Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front. Philos. China    2020, Vol. 15 Issue (4) : 612-635     https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-009-020-0035-6
RESEARCH ARTICLE
The Phenomenological Roots of Technological Intentionality: A Postphenomenological Perspective
Dmytro Mykhailov()
School of Public Administration, Department of Philosophy, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, China
Download: PDF(275 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Interest concerning the problem of technological activity has grown in philosophical discussions during recent decades. The crux of the matter is whether technological objects are mere means for achieving human goals or possess some sort of inherent active quality of their own that influences our behavior, perception, goals, and ethical beliefs. In this article, I aim to show that technology exhibits a specific quality of engagement that can be more clearly understood through the notion of technological intentionality. The term “technological intentionality” was first coined by the postphenomenological school of thought. However, it continues to beg for a more comprehensive and profound elucidation. In my investigation, I introduce the notion of technological intentionality from two major perspectives. The first perspective is deeply intertwined with Husserl’s notion of intentionality. Intentionality, in this context, represents an act through which a connection (or unity) between humans and the world can be reached. In my examination of the second perspective, I unpack the notion of technological intentionality and offer a conceptual description of its structure. Here I argue that technological intentionality is a specific sort of active relationship that appears between human consciousness and the world each time a technological object is in use. Technological objects here are not just passive instruments, but they also actively connect us with the environment in which we live.

Keywords phenomenology      philosophy of technology      intentionality      meaning      postphenomenology      technological intentionality     
Issue Date: 23 December 2020
 Cite this article:   
Dmytro Mykhailov. The Phenomenological Roots of Technological Intentionality: A Postphenomenological Perspective[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(4): 612-635.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-009-020-0035-6
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2020/V15/I4/612
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Dmytro Mykhailov
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Saulius Geniusas. Husserlian Phenomenology and Derridean Deconstruction: Their Fundamental Methodological Commitments[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(3): 451-471.
[2] Heath Williams. Analytic Phenomenology (or “What It Is Like”) vs. Husserlian Phenomenology[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(3): 427-450.
[3] LI Jing. Day and Night Overlap: Jan Patočka’s Phenomenological Interpretation of the Front-Line Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(3): 409-426.
[4] Genki Uemura. Articulating Consciousness: Brentano and Husserl on Descriptive Analysis[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(3): 352-379.
[5] Emilia Angelova. Hegel after Nancy: Sensibility, Singularity, and the Problem of the x[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 535-553.
[6] Hans-Georg Moeller. Necessity and Memory in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit: A Reconstruction[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 505-517.
[7] Giulio Tononi, Owen Flanagan. Philosophy and Science Dialogue: Consciousness[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 332-348.
[8] Hye Young Kim. A Phenomenological Approach to the Korean “We”: A Study in Social Intentionality[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(4): 612-632.
[9] Patricia Huntington. Place as Refuge: Exploring the Poetical Legacy of Matsuo Bashō[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(4): 572-590.
[10] Jos de Mul. The Earth Garden: Going Back or Going Forward to Nature?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(2): 237-248.
[11] CHEN Yajun. Between Darwin and Hegel: On Dewey’s Concept of Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 104-119.
[12] Tara Kennedy. The Ethics of Treating Animals as Resources: A Post-Heideggerian Approach[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 463-482.
[13] Megan Altman. Heidegger on the Struggle for Belongingness and Being at Home[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 444-462.
[14] JIN Xiping. Heidegger’s Conception of Being-with (Mitsein ) and His Simple Designation of Social and Political Reality in the Black Notebooks[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 415-429.
[15] François Raffoul. The Invisible and the Secret: Of a Phenomenology of the Inapparent[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 395-414.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed