{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title":"技术体系：理性的社会生活","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787552024104","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","uuid":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title":"技术体系：理性的社会生活","normalized_title":"技术体系理性的社会生活","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787552024104","isbns":["9787552024104"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":328,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%E4%BD%93%E7%B3%BB%EF%BC%9A%E7%90%86%E6%80%A7%E7%9A%84%E7%A4%BE%E4%BC%9A%E7%94%9F%E6%B4%BB","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/search"},"page":{"printed_page":244,"pdf_page":260,"physical_index":260,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"10dadef4d15522ff065a6234bd7d559f77f4c1a8b04b05c5f273f0219acb2781"},"chapter":"第七章抗争的逻辑","content":"正如我在第五章中所论述的那样，技术体系只能通过格式塔转换从内部改变。第六章在功能性逻辑的双重方面展示了切换的基础。技术专家在任何技术变革中都扮演着重要的角色，但并不是孤军奋战。用户和受害者根据其经验和参与者的兴趣对他们涉入的技术体系做出评判。这些就是“定向”的反思性判断，可以经由两个方面得以分享：一是一般公众诉诸警示和权利主张等普遍化程序，二是专家将它们转化为技术上合理的语言与设计。①\n\n决定性判断和反思性判断是理性的不同表现，适合不同的域境，但能够在公共领域进行交流。这种沟通是关于技术体系的政治的公共论辩的基础。在这一章中，我拟运用工具化理论来探讨在此政治的修辞结构中反思性判断的作用。我将展示技术公民如何将他们的利益转化为获得他人认可的理性主张，以跟随阿伦特与康德并参照西蒙栋，实现我们所称的拓展的技术精神。\n\n双向理论\n\n新的技术公共理性是什么？它不能被归结为社会技术合理性和理解为对手段适应目的的因果洞察。适应预设了功能性的先验构成及其在社会中的地位，这正是工具化理论在更基本的本体论层面所解释的。在这个层面上，操作和类型所扮演的角色既是技术性的，也是规范性的。实践中的社会技术合理性西蒙栋的技术精神—明确地表达了设计的因果关系方面，同时隐含地涵盖了规范方面。技术操作和类型意味着以更好或更糟的方式来执行技术操作，在他们所属的社会世界中设计人造物和体系。\n\n244\n\n技术体系：理性的社会生活\n\n① Ferrara, TheForce of the Example, 72-75.","previous_page":243,"next_page":null}