Strategy for Culture

Strategy for Culture

A critical review of use-plan theory in philosophy of technology

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Emad Tayebi 1
Alireza Mansouri 2
Alireza Monajemi 3
1 PhD in Philosophy of Science and Technology, Research Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies
2 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy of Science and Technology, Institute of Human Sciences and Cultural Studiess
3 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy of Science and Technology, Institute of Human Sciences and Cultural Studies
10.22034/jsfc.2024.394211.2504
Abstract
Based on the theory of action, Houkes and Vermaas developed the use-plan theory in the philosophy of technology. This theory proposes that plans are a series of actions taken to achieve a goal, and use-plans are plans involve at least one artifact to achieve a goal. Designing is primarily constructing and communicating use-plans rather than artifacts. The function of artifacts is determined based on the use-plan in which they are used. The designer should communicate with the user and reconstructsruct the use-plan according to the context and the user's skills. The use-plan should be evaluated based on the central standard of effectiveness and other standards such as efficiency, safety, and sustainability.

While this theory has an adequate foundation, there are several issues with it: firstly, the ontological status of the use-plan is unclear. Secondly, it presupposes a justificationist conception of knowledge, which we believe is flawed. Finally, the theory does not provide an explanation for the improvement of use-plan.
Keywords
use-plan
artifact
function
Wybo Houkes
Pieter Vermaas

Subjects

  • پایا، علی، و علیرضا منصوری.(1397). علم و تکنولوژی: تفاوت‌ها، تعامل‌ها و تبعات آنها. فلسفه علم. 8(16)، 131-158.
  • طیبی، عماد، و علیرضا منصوری.(1402). مروری انتقادی بر نظریات هستی‌شناسانه مصنوعات تکنیکی. فلسفه علم. 13(1)، 135-157.
  • علیزاده ممقانی، رضا.(1391). خلط مفاهیم علم و فناوری در سنت پدیدارشناسی هرمنوتیک از هایدگر تا آیدی. روش‌شناسی علوم انسانی. 18(73). 111-136.
  • منصوری، علیرضا؛ پایا، علی؛ قیومی، صدیقه. (1400). تکنولوژی: عقلانیت و نقدپذیری در برابر رویکرد موجه‌گرایانه، راهبرد فرهنگ. 14(54)، 43-72.
  • Bartley, W. W. (1964). Rationality versus the Theory of Rationality. In Critical Approaches to Science & Philosophy. London: Colier-Macmillan.‏
  • Brand, M. & Walton, D. (Eds). (1976). Action theory (No. 97). Springer Science & Business Media.‏
  • Cettier, E. L. (1963). 6. IS JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF KNOWLEDGE? Causal Theories of Mind, 135.‏
  • Cummins, R. (1975). Functional analysis. Journal of Philosophy, 72,741–765.
  • Dipert, R. R. (1993). Artifacts, Art Work, and Agency. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  • Dipert, R. R. (1995). Some issues in the theory of artifacts: defining ‘artifact’ and related notions. The Monist, 78(2), 119-135.‏
  • Forman, P. (2007). The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology. History and technology, 23(1-2), 1-152.‏
  • Juvshik, T. (2021). Function essentialism about artifacts. Philosophical studies, 178, 2943-2964.‏
  • Houkes, W. (2009). The nature of technological knowledge. In Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences(pp. 309-350). North-Holland.‏
  • Houkes, W. Vermaas, P. E. Dorst, K. & de Vries, M. J. (2002). Design and use as plans: an action-theoretical account. Design studies, 23(3), 303-320.‏
  • Houkes, W. & Vermaas, P. (2004). Actions versus functions: A plea for an alternative metaphysics of artifacts. The Monist, 87(1), 52-71.‏
  • Houkes, W. & Vermaas, P. E. (2010). Technical functions: On the use and design of artefacts (Vol. 1). Springer Science & Business Media.‏
  • Kroes, P. (2012). Technical artefacts: Creations of mind and matter: A philosophy of engineering design (Vol. 6). Springer Science & Business Media.‏
  • Maier, J. R. & Fadel, G. M. (2009). Affordance based design: a relational theory for design. Research in Engineering Design, 20(1), 13-27.‏
  • Mansouri, A, & Tayebi, E. (2023). The Metaphysics of Artifacts: A Critical Rationalist Approach, Journal of Philosophical Investigations, vol. 17, no. 42.
  • Mitcham, C. (1985). What is the Philosophy of Technology? International Philosophical Quarterly, 25(1), 73-88.‏
  • Miller, D. (2015). Critical rationalism: A restatement and defence. Open Court.‏
  • Millikan, R. G. (1984). Language, thought, and other biological categories: New foundations for realism. MIT press.‏
  • Neander, K. (1991). Functions as selected effects: The conceptual analyst's defense. Philosophy of science, 58(2), 168-184.‏
  • Preston, B. (2003). Of Marigold Beer: A Reply to Vermaas and Houkes. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 54(4).‏
  • Preston, B. (2009). Philosophical theories of artifact function. In Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences (pp. 213-233). North-Holland.‏
  • Pols, A. (2020). Use Plans. In The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Engineering (pp. 233-244). Routledge.‏
  • Scheele, M. (2006). Function and use of technical artefacts: social conditions of function ascription. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 37(1), 23-36.‏
  • Schweikard, D. P. & Schmid, H. B. (2021). Collective Intentionality [w]: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition), EN Zalta.‏
  • Searle, J. (1995). The Construction of Social Reality, London, Penguin Books.
  • Thomasson, A. L. (2007). Artifacts and human concepts, in Laurence, S. and Margolis, E. (eds), Creations of the Mind: Essays on Artifacts and Their Representations, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  • Vaesen, K. (2011). The functional bias of the dual nature of technical artefacts program. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 42(1), 190-197.‏
  • Vermaas, P. E. and Houkes, W. N. (2006). Technical functions: A drawbridge between the intentional and structural natures of technical artefacts, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 37, no. 1, 5–18.