Heidegger on Technology as a "Mode of Human Existence"

Most of the modern world thinks of technology as a tool, or merely as a means to make life better, more comfortable, or more efficient. This perspective is common to modernists or anyone who believes in a mind/body dualism. For these modernists, even the body is like a technology, or an instrument that the mind chooses to use at it's own discretion.

Heidegger thought differently. He did not see a split between the mind and body and therefore, his conceptions on technology were different as well.

For him, technology wasn't just a means to an end, but rather, a mode of human existence.

As other non-dualists have suggested, technology or media can be seen as "extensions of man" (McLuhan). Just as people who have lost a limb can feel phantom vibrations even though its gone, so do moderns when they are left without their cell phones.

Niel Postman once said that "with every new gadget, you destroy a previous way of life." That is how Heidegger sees technology. It creates a new way of life or a new mode of human existence.

We can see this with social media and all the different devices we use to access it. It has created a new way of living and operating in the modern world. If you don't get with the times, you can easily become disconnected, because social media for some is the only way they connect.

Moderns and New Media

Contrast with the ancient world

Modern philosophers pushed against the status quo of the ancient worldview that there were standards embedded in the Platonic heavens or in things themselves. It was believed that all things sought to become more like and moved toward their potentialities of the ideal thing that was somehow defined in nature. The modern philosophers, however, abandoned this view and focused on the divide between what exists and what we bring to the world.

Primary and secondary qualities

The modern view is that there are two types of qualities; primary and secondary. Primary qualities are those that actually are part of the thing itself and secondary are those we bring to it. Because our senses are part of us and not the thing itself, colors, feeling, beauty, goodness, and usefulness are all secondary qualities that we bring. It was also believed that people are generally the same and will place the same value on things. 

Hume vs. Kant

Hume taught that value is subjective but is only determined by a select group; those with unimpaired discernment and taste. In other words, beauty is in the eye of the unimpaired beholder. Kant believed differently. He taught that non-aesthetic values are standards to be accepted by everyone and that aesthetic values are judgments to be made by every individual for him or herself. In other words, beauty is in the eye of those who enjoy coming up with concepts.

Social websites in the light of modern philosophy

These concepts can be applied to our new media in a variety of ways:

• Provide all visitors to a website to cast their own lens on the website. They may be able to set preferences as to things they would like to see or an emphasis on certain topics. This may be as broad as choosing whether they would like to critique or be critiqued or as narrow as focusing only on Plato or some other philosopher. It may be worthwhile to build rich user profiles in order to provide the most relevant content.
• There should be a certain distinction for those that are qualified as an "unimpaired beholder." These people can be given special attention and receive a stamp of approval on their comments or edits. 
• Those that enjoy coming up with concepts can be given opportunities to build out an analysis of how to apply the philosophies to new media.
• Finally, the website should help people to move along on their path toward becoming master critics. There is a new trend of "gamification" in many aspects of business and recreation. Because of shorter attention spans and the fatigue users experience when going through long projects or articles, producer of content seek to gamify the experience, maintaining the viewer more engaged. The website could have profiles for each visitor that increase in influence/points when the user does certain tasks.

What would Philosophers from the Modern Era (1500-1800AD) have to say about what makes a good social media website?

For them, the good is what people like. But, more specifically, what people? 

There can be three ways to look at this.

1. The good is what your friends like. (Above, this is often integrated with Facebook.
2. The good is what the masses like. (On the top picture, this is the average user rating.
3. The good is what the professionals like. (On the top picture, this is the Editors rating.