How do we critically evaluate the social impact of the information and communications technology (ICT) that, in the developed world at least, is central to both economy and society. Market-oriented, functionalist and instrumental views tend to dominate discourse on ICT and the purpose of this paper is to challenge such views by suggesting a critical neo-humanist alternative. Harvey's critical analysis of recent industrial society, Aristotle's concept of phronesis and Heidegger's tool analysis set the scene for the main argument of the paper based on Habermas’ theory of communicative action. Using an illustrative case vignette from the Irish community sector, the paper argues that this theory provides potentially valid philosophical and social theoretical guidelines for a critical interpretive evaluation of the social impact of ICT that focuses attention on normative (‘lifeworld’) as distinct from instrumental (‘system’) forms of rationality.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlvessonM., and WilmottH. (eds) (1992). Critical Management Studies (Sage, London).
BaynesK. (1989–1990). Rational reconstruction and social criticism: Habermas’ model of interpretive social science. Philosophical Forum, 21, 122–45.
4.
BurrellG., and MorganG. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis (Heinemann, London).
5.
FlyvbjergB. (1998). Habermas and Foucault: thinkers for civil society?British Journal of Sociology, 49(2), 210–33.
6.
GadamerH.-G. (1992). Truth and Method, 2nd revised edn (Crossroad Publishing, New York).
7.
HabermasJ. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Vol. 1, McCarthy, T. (trans.) (Polity, Cambridge).
8.
HabermasJ. (1987a). The Theory of Communicative Action: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, Vol. 2, McCarthy, T. (trans.) (Polity, Cambridge).
9.
HabermasJ. (1987b). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, Lawrence, F. (trans.) (Polity, Cambridge).
10.
HabermasJ. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, Lenhardt, C. and Weber Nicholsen, S. (trans.) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
11.
HarveyD. (1990). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Blackwell, Cambridge, MA and Oxford).
12.
HeideggerM. (1927/1990). Being and Time, Macquarrie, J. and Robinson, E. (trans.) (Basil Blackwell, Oxford).
13.
HenriksenL.B. (1999). Technology in the modern world. In Focus on Production, Competencies and Organisational Learning, DrejerA. (ed.) (Aalborg University, Aalborg) pp 70–95.
14.
HenriksenL.B. (2001). Knowledge management and the missing tradition – on the role of tradition, knowledge and competencies in industrial production. Studies in Cultures, Organisations and Societies, 7(1), 81–104.
15.
HirschheimR., and KleinH.K. (1989). Four paradigms of information systems development. Communications of the ACM, 32(10), 1199–216.
16.
HirschheimR., and KleinH.K. (1994). Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: the case for ETHICS. MIS Quarterly, 18(1), 83–109.
17.
HirschheimR., KleinH.K., and LyytinenK. (1996). Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: a social action theoretic analysis. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 6(1/2), 1–64.
18.
HonnethA., Knödler-BunteE., and WidmannA. (1981). The dialectics of rationalization: an interview with Jürgen Habermas. Telos, 49, 5–31.
19.
KearneyR. (1997). Postnationalist Ireland (Routledge, London and New York).
20.
KleinH.K., and MyersM.D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–93.
21.
LyytinenK. (1992). Information systems and critical theory. In Critical Management Studies, AlvessonM., and WilmottH. (eds) (Sage, London), pp. 159–80.
22.
McCarthyT. (1987). Introduction. In The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, HabermasJ. (ed.) (Polity, Cambridge), pp. vii–xvii.
23.
O'DonnellD. (1999). Habermas, critical theory, and selves-directed learning. Journal of European Industrial Training, 23(4/5), 251–61.
24.
O'DonnellD. (2000). Intellectual Capital Creation: A Habermasian Perspective (Intellectual Capital Research Institute of Ireland, Ballyagran).
25.
O'DonnellD., O'ReganP., and CoatesB. (2000). Intellectual capital: a Habermasian introduction. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(2/3), 187–200.
26.
O'DonnellD., O'ReganP., CoatesB., KennedyT., KearyB., and BerkeryG. (2003). Human interaction: the critical source of intangible value. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), in press.
27.
PowerM., and LaughlinR. (1996). Habermas, law and accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21, 441–65.
28.
RiceP., and WaughP. (1992). Modern Literary Theory (Routledge, London).
29.
SeidmanS., and AlexanderJ.C. (2001). The New Social Theory Reader (Routledge, London).
30.
WeinsheimerJ.C. (1985). Gadamer's Hermeneutics (Yale University Press).
