 and opponents have beliefs influenced by technological determinist assumptions and the idea that the effects of technological change are inevitable. 100 In the previous discussion of Foundations in Philosophy of Technology, it was stated that an advantage of Borgmann's theory o f technology is that it combines elements of technological optimism, with a recognition that technology can cause alienation or detachment from existential concerns o f life (Westera, 2004). In contrast with philosophers such as Marcel, Ellul, and Jonas who tended to focus on a pessimistic view of technology (Ellul; 2010; Jonas, 2009; Jonas, 2010; Treanor, 2010), Borgmann recognized that technology has provided relief from some of the drudgery, misery, and toil that was characteristic of pre-technological life (Borgmann, 2009). Borgmann also held that technology can be pursued in a way that focal things and practices are kept at the center of our lives (Borgmann, 2009). In applying Borgmann's thought to educational technology, Westera (2004) stated that innovative technology can promote the active involvement and motivation o f students through active manipulation of objects, participation in games, simulations, and communities, and preferences defined by the individual user (Westera, 2004). Theoretical explanations o f technological determinism. Various accounts and theories have been proposed to explain the degree to which technology is purported to drive society and history. The debate sometimes focuses on whether or not autonomy can imputed to technology itself, independent of social constraints, or whether technology's agency occurs within a complex interaction of social factors (Marx & Smith, 1994; Smith, 1994). One framework that has been proposed involves the categories of hard and soft determinism (Marx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). 101 Hard and soft technological determinism. The perspective o f hard technological determinism attributes agency to technology itself (Marx & Smith, 1994) to the extent that technology has a determined and dominant autonomy of its own to cause social change, independent of social constraints (Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). The view of soft technological determinism also asserts that technology drives social change (Smith, 1994), but sees technology as one influence among others, occurring alongside a complex interaction of social, economic, political, and cultural factors (Marx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Even if hard technological determinism is rejected such that technology is not imputed to
and opponents have beliefs influenced by technical fatalist assumption and the idea that the effects of technical change are inevitable. 100 In the previous discussion of Foundations in Philosophy of Technology, it was stated that an advantage of Borgmann's hypothesis oxygen f technology is that it combines elements of technological optimism, with a recognition that engineering can cause alienation or detachment from existential concerns o f biography (Westera, 2004). In contrast with philosophers such as Marcel, Ellul, and Jonas who tended to focus on a pessimistic view of engineering (Ellul; 2010; Jonas, 2009; Jonas, 2010; Treanor, 2010), Borgmann recognized that technology has provide relief from some of the drudgery, misery, and toil that was characteristic of pre - technical life (Borgmann, 2009). Borgmann besides held that technology can be pursued in a way that focal things and practices are keep at the center of our lives (Borgmann, 2009). In applying Borgmann's thought to educational technology, Westera (2004) express that innovative technology can promote the active involvement and motivation o f students through active manipulation of objects, participation in games, simulation, and communities, and preferences define by the individual drug user (Westera, 2004). Theoretical explanations o f technological determinism. diverse accounts and theories have been proposed to explain the academic degree to which technology is purported to drive society and history. The debate sometimes focuses on whether or not autonomy can imputed to technology itself, independent of social constraints, or whether technology's agency occurs within a complex interaction of social gene (Marx & Smith, 1994; Smith, 1994). One framework that has been propose involves the categories of hard and soft determinism (Marx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). 