the concept of relativity—that “what was once thought to be absolute can appear differently depending on the conditions of observation”—left a profound impression on the intellectuals and popular culture of the time and demonstrated just how profoundly a scientific discovery can shake the human worldview.
The development of nuclear physics illustrates the relationship between technology and society even more dramatically. As the potential for nuclear fission and chain reactions became known, nuclear energy expanded beyond a mere scientific discovery to become a military and political issue. Although Einstein did not personally develop the atomic bomb, he was involved in signing a letter warning of the possibility of nuclear weapons—at a time when fission research was underway in Europe—and delivering it to the U.S. government. Subsequently, the development of nuclear weapons gained full momentum through the Manhattan Project, into which the U.S. government poured vast amounts of funding and manpower. This example clearly demonstrates that technological determinism and social constructivism operate simultaneously. While scientific knowledge in nuclear physics opened up new technological possibilities, the actual development of the atomic bomb would have been difficult without the historical context of war, national policy decisions, massive financial support, and the organized collaboration of countless scientists and engineers. Subsequently, nuclear weapons, nuclear power generation, and radiation technology have influenced international politics, the energy industry, medicine, and environmental issues, thereby transforming society once again. This illustrates a cycle in which technology changes society, and society, in turn, determines the direction of technological development and use.
Smartphones also serve as a good example for considering the relationship between technological determinism and social constructionism. Even in the past, when feature phones dominated the mobile phone market, mobile devices were gradually incorporating various functions such as cameras, music playback, internet access, and text messaging. The smartphone, too, was not an invention suddenly created by a single individual. The IBM Simon—considered one of the earliest smartphones—had already appeared, and various products such as Symbian smartphones, BlackBerrys, and Treos were already present in the market. Rather than being the first product to invent the smartphone itself, it is more accurate to view Apple’s iPhone as the product that significantly changed the direction of the smartphone market by integrating a multi-touch interface, web browsing, and media functions into a single consumer experience. While Steve Jobs’ personal vision and Apple’s product philosophy played a crucial role, the iPhone was also built upon numerous technologies and the achievements of companies and researchers accumulated over a long period—including semiconductors, mobile communication networks, displays, batteries, operating systems, the internet, and touchscreens.
Nevertheless, when we examine the impact smartphones have had on society, we can see that technological determinism offers a compelling explanation. Before smartphones became widespread, there was no clear social demand for people to be connected to the mobile internet all day long in the way we are today. However, following the rapid proliferation of high-performance smartphones and mobile internet, people’s lifestyles themselves changed to accommodate the technology. This shift is easily observable in public transportation spaces, such as subways. Whereas in the past it was common to read books or newspapers, listen to music, or make calls and send text messages on cell phones, today it has become a natural part of daily life to stream videos and music on smartphones, use social media and messaging apps, read news and webtoons, and handle shopping or financial transactions. Smartphones have gone beyond being mere communication devices to transform the very nature of social relationships, leisure, consumption, finance, work, and education. Given that human behavior and culture have been restructured around this technology following its emergence, this can be interpreted as a prime example of technological determinism.
However, if we examine the development process of smartphones itself, we cannot rule out a sociocultural explanation. Today, smartphone manufacturers develop products by considering user demands, market research, competitors’ moves, privacy regulations, telecommunications policies, environmental regulations, the app ecosystem, and changes in the content industry. Consumer demand and corporate competitive strategies also influence the direction of technological advancements, such as camera performance, battery life, security features, artificial intelligence capabilities, and foldable displays. While technology changes people’s behavior, this altered behavior, in turn, determines the direction of corporate research and development and product design. Therefore, it is more accurate to view the smartphone not as an example of technology unilaterally changing society, but rather as a prime example of technology and society evolving by mutually influencing one another.
Based on the arguments presented so far, it can be said that the influence of technological determinism is very strong in modern society. This is because every time technologies such as the internet, smartphones, and artificial intelligence emerge, new industries, occupations, cultures, and lifestyles—which were previously difficult to anticipate—come into being. Even looking solely at the spread of generative AI, technology is rapidly transforming work practices in various fields, such as writing, translation, programming, design, search, education, and customer service. We also repeatedly see society first grappling with how to accept new technologies after their emergence and then establishing laws and institutions accordingly. Judging by this phenomenon alone, the technological determinism explanation—that technology first creates new possibilities and society follows suit to adapt—holds considerable persuasive power.
However, this does not mean that social constructivism is wrong. As history has shown, the relative explanatory power of any single perspective can vary depending on the era and the nature of the technology. In particular, modern cutting-edge technology has become far more specialized and complex than in the past. The image of an era when a single inventor could create a groundbreaking product relying solely on their own knowledge and capital does little to adequately explain today’s high-tech industry. Even a single smartphone combines knowledge and industries from countless fields, including semiconductor design and manufacturing, displays, batteries, camera sensors, communication technology, operating systems, software, artificial intelligence, and global supply chains. Even if a single person understood all these principles, it would be virtually impossible for them to build a modern smartphone entirely on their own—from sourcing raw materials to establishing semiconductor manufacturing equipment, production facilities, communication networks, and operating systems. This illustrates just how specialized and massive modern technology has become, and how deeply it relies on a complex social division of labor.
Therefore, it is highly likely that developing new technologies that will significantly transform human knowledge and civilization in the future will require even more substantial funding, specialized personnel, research facilities, data and computing resources, energy, and supply chains. In fields such as advanced semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, space exploration, nuclear fusion, new drugs, and gene therapy, it is already difficult for universities or individual researchers alone to carry out the entire research and development process. Government R&D policies, corporate investment, collaboration between universities and research institutions, international supply chains, and legal and ethical norms all have a direct impact on technological advancement. Increasingly, societal choices—such as which technologies to research, which fields to invest in, and to what extent to allow commercialization—are determining the future of technology.
These changes do not imply that either technological determinism or social constructivism will ultimately and completely replace the other. Rather, as we move into the future, the boundaries between these two perspectives are likely to become increasingly blurred. Technology creates new possibilities that humans could not have previously imagined, thereby transforming societal behavior and institutions; in turn, society adjusts the direction of technological development through laws, ethics, investment, markets, cultural values, and political choices. When artificial intelligence creates new ways of working, society establishes rules governing how AI should be used, and those rules, in turn, influence the direction of technological development by companies and researchers. When biotechnology opens up new possibilities for treatment, society discusses standards for bioethics and safety, and these standards, in turn, determine the scope of research and commercialization. Rather than one—technology or society—unilaterally dominating the other, a structure in which each is both the cause and the effect of the other is becoming increasingly clear.
Ultimately, rather than being completely mutually exclusive theories, technological determinism and social constructivism can be viewed as two perspectives that examine the relationship between technology and society from different angles. In the past, technological determinism held strong persuasive power because it was common to see individual discoveries or the invention of new machines bring about massive changes in society. However, as technology becomes more sophisticated and the scale of research and development expands, technology is becoming increasingly intertwined with social institutions, capital, organizations, and culture. At the same time, the technology thus created, in turn, transforms human lifestyles and ways of thinking, as well as the economy, culture, politics, and institutions. Therefore, in the future, rather than a simple shift in focus from technological determinism to social constructionism, the interaction through which technology and society mutually shape and transform one another will become even more important. Humans create technology, but the technology thus created, in turn, changes humans and society. To understand the future of technology and society, we must examine this ceaseless interaction as a whole.
