We are continuing on in our series discussing Kids & Technology.
In our last post, we looked at two approaches to parenting, generally-speaking, and how these can be instructive for how we approach technology with our children. In this post, we’ll learn about two key principles of technology from the field of media ecology, which will help us to understand the importance of intentionality when parenting our children in their use of technology.
We Shape Our Tools, but Our Tools Shape Us
In Psalm 115 we read…
2 Why should the nations say,
“Where is their God?”
3 Our God is in the heavens;
he does all that he pleases.
4 Their idols are silver and gold…
the work of human hands…
8 Those who make them become like them;
so do all who trust in them.
—Psalm 115:2-4,8
It is easy in our understanding of texts like this to think of idols in the spiritual sense, while losing the simple fact that idols are things crafted with human hands. They are tools. They have a connection to the spiritual, for sure, but are still, in their essence, merely objects made by human hands.
Did you catch what Scripture says about these idols? These inanimate objects actually shape those that make them, and even those that trust in them.
These things created by human hands are shaped by their creators, yet simultaneously, these things created by humans hands shape their creators as well.
As we think about idols, I think we tend to under-materialize the works of human hands in Scripture, but then we under-spiritualize the works of human hands today.
Philosopher Hannah Arendt put it this way…“…the things that owe their existence exclusively to men nevertheless constantly condition their human makers.”1
We make our tools, and our tools make us.
But how is it that our tools shape us?
We already have said in a previous post that every technology is an extension, but with every extension there is also amputation
As we depend on technology for something, we then get worse at doing that thing, because we no longer have to.
Andy Crouch says that there are two promises with every technology: “Now you can” and “now you no longer have to.” But he says there are also two consequences with every technology: “Now you’ll no longer be able to” and “Now you’ll have to.”2
In his 1964 book, the Technological Society, priest and philosopher Jacques Ellul warns, “The machine tends not only to create a new human environment, but also to modify man’s very essence. He must adapt himself, as though the world were new, to a universe for which he was not created.”3
Millenia ago Socrates bemoaned the “amputations” that writing would have on a person’s memory. He laments, ”For this invention will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it, because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them.”4
To extend Socrates’ groanings to a current technology, what consequences (a la Crouch) come of Google search? Well, to twin consequences: now you’ll no longer be able to remember any facts, or quotes, or…Bible verses, and now you’ll have to have a device on you at all times to access any type of important knowledge.
With every technology there is an extension, but there is also an amputation.
That’s the main thrust of Psalm 115:8; if we depend on an idol (extension) we no longer depend on the LORD (amputation).
Those who make them become like them;
so do all who trust in them.
—Psalm 115:2-8
Technology Is Not Neutral
Saying technology is not neutral is not a statement on its morality. It is not saying a piece of technology is morally good or morally evil.
To say technology is not neutral is to say that every technology has a bias. It has a telos or an end. Every technology is created with a purpose to achieve a certain job.
For us, as Christians, this principle squares nicely with our worldview.
We serve a God who creates with purpose, with intentionality. He created all things with a telos. As his image-bearers, we too create things with a purpose, with a telos.
Because every technology is created with a telos, every technology has an inherent bias, a way or purpose for being used. It has an bias baked into its very essence.
A pencil is created for writing.
A hammer is created for hitting.
A chair is created for sitting.
Because a technology has a bias does not mean that it can only be used in a certain way, but rather that the path of least resistance is that it be used in accordance with its bias.
That’s why it’s easier to use a pencil for writing than for roasting marshmallows.
Or it’s easier to use a hammer for hitting a nail than raking leaves.
In his book, Media Ecology, Lance Strate writes…
A bias does not represent absolute command over us…but rather a path of least resistance. We can always choose to move against the pull of the prevailing bias, and there is also the possibility of reinvention, as an alternate use of a technology that in effect transforms it into a different technology. The concern…is the degree to which we cede control to the biases of technology.5
We need to know and understand that each technology imbibes the intent of the creator, but also that it can morph into beyond the creator’s original intent (sounds a little like the story of Genesis 1-3). Again this does not communicate morality, but merely an operational bias.
This idea is so important for us as Christians to know and understand because it helps us to understand that technologies created by man do not always take us or our kids, or our society, or our churches down the same path that God wants us to go.
Especially in a culture shaped and animated by the Myth of Human Progress, we need to know and understand that our technologies are created by fallible people, and as such they often have fallible biases.
Oftentimes, we approach our technology like we’re getting on a bicycle; if we sit on a bike, it will only start moving if we pedal it, and will only go a direction if we steer it. It’s all about how we use it. The aims of the technology is dictated by the user, not the technology.
But that’s not how technology—especially those built around the foundation of the attention economy—operates. A much more apt metaphor for technology is like getting in a car and it idling forward. And really at the rate of technological change of today, it’s probably better said that using technology is like getting in an idling car that’s at the top of Pike’s Peak. If you don’t hit the brake, it’s just going to go barreling in one direction, and maybe a direction you don’t want it to go.
That Time My Kids Talked About Big Butts Over Breakfast
Not too long ago, I was eating breakfast with my boys, and my oldest son started to tell me something that happened during his rest time. “Dad,” he sheepishly began, “something bad happened during rest yesterday, and I need to tell you about it.”
Knowing what was coming because of my wife’s forewarning, I invited him to go on.
“The other day during rest, I asked Alexa to play Pete the Cat and a different song came on. And the girl said, ‘Oh. My. God, Becky. Look at her butt, it is so big.’”
Like a witness of a crime, my son’s face was concerned with what had transpired.
“That was bad,” he concluded.
I calmly said, “Ya, bud, that’s not good.”
My middle son, who is three and tends to be aloof in general, said, “What did she say?”
At which point my oldest son recounted it all over again.
So, we didn’t get into the objectification of woman, but did have discuss that those aren’t some of the words that our family says.
Now, that’s a silly example, and by God’s grace, a fairly inconsequential technological mishap. But it is illustrative of the fact that the desire we have to cultivate environments for our little plants to flourish in Christ is often overridden by the ends of a technocratic society.
These two principles—our technology shapes us and our technology is not neutral—will help us to be able to more fully understand our next post where we unpack the question: what our digital technologies are doing to our kids?
Nicholas J. Weyrens 