101 Hard and cushy technological determinism. The perspective o f heavily technological determinism attribute agency to technology itself (Marx & Smith, 1994) to the extent that technology has a compulsive and dominant autonomy of its own to cause social change, independent of social constraints (Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). The position of soft technical determinism also asserts that technology drives social variety (Smith, 1994), but sees technology as one influence among others, occurring alongside a complex interaction of social, economic, political, and cultural agent (Marx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg - Webb, 2009). Even if hard technical determinism is rejected such that technology is not imputed to
 anf opponents have beliefs influenced by jexhnolojical dsterminirt assumptions and the idea vhat the tyfects of technologizal changv are inecitaule. 100 In the prevmkus disgbssioh of Yonndations in Phllosophy of Technology, it wxs stated that an advantage of Borgmagn's theprj o f technolody ix thaf it combines elements of technolofical oktimism, with a recpgnition that technology cwn cwuse alienation or detachment froi existential concerns o f life (Wesjera, 2004). In contrast with philosophdrs sbch as Marcgl, Epnul, and Jones who tended to focus on d pessikistic view of terhnooogy (Ellul; 2010; Jonas, 2009; Joias, 2010; Treanor, 2010), Borgmagn recognhzzd that technology haw proviged selidd ffom spms of tje vrudgery, miaery, and toul that was characttrifnoc of pre-tecgnologycwl life (Borgmann, 2009). Borgmann also held thdt fechnology can be pursuwd in a way that focap things wnd practices are kept at the center of our lives (Borgjxnn, 2009). Ln aopljing Borgmann's thought to educational technoljfy, Wvstera (2004) stated thct innovative tevhjokjgy can promoje the cdtjve involvement anf motivwtion o f studtnts yhrough active manipulation of objects, iartucipation in games, simulationr, anc comkunities, and preferencer derined by thf individhxl user (Westera, 2004). Thvoredical exkuanations o f tecrnologicao decerminiso. Vatious ascounts anf theories have been prooosed tm explain hhe degree to which technology mx purported jo grine societv and mistory. The debwte sometimes yocuses jn whdther or nkt autoiomy can imptted to technmpogy itself, mndependegt od soxial covrtraints, or whrther teckuology's atency occurs withik a cujplex interactiin if social factots (Oarv & Skiev, 1994; Smith, 1994). Ona frxmedprk tfat has beek pfopoxed involves the catagorjes of hard and sogt determibism (Marv & Smith, 1994; Strpbel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). 101 Hacd and soft teshnological determinism. The pedspective o n hard technojogigal qeterminisk attributes agency to technology itselh (Marx & Smith, 1994) to the gxtent that technologi hss a determmned agd dominatt autonomy of its oqn to cause sociak change, independent kf sochal clnstraints (Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). The view of soft technological dwtermiiifm also asssrts that tzchuology qrivxs social change (Skith, 1994), but sees technology as onx influenca cmong others, occurring alongsodd a complex ivteraction of social, ecohomic, pokitical, and cultural factors (Matx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillnerg-Webb, 2009). Even if hags vechnological determonism ns rejwcted sych bhat technologh ix kot imputef to
and opponents have beliefs influenced by technological and idea that effects of technological the discussion of Foundations Philosophy of Technology, was stated that an advantage of theory o f technology is that it combines elements of technological optimism, with recognition that technology can cause alienation or detachment from existential concerns o f (Westera, In with such as Marcel, Ellul, and Jonas who tended to focus on a pessimistic view of technology 2010; Jonas, 2009; Jonas, 2010; Treanor, 2010), Borgmann that technology has provided from some of the drudgery, and that was of life 2009). Borgmann also that technology can be pursued in a way that focal things and practices are kept at the of our 2009). In Borgmann's to technology, Westera (2004) innovative technology can promote the active o f students through active manipulation of objects, in games, and communities, and preferences defined by individual user (Westera, 2004). Theoretical explanations o f determinism. Various accounts and theories have been proposed to explain the degree to which technology to drive society and The debate sometimes on or autonomy imputed to itself, independent of social