In this blog post, we explore how technology and society influence each other and achieve harmony, based on the perspectives of technological determinism and social constructionism.
“People don’t know what they want until you show it to them. When we developed the iPhone and iPad, we didn’t need market research. Did Bell do market research when he invented the telephone? I just want innovation.“
These are the words of Steve Jobs, who created the iPhone that changed the world. This can be interpreted to mean that while many people don’t recognize the value of technology or products until they appear, society progresses only after new technologies emerge and their value is felt. This is a view based on ”technological determinism,” which holds that technology influences society.
Meanwhile, the public reacted to the iPad’s launch with comments like: “It replaced multiple devices—e-readers, game consoles, multimedia players (PMPs)—with one innovative product.” This implies that, though unspoken, many people were waiting for a tablet PC with diverse functions and excellent portability. The iPad, born to meet this consumer expectation, was readily accepted because people had already experienced PMPs, e-book readers, Nintendo, and similar devices. This aligns with the “social constructivism” theory, which states that technology is born and develops based on the demands of society’s members.
The debate over whether technology influences society or whether society and its members influence technological development has persisted since ancient times. This debate is theorized as “technological determinism” versus “social constructivism,” standing in sharp opposition.
Regarding these two positions, I believe most existing technologies developed under the influence of society’s members and social atmosphere. That is, whether technology satisfies members’ desires and whether society has developed enough to accept it significantly impacts technology’s adoption and advancement. Let’s reconsider Steve Jobs’ words. Did he truly not conduct market research for products? At the time, Apple focused on user interfaces to develop differentiated products, and Steve Jobs was at the center of this effort. While Jobs was a staunch technological innovator, the iPhone could only emerge because he prioritized creating products that users could easily enjoy and use. This demonstrates that user-centered thinking was Steve Jobs’s unique form of market research.
Thinking more broadly about smartphones, many people consider the iPhone to be the first smartphone, but the actual first smartphone was the ‘Simon’ created by IBM in 1992. If technological determinists were correct, the global frenzy seen when the iPhone debuted in 2007 should have occurred 15 years earlier in 1992. However, the Simon sold only about 50,000 units before ending up in a museum. At that time, the concept of making calls while moving was still unfamiliar to people, so they weren’t ready to accept a phone with features beyond calling. In contrast, the situation in the mid-2000s when the iPhone launched was different. Various forms and functions of mobile phones were already on the market, and people were dissatisfied with existing phones. Recognizing this atmosphere, Apple prioritized user convenience and usability when launching the iPhone, allowing the public to become enthusiastic about it. Seeing how the same type of technology receives different responses and develops depending on the specific era demonstrates that technology is influenced by society.
The same holds true for smartphone applications (apps) and app stores. Smartphone owners desired functionality beyond that of traditional phones, but these desires varied greatly from person to person. In this context, the app store emerged as a platform where desired functions could be created as ‘apps’ and sold or purchased. Driven by consumers’ relentless demand for new features, the number of apps available on app stores grew exponentially. In response, developers strove to create apps that sold better, leading to rapid advancements in app development technology itself. Thus, apps and app stores did not evolve purely as technologies; rather, they developed due to the social environment created by smartphone technology and consumers’ desire for new functions.
Beyond this, many past technologies have also evolved under the influence of their social environment. Examples include the internet, conceived in the US during the Cold War as a network that could function under any circumstances, assuming a Soviet attack; computers, which originated as military equipment during World War II for ballistic calculations and cryptanalysis; and nuclear technology, which began in pure physics but developed into a weapon of mass destruction due to the social atmosphere of war.
One might question whether technologies first discovered by accident or through experimentation, rather than derived or developed from other technologies, are independent foundational technologies unaffected by social demand, exerting their influence on society autonomously. However, upon deeper reflection, it becomes clear that even these technologies ultimately received recognition and developed precisely because they were influenced by their social environment.
Consider, for example, X-rays, commonly used in hospitals today. Röntgen discovered unexpected electromagnetic waves during experiments to confirm cathode ray fluorescence. Unable to identify their nature, he named them ‘X-rays’. These accidentally discovered X-rays played a crucial role in identifying the locations of injuries during World War I. Medical technology based on this discovery rapidly advanced, reaching today’s level. The fact that medical technology advanced due to an accidentally discovered technology suggests that technology can influence society. However, it was because the scientific community was already interested in radiation research that the discovery of X-rays was recognized as a technology and could be continuously studied. If the fields of electromagnetic waves or radiation had not been developed at that time, X-rays would likely have been dismissed as a mere experimental error. Furthermore, the high number of casualties during the war at that time made it possible to attempt applying X-rays to the medical field.
The same applies to penicillin discovered by Fleming. Penicillin, the foundation of modern antibiotics, has saved countless lives. However, it was the war, with its high number of casualties dying from bacterial infections, that drove Fleming to seek a way to inhibit bacterial growth. It was his diligent bacterial culture experiments that led to the discovery of penicillin. The social backdrop of war enabled Fleming to recognize the severity of bacterial infections and immerse himself in research.
Had X-rays been discovered in an era before electromagnetic wave research or during the Industrial Revolution instead of World War I, they might well have been used for industrial purposes. Similarly, penicillin might never have been discovered if the war hadn’t caused so many casualties, preventing Fleming from grasping the severity of bacterial infections. This shows that even technologies discovered by chance can be recognized and developed depending on their social environment.
Technology has evolved through societal selection since ancient times, and we live in a world where diverse technologies have advanced. However, it’s difficult to conclude that technology has been solely influenced by society. Like the age-old question of “which came first, the chicken or the egg?”, this issue can be interpreted differently depending on the observer’s perspective and values, and neither side can be definitively declared wholly correct. Technology provides society with opportunities for further advancement, and society, in turn, uses those opportunities to steer technology toward better development—they exist in a mutually complementary relationship. It is entirely possible that technology’s influence on society will only grow stronger in the future.
