The following items can be distinguished:
a) Technology in itself is positive, the same as the progress of mankind. - Accidents, disasters, etc. are attributed to human error, that is, by technical progress, to turn himself in by the goal is to replace the fallible human beings by the infallible technique - but in the spirit of man ... Example: Nuclear power is problematic in itself and only through improper handling or lower interest (atomic bomb, war) is problematic.
b) Technology in itself is negative; technology development undermined the progress of mankind. Technology is here understood as a principle of the (human) world relationship. These include, for example, the criticism is part of the idea to keep the technology as infallible, that is, criticism of technology optimism, criticism of technology-euphoria, criticism of the "idolatry of technology," etc. - The man can not master the technique. Example: Even the hammer is just as problematic as the nuclear power and points to the problem of technology.
A variant of it: in particular, by the technology dominated the history of mankind has the technology operating in its character. Example: The hammer is a technique that can be controlled, nuclear power, however, shows the difference between Producing and presenting - it is uncontrollable in itself.
c) There is no art in itself, the technology development is a part of the historical dynamics. She is actually neutral, but nevertheless reflects a general progress - for example in terms of improving living conditions, democracy, information access, etc. In the art reflects the tendency of rationality in history. - Example: While some may also be destroyed with nuclear power, but in principle it is a blessing for the people dar.
d) The technique is dependent on its specific development of general living conditions and specific historical conditions, an sich allerdings erst einmal positiv (progressiv), das heißt sie stellt prinzipiell einen möglichen Fortschritt dar, der aber zum Beispiel durch die Ökonomie oder durch politische Interessen gehemmt wird – oder sogar ins Gegenteil umschlagen kann. Beispiel: Atomkraft im Kapitalismus ist problematisch und erst in einer sozialistischen Gesellschaft unproblematisch. Oder: Atombomben dienen eigentlich einer vernünftigen Politik der Abschreckung; erst in den Händen von Terroristen und Schurkenstaaten sind sie bedrohlich und gefährlich (also: das Technische selbst ist unproblematisch, nur die konkrete Anwendung ist ggf. problematisch).
e) Technik wird in ihrer konkreten Gestalt durch die gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen problematic, and to an extent that technology is no progress in their development even more. Example: to use the knowledge of nuclear physics in general, corresponds to a logic of modernity (capitalism), which together bring the technology in a direction that runs counter to any possibility of exemption, that is, is in a liberated society there will be a completely different technique (have to give or). Example: Nuclear power is unthinkable in an emancipated society.
additional or alternative: At the same time has caused the technology of modernity is already so much damage (destruction of nature) that, whilst retaining the existing technology must be used for the damage done by their to repair damage. For example, the consequences of the use of nuclear energy, the human race, if it does not, is still engaged the next year tens of thousands, they are the damages that can be probably averted only with the atomic force itself ...
Addition: Technology is already much too vague term in order to simultaneously take all the practical technical inventions and the abstract dynamics of the technical, but nevertheless, trends were identified that are responsible as well for the conceptual generalization and hypostasis of the art. The criticism is not the technology itself, but the technological rationality, its criticism is immanent criticism. Example: Nuclear Power is not only problematic when it comes to training and accidents, but problematic in itself is a legitimate as rational "thinking", the force of its rational logic sets in motion a development which inevitably ends up with nuclear power.
all positions (which are not shown in the subjunctive, to prevent a score) in common is that they require a dedicated and reflected the concept of technology (although not all positions on such a concept of technology).
These positions, which are in the (very diverse) use of nuclear power of course, a very good example would be, well to discuss in much more abstract view of complex ions of technology and technological development: What is the relationship between technology and computer networks and Numerikmaschinen, technological rationality and calculation processes? At the same time would be to discuss again and again to intervene in the extent to which technology or technical (technified) processes and procedures in the human living conditions, including whether it is possible and real, that> the technology 'or' the Technical \u0026lt;For example, in our awareness sediment (as form of consciousness?).