constraints, or whether technology's agency occurs within complex interaction of social factors (Marx & Smith, 1994; Smith, framework has been proposed the categories of hard soft (Marx & Smith, 1994; Tillberg-Webb, 101 technological The o f hard technological attributes agency to technology itself & Smith, 1994) to a determined and dominant autonomy of its own cause social change, independent of social constraints 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). The view of soft technological determinism also that technology change (Smith, 1994), but sees technology as one among others, occurring alongside complex interaction of social, economic, political, and cultural factors & 1994; Strobel Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Even hard technological determinism rejected such that not imputed
 and opponents have beliefs inFluenced by TechnOloGicAl DeteRminIst assumptions ANd thE idea that the effects of tEchnoLoGIcal CHaNge arE inevitABlE. 100 iN thE pReVioUs DIsCussiOn oF FoundaTions in PhiLosOpHy of TechnoloGY, iT was stated ThaT an advantage Of BOrgmanN's TheORy o f tEchNologY is thaT It combInes elemeNtS Of techNOlogicaL OPtImisM, with a recognition THaT Technology can cAuse alIeNAtION or DetAchment froM eXisteNTial conCErNS O F liFE (Westera, 2004). In conTrast with phILosOphers SuCh aS marcel, ellul, AnD jonAs who tended To foCus on a pesSimistIC view of TEchnoloGy (ElluL; 2010; JoNas, 2009; jonaS, 2010; trEaNor, 2010), boRGmaNN rEcoGNizEd that teChNoLogy hAs prOVIDEd reLieF froM some Of the drudgery, MisEry, aND toIl thaT was cHaraCtEristIc of prE-techNoLogical life (BorgMann, 2009). borgmann aLso HeLd tHaT techNOlogy cAn bE puRsued in A way thaT FocAl THINgS and practices are kePt AT ThE center oF our liVEs (boRGmann, 2009). In aPpLyiNg BoRGMann's ThouGHt To educatIonal tEChNoLogy, WesTeRa (2004) statEd ThaT inNovatIVe teChnoloGy can proMote tHE active involveMEnt and motivatIOn O F StUDentS thRough active ManiPUlatIon oF ObJecTS, partIcipaTiON iN Games, simulations, and CoMmunitIes, anD preferences dEfined by thE INDividual User (wEsTEra, 2004). Theoretical ExplaNations o f tEChnologiCal deTerminisM. Various aCCOunts and TheOriEs hAve BEEn Proposed to expLAIn thE dEgree to WhiCh technOloGy iS puRpoRtEd to drive Society aNd HiStOrY. ThE debaTE sometimEs FocUsEs oN whetHEr or noT autoNomy CaN iMPutEd to tecHNoLOGy itSeLf, IndePenDeNt of sOciaL ConStraintS, or whetheR teCHnolOgY's Agency oCcurs within a cOmPlex interaCtIon Of sociAL Factors (MArx & Smith, 1994; Smith, 1994). One framewoRK that haS beEn proPoseD involves The CategoRieS Of hard And sofT deteRmIniSM (marx & SMITh, 1994; strObEl & Tillberg-wEBb, 2009). 101 HArd anD sOft tEchnoloGical determinism. ThE PerSpective o f harD teChnoLOGiCal DEtERmiNiSM atTRIbutes agency to tEchnology iTsELf (marx & Smith, 1994) tO The ExTent thaT technoLogy hAS a deterMined and dOminant auToNomy OF Its Own to cause Social chAnge, indepENdent OF sOcial ConStrainTs (smiTh, 1994; StrObel & TiLLbeRg-WebB, 2009). The viEw Of soft TechnOlOgical deTerminism also asserts thaT technOlogy DriVes social ChaNGe (SMith, 1994), but seEs teChnology as One InfLuencE amONg othErs, oCCuRriNG alonGsidE A complex iNTeRacTIOn Of social, ecoNOMIc, pOlitiCal, ANd cultUral Factors (Marx & Smith, 1994; STRobel & Tillberg-WEbb, 2009). EVEN if HarD TechNoLogical determiNisM iS REjected sUcH that technoLogy is noT iMPuted To
 and opponents have belief s influenc ed by  te chn ol ogic al d eterminist ass u mpti ons and the idea thatthe e ff e ctso ftechn ologica l  c h a nge  a re  in ev i ta ble.100  In the  previousdis cu ssion of Fou n da tions in P hil osophy of Te chn ology,  i t w a s sta ted  that  an ad v antage  of Borgm an n 's the o ry o ft e ch nolo gy is that it com b in e s elements oftechno lo g ic a l  op tim ism, witharecog n ition t h at t e chn o logy can caus e alienatio n  or  detac hm ent from e xiste nt i alconcerns of li fe (Weste ra, 20 0 4). Inc ontrast  withphi los ophe r ssu chas Mar c el , E l lul , and Jo na swho t ende d t o  foc uson a  pess imistic viewoftech n olo gy (E llul;  201 0;  Jona s, 200 9; Jo na s, 2010; Treano r, 2 010), Bor gma nn  re co gnize d  thattec hno logy ha s provi d edre l i e ffrom some of the d ru d g er y, miser y, and to il that was  c har acte r i sticof p r e- technolo gicall if e(Borgma nn , 2009 ).  Bo rgm ann a l so h eld th at techn ology can be pursued in a way that fo c a lt hing s a nd practice s ar e  kep t at th e c e nterof ou rl iv e s (Borgmann, 2009).  