麻烦路过的NN帮个忙 OG13 阅读 123题 关于技术决定论和社会constructivism的讨论

ljwqlcl881703

    Jon Clark’s study of the effect of the modernization of a telephone exchange on exchange maintenance work and workers is a solid contribution to a debate that encompasses two lively issues in the history and sociology of technology:  technological determinism and social constructivism.
    Clark makes the point that the characteristics 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 organization.  Clark believes this possibility has been obscured by the recent sociological fashion, exemplified by Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes the way machinery reflects social 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 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  the new mainstream called social constructivism.
   The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism:  technological determinists are 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 society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.
        Clark refutes the extremes of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments.  Theoretically he defines “technology” in terms of rela- tionships between social and technical variables.  Attempts to reduce the meaning of technology to cold, hard metal are bound to fail, for machinery is just scrap unless it is organized functionally and supported by appropriate systems of operation and maintenance.  At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers.  Some changes Clark attributes to the particular way management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology, whereas others are seen as arising from the capabilities and nature of the technology itself.  Thus Clark helps answer the question:  “When is social choice decisive and when are the concrete characteristics of technology more important?”

123. The information in the passage suggests that which of the following statements from hypothetical sociological studies of change in industry most clearly exemplifi es the social constructivists’ version of technological determinism?
(A) It is the available technology that determines workers’ skills, rather than workers’ skills influencing the application of technology.
(B) All progress in industrial technology grows out of a continuing negotiation between technological possibility and human need.
(C) Some organizational change is caused by people; some is caused by computer chips.
(D) Most major technological advances in industry have been generated through research and development.
(E) Some industrial technology eliminates jobs, but educated workers can create whole new skills areas by the adaptation of the technology.

虽然不是自己打的字儿 但是排版也很累  所以希望经过的NN 或者 熟悉OG 阅读的朋友帮忙解答下
题目问social constructivist (SC)对于technological determinism (TD)的观点 即看法 也就是我标绿的那句话 我的理解是 SC对于TD的理解认为TD所认为的是技术决定了社会（工作技能和工作组织） 依据作者的意思  SC曲解了TD的意思 就是说SC曲解的技术决定社会的观点是错误的 可是文中 （红字儿部分）又说明了作者支持TD的观点 技术决定社会（即TD本身就这么认为的） 那为何这题A答案 成为SC所误解的观点 又在文章中成为了TD实际的认识（承认技术决定社会）  这不是矛盾的么？
另外绿色字体部分 capable of... 这里我理解的是修饰社会  即社会具有影响skills and work organization的能力 可是A答案是技术决定了社会 如果把技术变成社会到是没疑问了- -  顺道说说你们对这里 the alternative to 的理解吧 每次遇到都这词儿都晕了
路过的NN 不胜感激  真心求解答 好人快来~~~~~~~

ljwqlcl881703

求好心人！！！！

yyb3well

我试着来解读一下这篇文章
这篇文章奇怪的地方在于TD对于技术的观点和SC对技术的观点差别很细微，前者认为技术对社会、组织的影响是primary determinant；后者认为技术的地位是完全压倒性的：imposes appropriate forms of order on society 和 directly influencing skills and work organization这两句话可以读出来这个观点。
123题的选项中只有A表达这个意思，其他几个选项是比较明显的陪衬选项，因为它们的意思实在是和原文相应段落的意思不搭配。
我觉得GMAT的人文类文章中的观点对比往往不是简单的正反、增减对比。读文章的时候对此要有心理准备，不要被这种微妙的对比搞晕。

yyb3well

补充一下，SC对于TD观点的解读是：技术对社会和组织的作用是压倒性的。这是SC对TD的误解。

ljwqlcl881703

yyb3well 发表于 2013-11-2 02:22
补充一下，SC对于TD观点的解读是：技术对社会和组织的作用是压倒性的。这是SC对TD的误解。 ...

谢谢你的帮助  
就是说SC 对TD  是觉得TD把技术理解成完全作用了社会和组织  而TD本身只是 觉得技术是主要因素 对么？另看下 那个capable of 修饰的是society么？ 再次谢谢！

ljwqlcl881703

yyb3well 发表于 2013-11-2 02:22
补充一下，SC对于TD观点的解读是：技术对社会和组织的作用是压倒性的。这是SC对TD的误解。 ...

再问下 文中第三段  view technology  as existing outside society 怎么解毒 不是说技术存在于社会之外了么 怎么理解技术对社会有压倒性的作用？

yyb3well

你的第一个回复：就好比我说“中国是人类历史上最伟大的国家之一”；好事者把这句话说成“中国是人类历史上最伟大的国家”。尽管方向上一致，但是程度上做了夸张。这也是GMAT设计陪衬选项的主要套路之一。不要纠结于句子里每一个词什么意思，做阅读的时候你没这个时间，重要的是你要看出这种套路设计，这需要多做分析总结，还有练习。
你的第二个回复：view technology  as existing outside society的意思是什么你单拿出来的确很难解读。但是和它前一句话放在一起看就很清楚了。不仅是GMAT文章，任何普通文章行文都是这样的：当你提出一个观点以后，你总要对它做出一些解释，你提问的这句话就是对那一段观点的解释，或者说，叫同义重复。这种句子要明白它在段落或文章中起到的作用，不要纠结于词语的意思。

yyb3well

漏了一个问题：capable of 是否修饰society
这句话我只能根据上下文从语义上认为它修饰technology，看起来是独立主格的样子；具体语法上的问题你要去SC论坛上发问。

ljwqlcl881703

yyb3well 发表于 2013-11-3 01:05
漏了一个问题：capable of 是否修饰society
这句话我只能根据上下文从语义上认为它修饰technology，看起来 ...

明白了 谢谢！

SuperTroy

yyb3well 发表于 2013-11-2 02:21
我试着来解读一下这篇文章
这篇文章奇怪的地方在于TD对于技术的观点和SC对技术的观点差别很细微，前者认为 ...

非常受益，谢谢！