In business, technology is nothing but the application of science and math for a particular purpose. Technology is thus the synonym for science and technology. In the broadest sense, technology can be regarded as the application of human knowledge and skills in order to achieve some result desirable to the person who wishes to employ it. Technology is thus the collective term for the variety of human skills and knowledge utilized in the different fields of human endeavor and activity.
Schatzberg’s notion of technological change can be classified into two broad categories. The first is cultural and the second is rational. In the former, technological changes are viewed as motivated by an underlying cultural philosophy, whereas in the latter, technological developments are viewed as motivated by rational considerations in the light of past experience and current knowledge. In Schatzberg’s conceptualization, technological change is viewed as the product of a social history of scientific and technological developments that have transpired over the course of history. Thus, technological change is seen as having cultural, rather than rational, grounds.
As technological objects and processes are developed, they tend to displace various earlier forms of technological activity, especially the older forms that were more effective and productive. This phenomenon is known as technological change. There has been much research on this subject, including research by Chaserto and Wells, wherein they looked at the impact of new technologies on organizations.
In his exposition of the dilemma posed by technological change, Chaserto points out that, as technologies change, people must also change, since people and their ways of thought and culture are in constant flux. Thus, in order to avoid becoming obsolete, technological innovations must themselves be innovative. This innovative impulse might then push an organization to go beyond the established norms, which in turn might threaten the very existence of the new, revolutionary technology. In the case of scientific innovations, for example, it has been argued that, contrary to Schatzberg’s notion, scientific innovations are not immune from the effects of technology, because technology can make them sub-optimal. Thus, even if the technology is good, it might displace other forms of technology or cause people to be jaded about using them because it makes them seem old-fashioned. Moreover, technological change tends to accentuate rather than dampen, the value of certain forms of creativity.
Furthermore, according to Schatzberg, technology is a relation between things and people, a relation which he equates with the notion of value. He believes that it is technology which determines the value of the human form, since technological objects can provide the means to realize value. He goes on to say that value is determined not only by usefulness but by the manner in which objects are utilized, for example, beauty, novelty, usefulness, and innovation. Thus, instead of viewing technology as an abstract category, which could be combined into any and all categories, the meaning of technology as it relates to the twentieth century is determined by the existence and significance of particular forms of innovation. Such forms include technological objects such as technological books, automobiles, sewing machines, communications systems, television sets, and so on.
According to Schatzberg, value is also a subjective concept, which is determined by the extent to which it satisfies the needs of those who use it. This suggests that value is not a purely objective or ethereal concept, since it is not grounded on anything concrete. Rather, the value is determined by human needs, which are subjective in nature. Thus, instead of viewing technologies as a purely abstract category, we should view them more as a complex array of various technologies interacting with one another, generating new and innovative technologies as they go along. This way, the meaning of technology as it relates to the twentieth century becomes more evident.
In light of his arguments, the idea that technology is merely an analytical category is clearly problematic. According to him, there are too many different forms of technology, each having their own independent interests, goals, and potentials. By identifying technology as an Analytical category, Schatzberg effectively renders technology more of a vague and generalized term, as opposed to an object in itself. However, in some ways the term technology seems to fit the bill, where an object cannot be viewed in its pure form, as in the case of machines. However, it may be argued that technology is still more accurately viewed as an object, as it tends to speak of specific technological objects.
The meaning of technology, according to Schatzberg, has changed significantly over the years, with the twentieth century seeing significant shifts in its meaning. For instance, in the early twentieth century, technology was understood to refer to the advances made by science and technology, especially the technological aspects of scientific, technological, and social progress. In addition, there was also a movement towards technology as an integrated field, with technology being seen to have multiple fields of applicability, including business, industry, engineering, and society. However, these definitions were challenged in more recent years, with some arguing that technology has become too diffuse to be considered an actual field, instead becoming a set of concepts and practices. Such an approach would also seem to contradict the notion that technology has a universal significance, since it is not tied down by any particular theoretical domain, which some philosophers and linguists have claimed, especially in the case of philosophy and the human sciences.