Everyone has noticed that new technologies rarely do exactly what they are supposed to. They were created to solve a problem, and they may do that, but coming along for the ride may be some new problems that we hadn't anticipated. And in the worst cases, the "solution" can make things worse. The more technology we have, the more additional technology we need to solve the problems.
Edward Tenner is no Luddite. He does not take the concepts of the above paragraph and turn them into a backward-looking lament about how we never should have started on this technological path. But he does take a hard look at the technical fixes we have been applying in areas like medicine, the environment, sports, and the office.
"Why Things Bite Back" is a historical exploration of our attempts to improve the world and our lives with gadgets, drugs, modified plants and animals, and other technological means. It is an even-handed reaction against the technophile attitude that technology will bring about a huge transformation of our lives such that everything is simple, we will wield vast power with the touch of a button, and so on. He says simply, "Let's look at the evidence."
Much of the book is about the counterexamples he found when he did this exercise. [BTW, this book was written in 1996, so it's not really about the latest bubble. He does a nice job of drawing his examples from all over the post-Renaissance tech boom.] The unintended consequences largely fall into two broad categories:
Note that Tenner's examples do not invalidate the cases where technology did simplify our lives and did have the intended effect. But they are real counterexamples, and worth thinking about. All the data do not lie on a perfect, monotonically increasing line.
So the book basically says, "Yes, but." Yes, our lives are better, and simpler in many cases.... but not always. This may be annoying to both lovers and haters of technology who want to just believe half the evidence. But Tenner is willing to see the whole picture. It is fair to say that he is most concerned not about technology itself, but about our blind faith in it-- that in itself can lead us to being inadequately skeptical of our inventions.
I do have some complaints about the book, however. First is Tenner's vocabulary. He glibly uses the term "revenge effect" for unintended consequences. I understand that Tenner is trying to capture the frustration we feel with our gadgets-- as if they are "out to get us"-- for indeed it sometimes feels like that. But still, the implied volition of the technology rankled. Tenner also spends the first chapter ("Ever Since Frankenstein") defining a complex series of terms like recomplicating effect and reverse revenge effect (which actually means that the technology did better at what it was supposed to than originally anticipated). I found all of this baggage to be a bit tedious. Oh, one more thing about terminology-- this book is not about why things bite back, but how.
A further complaint is that Tenner leaves his analysis unfinished. He writes a long book with hundreds of examples of how introducing technology (or even moving Nature around, such as by transplanting species from one part of the world to another) is a complicated affair that rarely goes exactly as planned. But then he stops. He doesn't tie it all together into a solid ending. He sprinkles specific recommendations here and there in the main text, but I found the conclusion unsatisfying.
Tenner could have said a lot of things. He could have tied his ideas into the notion that complex systems, like modern society or like our own bodies, tend to react to inputs on multiple fronts; pushing in one place creates several reaction forces, which may then interact. He could have made an eloquent plea for a more strategic deployment of technology-- that we ought to consider more scenarios a priori, that we ought to be more aware of techological history, that we ought to manage techology with more foresight.
But he mostly ignores these top-level summaries. He is content to have written a book that mainly says, "Yes, but." It is a cathartic read for those who suspect that the technophiles are a little too starry-eyed, and that skepticism about techology is OK. But I think he misses a chance to take his analysis to a higher level because he really is onto something important. The power of our current techologies is increasing-- meaning that they can affect more people over a wider area and for a longer time. We should begin to treat new techologies with the same techniques that are applied by, say, physicians or military tacticians-- the techniques of risk management.
Tenner takes the first step, but doesn't quite follow through. Nonetheless, he has done his homework and provides an enjoyable and thought-provoking read. I'll give "Why Things Bite Back" a weak +.
Copyright © Kim Allen 2002
