Technological solutionism and the danger of a single story

Chimamanda Adiche’s famous book (and TED video with millions of views) “The danger of a single story” portrays the complexity of the social, cultural, and historical structures in which we are inserted as societies. So much is this complexity that the different prisms also need to be considered about the – so-called – technological solutions.

Why a single story for technologies?

There is an understandable enthusiasm for the technology. For a long time, everything that is “new”, “updated”, “modern” has been associated with bonuses for society. The refrigerator of the new model is better than the previous model, the car of the year has numerous advances compared to last year, the brands’ launch devices that always outperform others. This is associated with the current mode of production and consumption and can also be linked to a need to believe that what comes, comes for the better.

It turns out that technological advances and even what we consider a society do not follow a linear path. The idea that the future will always be better, despite functioning as a generator of hope, does not necessarily apply to the development of technology. It may even be used as a motto for life, but it is not really concerning technological development.

What are the problems of technological solutionism?

The single story that all technology is necessarily neutral, better than humans to perform a certain function or the missing piece in the puzzle, is extremely dangerous. First, because it is simplistic and lazy. It attributes to a mere tool – however robust it is, it is still a tool – solutions to dynamic, complex, and built problems over time. Second, because he forgets that (as my father says) within the word “bonus”, there is the word “onus”. And this burden is usually paid by collectives other than those to which the power to choose technology is attributed, which is a picture of injustice. Third, because it ignores social, historical, cultural interfaces, economic interests, inequalities in the development, manipulation, and use of technologies in general.

The story that all technologies are always good cannot be the only one, especially when they involve massive applications that enhance social problems. The dangerous and naive perspective that novelties that are generally produced in one part of the world and imported elsewhere are perfect mechanisms for needs (supposedly universal) cannot be the only way to fuel debates.

For some time now, non-discrimination has been a concern in the use of increasingly detailed technologies, based on huge volumes of personal data and unchecked reach. Thinking that the use of technology should not lead to discrimination, unequal opportunities or disadvantage for a portion of the population should be the basis for conversations about technology. This already appears in regulatory frameworks around the world, but it must also be understood in the field of technique, academia, public policies, the private sector, and civil society. The single story that technology always helps may involve commendable initiatives, to some extent good intentions, but have disastrous effects, whether they are known and predictable, or not.

The distribution of technology, from its conception processes to its use and availability, cannot be seen as a balanced scenario, either. Whether in the geopolitical framework remodeled by the Internet, in the diplomatic fields of cooperation in research and development, in the alarming indices of digital exclusion in Brazil and the world, finding that technology goes through a natural flow and simply reaches or not certain groups (due to destiny, perhaps?) ignores the real barriers faced by thousands of people to human, social and economic development.

We need to hear more

We need to learn to listen, to see, to understand the facts in different ways. Although this is a difficult exercise, uncomfortable and even, for some people, threatening. Knowing the other sides of the stories, going beyond the ears of books and leaving to face their dense and unknown contents, having contact with different realities, assimilating ideas that never crossed their minds. We also need to dedicate our attention to what we do not necessarily experience, but which impacts so many other lives.

Technological applications, enhanced by digitization, globalization, or what we simply call the internet, also have no single history. In this sense, ignoring different perspectives on them does not lead them to the path of development. Not just, humane, sustainable development, let alone serve to ensure that no one is left behind.

The views and opinions expressed in this blogpost are those of the author. 
Illustration by Freepik Stories.