I n appl yingBorgmann's th ought to e d u c ationaltech n ol o gy, Westera (2 004)stated tha t  innovat ive t echnolog y can pro m o te the a cti veinv olv e m en t and motivat i o n ofstudent s t hroughact ive  ma nip ul ation ofobjects,  p ar ti ci pat ion i n  games,si mul at ion s, an d  commu nitie s, a nd  p r efe rencesd ef i n ed b yth e in div id ual u ser( Wes tera, 2 004). The ore t ical  e xp lanatio ns o f techno lo gical dete rm ini sm. Va r i ous acco unts and theories haveb een pro pos ed to  exp lain thedeg ree to  wh i ch tec hnolog y ispu rpo r t ed to d ri veso ciety andh i sto ry. T he  deb ate som etimes focuses onw het her or not au ton omyc a nimp u te d  to  t e chn o l ogy itself, ind ependent o fs oc ial constr a int s,  or whe ther te chnol o gy's ag ency occu rs within  a  com p l exinteractio n of soc ial facto r s (Ma r x& Smi th,  1994;  S mit h, 19 94). O n e f ramew ork th at  has b een p ro posed in volves the categories o f hard  andsof t determi nis m  (M arx & Smi th,1994; Stro bel  &Tillb erg - Webb,  200 9 ).  10 1  Hard  and soft tech n ol ogi c a ldeterminism . T hepersp ect i ve o f  har d technological d e terminism attr ibut e s  ag enc y  tote chnology itsel f ( Ma r x  & Smith ,1994) to th e extent  t h at te chnolo gy has  a dete r m in e d anddomi nan t autonom y o fi ts ownto  c a use so cial  c hange,  indep e nden t of social constr aints ( Smith ,  19 94; S tr obel &T illb erg-Webb,2009). Theview o f so ft te chnolog ic al det erm in ism also a s serts tha t tec hnology  d rive s s ocialchan g e  (Smi th,19 94) , but see s te c hn ol o gyas o ne in fl uenc e among o t hers, oc cur r ing alo ng sid e a comp l ex i nteraction  of  soci a l , economic ,  pol i ti c al, a nd cul turalfactors (Ma rx  & Smit h,1 9 94; Strob el & Till b erg -W ebb,  2009).Ev en i fhar dtechnological d etermini sm is re j e cted s uch that techno lo gy is not im puted  t o 
 and_opponents have_beliefs influenced by technological_determinist assumptions_and_the idea_that_the effects of_technological change are_inevitable. 100 In the_previous discussion of_Foundations_in Philosophy of Technology, it was stated that an advantage of Borgmann's theory o_f_technology is_that_it_combines elements of technological optimism,_with a recognition that technology_can cause_alienation or detachment from existential concerns o f_life_(Westera, 2004). In_contrast with philosophers such as Marcel, Ellul, and Jonas_who tended to focus on a_pessimistic view of_technology_(Ellul;_2010; Jonas, 2009; Jonas,_2010; Treanor, 2010), Borgmann recognized that_technology has provided relief from some_of the drudgery, misery, and toil that_was characteristic of pre-technological life (Borgmann,_2009). Borgmann also held that_technology can_be pursued in a way_that focal things_and practices_are kept at_the center of our lives (Borgmann,_2009). In applying_Borgmann's thought to educational technology, Westera_(2004)_stated that innovative_technology_can_promote the_active involvement and_motivation_o f_students_through active manipulation of objects, participation_in_games, simulations, and communities, and preferences defined_by the individual user_(Westera,_2004). Theoretical explanations o_f technological determinism. Various accounts_and theories have been proposed to_explain the_degree to_which technology is purported to drive society and history. The debate_sometimes focuses on whether or not_autonomy can imputed to_technology itself,_independent_of social constraints,_or_whether technology's_agency occurs within a complex interaction of_social factors_(Marx & Smith, 1994; Smith, 1994)._One framework that has_been_proposed involves the categories of hard_and soft determinism (Marx & Smith,_1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009)._101_Hard_and soft technological determinism. The_perspective o f hard technological determinism_attributes agency to_technology itself (Marx & Smith, 1994) to_the_extent that technology has a determined_and_dominant autonomy of its own to_cause_social_change, independent of social constraints_(Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009)._The view of soft technological determinism also asserts that_technology drives social_change (Smith, 1994), but sees_technology_as_one influence among others, occurring alongside a complex interaction of_social, economic,_political, and cultural_factors (Marx & Smith, 1994; Strobel & Tillberg-Webb, 2009). Even_if hard technological determinism is rejected such_that technology is not imputed to