In this blog post, we will look at whether smartphones have led social change or whether society has led the development of smartphones from the perspectives of technological determinism and social constructionism.

 

Smartphones and society: Is change driven by technology or by society?

Today, smartphones have become a part of our lives, going beyond the simple function of a mobile phone. This small device not only provides convenient functions for users, but also plays a central role as a cultural content. So, is our society changing because of smartphones, or is it the social currents that require smartphones that have led to the emergence of this technology?
The former view, which sees technological progress as the central cause of social change, is called technological determinism, while the latter view, which sees technology as developing according to the needs of society and the social elements involved in the process, is called social constructionism. Some people support social constructionism, believing that most technologies advance according to the needs of users and that factors such as politics, economics, and culture are involved. However, looking at history, the emergence of new technologies has brought about rapid changes in society and had a significant impact on the lives of its members. On the other hand, the examples of technological progress that social constructivists claim are often more like a convergence of different technologies rather than a ‘progress’ of technology. Even if there is progress, the driving force is not social necessity, but rather the direction set at the time of the invention of the technology, and the technology develops independently beyond human control.
Furthermore, the fact that social factors intervene in technological progress is already a result of technology having a significant impact on society, so the direction of technological progress is already determined. In other words, technology determines everything.

 

Examples of social changes brought about by technology

There are many examples of technology bringing about major changes to society and its members. The invention of the wheel is one such example. First appearing in the ancient Mesopotamian civilization, the wheel was applied to chariots, completely changing the nature of warfare. The advent of carts made it easier to transport large quantities of cargo and greatly expanded the range of people’s movements. This also had an impact on the development of land routes and the emergence of cities, which further accelerated the development of civilization. The invention of the wheel ultimately contributed to the development of civilization, showing that technology has brought about major changes in society.
Another example is Gutenberg’s metal type. The invention of metal type made it possible to mass-print, which led to the popularization of knowledge. Previously, only a small number of aristocrats with economic means could enjoy knowledge, but thanks to metal type, more people could access knowledge and information. This ushered in the beginning of a cultural renaissance, and this example supports technological determinism in that printing technology was not developed to bring about social change, but rather that the development of printing technology triggered social change.
There are many examples of technology changing society even in the modern era. One of them is the smartphone. Since the advent of the smartphone, people’s lifestyles have changed dramatically, with them watching movies or reading books on the go, handling work in real time, taking photos, and sharing their talents with others. The smartphone has even become a part of our lives to the point that it has given rise to a social problem of smartphone addiction, where people feel anxious without their smartphones. MP3 players, PMPs (portable media players), and digital cameras, which were widely used before the advent of smartphones, have disappeared, giving up their functions to smartphones. This change in lifestyle is not due to the social need for smartphones. Even before smartphones, people lived without complaining, adapting to the technology of the time, and the emergence of a new technology called smartphones has unilaterally changed our lives.

 

Arguments of Social Constructionists and Their Fallacies

Despite the numerous examples of technology changing social structures, social constructionists argue that social factors intervene in the process of technological progress, not the emergence of technology. In the case of smartphones, social constructionists argue that early smartphones did not have an operating system, but it was equipped with an operating system according to people’s needs, and that it became popular. However, this argument is flawed because it focuses only on part of the phenomenon. The original goal of smartphone development was to realize the era of portable PCs. If we compare this with the process of the invention of the PC, the early computers were large computers for computing, and after a long period of progress, they were equipped with an operating system as personal computers. Similarly, it was inevitable for smartphones to be equipped with an operating system as they developed into portable PCs. In other words, the direction of technological progress was determined from the beginning of the development of smartphones.

 

Examples of technological progress that can be seen in the development of computers

Another example of the direction in which technological progress is heading can be found in the development of computers. Some people may think that computers, unlike smartphones, have evolved into today’s personal computers for the convenience of users. However, if we look at the purpose of the development of computers, this is also easy to understand. Early computers were machines developed to aid military calculations, such as calculating the angle of a cannonball. They were created with the aim of reducing human effort, so the development process for convenience was planned from the beginning.

 

Limitations of social constructionism and misunderstandings in the process of technological progress

This fatalistic view of technological progress is seen in most technological development processes, but social constructivists often view technological progress within a limited scope. Even if technology has developed and changed outwardly, considering the purpose for which the technology was originally developed, it can be seen that the technology has not changed its direction of progress due to external factors. If progress is initially based on a purpose, it is following a predetermined trajectory and not changing direction due to external factors.
We should be careful to understand the process of technological progress in the same way as social needs. Marconi’s invention of wireless communication ushered in the era of full-fledged communication, but this was not the reason for the demand for the development of wireless communication. It is a kind of error of intention expansion to perceive the two as having the same meaning.

 

Cases of the History of Bicycles and the Limitations of Social Constructionism

One of the famous examples supporting social constructionism is the study of the history of bicycles. It argues that early bicycles did not have pneumatic tires, and that the development of pneumatic tires was a consensus process between bicycle racers and developers. It attempts to prove social constructionism by showing that superior technology was not selected in the process of technological development, but that there was a consensus process between groups related to technology.
However, this claim contains a fundamental error in viewing the installation of pneumatic tires on bicycles as a technological advancement. Bicycles and pneumatic tires are two different technologies, and one cannot say that one is an advanced form of the other. Although the roots of the two technologies are the same, bicycles were developed for ease of movement on wheels, and pneumatic tires were developed for physical comfort on wheels. They are in a parallel relationship, not an inclusive relationship. Therefore, the installation of pneumatic tires on bicycles should be seen as a convergence of differentiated technologies rather than as technological progress, and is not an appropriate argument for social constructionism.

 

Interaction between technology and society

Even if we accept the social constructionist position for a moment, the error of the argument is revealed. The social elements involved in the process of technological progress are ultimately created because of technology. In the case of the bicycle, the need for comfort and speed emerged because of the existence of the bicycle technology. Without the bicycle technology, there would be no need for comfort and speed, and no invention of the pneumatic tire.