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 sociol16
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 determinant
of social and managerial organ-
(15) ization. Clark believes this possibility
has been obscured by the recent sociological
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 constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance
by misrepresenting technological determinism:
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 appropriate
systems of operation and main17
tenance.
Q26:
The information in the passage suggests that Clark believes that which of the following
would be true if social constructivism had not gained widespread acceptance?
A. Businesses would be more likely to modernize without considering the social
consequences of their actions.
B. There would be greater understanding of the role played by technology in
producing social change.
C. Businesses would be less likely to understand the attitudes of employees affected
by modernization.
D. Modernization would have occurred at a slower rate.
E. Technology would have played a greater part in determining the role of business
in society.
这题给的答案是选B，但我认为应该选E，搜索过前面的连接，似乎大家恩威role of business无关。但我认为参考黑体定位，clark认为科技本来应该是决定社会和经营性组织的首要因素。但其作为首要因素的可能性被constructivism的流行而削弱了。所以对这个取非，应该是如果constructivsim没有被广泛认同，科技的决定作用还要高。B中的greater understanding似乎应该是大家认为的科技的作用应该更高，这不符合题目。所以应该E更为接近：即科技的决定作用更高。请各位牛牛指正。  | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-7-10 19:27:00
楼主
