Techne 14:1 Winter 2010 Feenberg,Ten Paradoxes of Technology/6 modernization would require the adoption of English! Good sewage systems and Roman alphabets form a niche essential to the proper functioning of these technologies just like the water in which fish swim.Technologies resemble animals in belonging to a specific niche in a specific society.They do not work well,if at all,outside that context.But the fact that technologies can be detached from their appropriate niche means they can be imported without bringing along all the contextual elements necessary for their proper functioning.Technologies can be plucked from the environment in which they originated and dropped into a new environment without afterthoughts.But this can be a formula for disaster Consider the adoption of the private automobile by China as a primary means of transportation. In February 2009 auto sales in China surpassed those in the United States for the first time.China is now the largest market for private cars in the whole world.This is not surprising given the size of China's population.But for that very same reason it was foolish to commit so many resources to the automobile.Automobiles are a very inefficient means of transportation.They consume a great deal of fuel for every passenger mile driven.China is so big that its participation in oil markets will eventually push prices up to the point where the private automobile will become unaffordable to operate.Meanwhile,China will have built its cities around automotive transportation with consequences that will be very expensive to reverse.Mistakes such as this occur because policymakers fail to realize the dependence of the parts on the whole.In this they resemble ordinary people everywhere in modern societies.Our common sense misleads us into imagining that technologies can stand alone. 2.The paradox of the obvious. Why do we think like this?Why does common sense tend to validate the first of the two images I have presented?I find the answer to these questions in another paradox which I will call the paradox of the obvious.Here is a general formulation:what is most obvious is most hidden.An amusing corollary dramatizes the point:fish do not know that they are wet.Now,I may be wrong about fish but I suspect that the last thing they think about is the medium of their existence,water. the niche to which they are so perfectly adapted.A fish out of water quickly dies but it is difficult to imagine fish enjoying a bath.Water is what fish take for granted just as we human beings take air for granted.We know that we are wet because water is not our natural medium.It exists for us in contrast to air.But like fish who do not know they are wet,we do not think about the air we breath. We have many other experiences in which the obvious withdraws from view.For example,when we watch a movie we quickly lose sight of the screen as a screen.We forget that all the action takes place in the same spot at a certain distance in front of us on a flat surface.A spectator unable to ignore the obvious would fail to foreground the action of the film and would remain disturbingly conscious of the screen.The medium recedes into the background and what we notice in the foreground are the effects it makes possible.This explains why we see the possession of wings as the adequate explanation of flying and why it looks to us like machines are composed of independent parts. 3.The paradox of the origin. Our forgetfulness also blinds us to the history of technical objects.These objects differ from ordinary things and people in the way they relate to time.This person,that book,the tree behind our house all have a past and that past can be read on his wrinkled and smiling face,the dog-earedTechné 14:1 Winter 2010 Feenberg, Ten Paradoxes of Technology/6 modernization would require the adoption of English! Good sewage systems and Roman alphabets form a niche essential to the proper functioning of these technologies just like the water in which fish swim. Technologies resemble animals in belonging to a specific niche in a specific society. They do not work well, if at all, outside that context. But the fact that technologies can be detached from their appropriate niche means they can be imported without bringing along all the contextual elements necessary for their proper functioning. Technologies can be plucked from the environment in which they originated and dropped into a new environment without afterthoughts. But this can be a formula for disaster. Consider the adoption of the private automobile by China as a primary means of transportation. In February 2009 auto sales in China surpassed those in the United States for the first time. China is now the largest market for private cars in the whole world. This is not surprising given the size of China's population. But for that very same reason it was foolish to commit so many resources to the automobile. Automobiles are a very inefficient means of transportation. They consume a great deal of fuel for every passenger mile driven. China is so big that its participation in oil markets will eventually push prices up to the point where the private automobile will become unaffordable to operate. Meanwhile, China will have built its cities around automotive transportation with consequences that will be very expensive to reverse. Mistakes such as this occur because policymakers fail to realize the dependence of the parts on the whole. In this they resemble ordinary people everywhere in modern societies. Our common sense misleads us into imagining that technologies can stand alone. 2. The paradox of the obvious. Why do we think like this? Why does common sense tend to validate the first of the two images I have presented? I find the answer to these questions in another paradox which I will call the paradox of the obvious. Here is a general formulation: what is most obvious is most hidden. An amusing corollary dramatizes the point: fish do not know that they are wet. Now, I may be wrong about fish but I suspect that the last thing they think about is the medium of their existence, water, the niche to which they are so perfectly adapted. A fish out of water quickly dies but it is difficult to imagine fish enjoying a bath. Water is what fish take for granted just as we human beings take air for granted. We know that we are wet because water is not our natural medium. It exists for us in contrast to air. But like fish who do not know they are wet, we do not think about the air we breath. We have many other experiences in which the obvious withdraws from view. For example, when we watch a movie we quickly lose sight of the screen as a screen. We forget that all the action takes place in the same spot at a certain distance in front of us on a flat surface. A spectator unable to ignore the obvious would fail to foreground the action of the film and would remain disturbingly conscious of the screen. The medium recedes into the background and what we notice in the foreground are the effects it makes possible. This explains why we see the possession of wings as the adequate explanation of flying and why it looks to us like machines are composed of independent parts. 3. The paradox of the origin. Our forgetfulness also blinds us to the history of technical objects. These objects differ from ordinary things and people in the way they relate to time. This person, that book, the tree behind our house all have a past and that past can be read on his wrinkled and smiling face, the dog-eared