ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2930|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教:GWD-8-Q25 -Q28中一句话的意思,呵呵

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2007-7-5 15:07:00 | 只看该作者

请教:GWD-8-Q25 -Q28中一句话的意思,呵呵

1.         GWD-8-Q25-Q28

Jon Clark’s study of the effect of

the modernization of a telephone

exchange on exchange maintenance

Line      work and workers is a solid contribution

(5)       to a debate that encompasses two

lively issues in the history and social-

ogy of technology: technological

determinism and social constructivism.

Clark makes the point that the char-

(10)      acteristics of a technology have a

decisive influence on job skills and

work organization. Put more strongly,

technology can be a primary determi-

nant of social and managerial organ-

(15)      ization. Clark believes this possibility

has been obscured by the recent soci-

ological fashion, exemplified by

Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes

the way machinery reflects social

(20)      choices. For Braverman, the shape of

a technological system is subordinate

to the manager’s desire to wrest control

of the labor process from the

workers. Technological change is

(25)      construed as the outcome of negotiations

among interested parties who

seek to incorporate their own interests

into the design and configuration of the

machinery. This position represents

(30)      the new mainstream called social con-

structivism.

The constructivists gain acceptance

by misrepresenting technological deter-

minism: technological determinists are

(35)      supposed to believe, for example, that

machinery imposes appropriate forms

of order on society. The alternative to

constructivism, in other words, is to

view technology as existing outside

(40)      society, capable of directly influencing

skills and work organization.

Clark refutes the extremes of the

constructivists by both theoretical and

empirical arguments. Theoretically he

(45)      defines “technology” in terms of relationships

between social and technical

variables. Attempts to reduce the

meaning of technology to cold, hard

metal are bound to fail, for machinery

(50)      is just scrap unless it is organized

functionally and supported by approp-

riate systems of operation and main-

tenance. At the empirical level Clark

shows how a change at the telephone

(55)      exchange from maintenance-intensive

electromechanical switches to semi-

electronic switching systems altered

work tasks, skills, training opportunities,

administration, and organization of

(60)      workers. Some changes Clark attri-

butes to the particular way management

and labor unions negotiated the intro-

duction of the technology, whereas

others are seen as arising from the

(65)      capabilities and nature of the technol-

ogy itself. Thus Clark helps answer

the question: “When is social choice

decisive and when are the concrete

characteristics of technology more

important?”

这个alternative到底是谁的观点?是结构主义的观点么?但是从后面的capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.来看,似乎这个观点表达的内容和Clark的观点一样阿。。。


[此贴子已经被作者于2007-7-6 14:10:16编辑过]
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2007-7-6 14:11:00 | 只看该作者
upup
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2007-7-6 20:09:00 | 只看该作者
upup
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2007-7-7 10:28:00 | 只看该作者

upup

5#
发表于 2007-7-7 13:23:00 | 只看该作者

The constructivists gain acceptance

by misrepresenting
                technological deter-

minism: technological determinists are

(35)      supposed to believe, for example, that
            

machinery imposes appropriate forms

of order on society. The alternative to

constructivism, in other words, is to

view technology as existing outside

(40)      society, capable of directly influencing
            

skills and work organization.

Clark refutes the extremes of the

constructivists by both theoretical and

empirical arguments. Theoretically he

(45)      defines “technology” in terms of relationships
            

between social and technical

variables. Attempts to reduce the

meaning of technology to cold, hard

metal are bound to fail, for machinery

(50)      is just scrap unless it is organized
            

functionally and supported by approp-

riate systems of operation and main-

tenance.

红的词是说social constructivism污蔑了technological determinism来占上风, 蓝的词是他们具体怎么污蔑的. 就是把technological determinism 作为一个很极端的观念来推广, 说这个概念只是一个冷冷的机器而已, 在社会外层想要控制社会.  绿的地方是Clark的反驳, 说technological determinism的概念其实是和社会的结构和人的支持离不开的, 是多种系统配合情况下才能成功的.  然后他开始提数据empirical data来更加强他的观点.  你要看清楚他说的和SC的污蔑是有根本性的不同的.

6#
发表于 2009-7-24 00:04:00 | 只看该作者
up
7#
发表于 2009-7-30 23:57:00 | 只看该作者

see see

8#
发表于 2009-7-31 22:31:00 | 只看该作者
.
9#
发表于 2011-8-14 10:44:33 | 只看该作者

The alternative to
constructivism, in other words, is to
view technology as existing outside
(40)      society, capable of directly influencing



skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the
constructivists by both theoretical and
empirical arguments. Theoretically he
(45)      defines “technology” in terms of relationships



between social and technical
variables. Attempts to reduce the
meaning of technology to cold, hard
metal are bound to fail,
这个alternative到底是谁的观点?是结构主义的观点么?但是从后面的capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.来看,似乎这个观点表达的内容和Clark的观点一样阿。。。


[此贴子已经被作者于2007-7-6 14:10:16编辑过]


-- by 会员 ysl246 (2007/7/5 15:07:00)



这个是结构主义的观点拉。
capable of directly influencing不是clark的观点。问题在于directly,clark并不认为tech是直接影响的,而且通过与其他东西结合来影响的。这就是文章提到的clark不走极端(橙色部分)
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-6-11 14:03
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部