Home » BLOG » Technique Over Truth (Technopoly)

Technique Over Truth (Technopoly)

I want to share two quotes under the heading ‘Technique Over Truth’:

We might even say that in Technopoly precise knowledge is preferred to truthful knowledge…

-Neil Postman, Technopoly, p. 158

This quote reminded me of something I came across a while back that was attributed (though I’ve never found the source) to G.K. Chesterton. He was reported to have said something like ‘not facts, but truth.’ The idea of the statement is that the Christian is interested in more than simple facts; The Christian’s primary concern is the Truth itself. This does not, or at least should not, mean that we downplay facts. But it means that a general sense of the Truth is preferable to a precise knowledge of things. I could illustrate this by saying that I would trust a psychologist who has a good understanding of the human soul with little understanding of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) than one with a precise understanding of the DSM and a poor understanding of what the human soul is. (This immediately makes me a Psychology heretic by the way).

As a preacher, I cannot help giving another illustration. I would prefer to hear a preacher any day who has a great general idea of the truth of Scripture (the message of Scripture) over one who has a precise knowledge of Hebrew and Greek with little understanding of the message. If he has both, that is all the better.

I understand that this opens up all kinds of problems and objections. Yes, I would rather have a ENT doctor who understands human allergies though he is weak on Truth in general than one who is strong on Truth and weak on noses. But this does not have to be an either/or. Ideally, we would want both. I would have to work through the objections on an individual basis.

A problem with modern ‘technological’ man, according to Postman, is that he values precise knowledge, technique if you will, over the Truth. For us, the genius is one who can postulate and solve complex scientific formulas, even though that same scientist may be a terrible grouch who has been divorced three times and is an atheist. We laud him because of his precise knowledge, though he is far from the Truth.

Because this is the case, education has become much more concerned with the student’s acquisition of precise knowledge of things rather than a larger view of Truth itself. This leads to the next quote. Postman relates technological man’s take on art and literature in this way:

They are interesting; they are ‘worth reading’; they are artifacts of the past. But as for ‘truth,’ we must turn to science (p. 159).

The Lord of the Rings may be an interesting read, and it may be somewhat imaginatively enriching, but it has nothing to teach us about the truth. We don’t need fiction to teach us about bravery, or friendship, or love, or sacrifice, or humility, or the danger of technology; rather, we must turn to Science alone, with the end result that we are content to know techniques and be ignorant of the Truth. That is another angle on Technopoly – the culture that exalts Science to the point of it becoming a religion.

0 comments

  1. jargonbargain says:

    I certainly see this happening in various realms, across culture.

    Sometimes a person might refer to a TV show in conversation with me. If I reply that I don’t have TV, they will almost certainly be quick to reply, “yeah, I don’t watch much TV. Mostly the history channel, and the news, and stuff.” The implications here being of course that they are interested in the TV because they want “factual” information.

    In Church, I have observed a strong gravitation toward the postulations of the New Testament over the Old Testament. “Bible Stories” are seen as “fun ways for kids to learn Truth.” Besides, the New Testament has all the “New” and updated stuff, right? What is newer is most certainly better right? Isn’t that what Darwin taught us?

    In a small, home group extension of a church I once attended, we were asked once if anybody was reading books or where we all “too busy”? We were exhorted to read, not just the Bible, but complimentary literature. A few people raised their hand to share a non-fiction work they were reading. When someone mentioned a fiction book, the teacher smiled and said “Cool, but I meant books for learning how to grow in the Faith.”

    Of course, if I read the “Cliff Notes” on a book, haven’t I acquired all the “facts” in a more efficient manner?

    • Heath says:

      I get all that you are saying, and that last point about Cliff’s Notes is really interesting. I watched a the PBS Frontline documentary called ‘Digital Nation’ a while back; they interviewed several teenagers about reading. One of the guys they interviewed made the point that no teenager has time to read. He mentioned that he had never really read a book but that he reads Cliff’s Notes to prepare for tests. He said something like, ‘I can read a book in 20 minutes’ – as if he really felt like he was reading it. In his mind, he wasn’t missing out on anything.

      As far as the reading in church comment; I know I’ve told you, but I am always looking for ways to subvert that kind of thinking. My main strategy at the moment is to recommend fiction books to the congregation on a regular basis and offer a copy of the book to first person who asks for it. Someone almost always takes me up on the offer.

      Reading Postman has inspired me that I need to come up with as many strategies for that sort of thing as possible, so I am always looking for subtle ways to subvert that type of thinking.

Leave a Reply