The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Technology matters: questions to live with
Abstract
Technology matters, writes David Nye, because it is inseparable from being human. We have used tools for more than 100,000 years, and their central purpose has not always been to provide necessities. People excel at using old tools to solve new problems and at inventing new tools for more elegant solutions to old tasks. Perhaps this is because we are intimate with devices and machines from an early age -- as children, we play with technological toys: trucks, cars, stoves, telephones, model railroads, Playstations. Through these machines we imagine ourselves into a creative relationship with world. As adults, we retain this technological playfulness with gadgets and appliances -- Blackberries, cell phones, GPS navigation systems in our cars. We use technology to shape our world, yet we think little about choices we are making. In Technology Matters, Nye tackles ten central questions about our relationship to technology, integrating a half-century of ideas about technology into ten cogent and concise chapters, with wide-ranging historical examples from many societies. He asks: Can we define technology? Does technology shape us, or do we shape it? Is technology inevitable or unpredictable? (Why do experts often fail to get it right?)? How do historians understand it? Are we using modern technology to create cultural uniformity, or diversity? To create abundance, or an ecological crisis? To destroy jobs or create new opportunities? Should the market choose our technologies? Do advanced technologies make us more secure, or escalate dangers? Does ubiquitous technology expand our mental horizons, or encapsulate us in artifice? These large questions may have no final answers yet, but we need to wrestle with them -- to them, so that we may, as Rilke puts it, live along some distant day into answers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Culture of Disengagement in Engineering Education?
Cech, E. A. (2014) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243913504305 · Cited by 836
Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology
Selwyn, N. (2010) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00338.x · Cited by 584
Cech, E. A. (2013) · Philosophy of Engineering and Technology · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6350-0_4 · Cited by 358
Legacy, C., Ashmore, D., Scheurer, J., Stone, J., & Curtis, C. (2019) · Transport Reviews · doi:10.1080/01441647.2018.1466835 · Cited by 156
Papa, E., & Ferreira, A. (2018) · Urban Science · doi:10.3390/urbansci2010005 · Cited by 128
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2006-11-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 03
- Pages
- 44-1489-44-1489
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1543600149
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Technology matters: questions to live with. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.44-1489
- The paper
- Technology matters: questions to live with. (2006). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.44-1489
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.