Revisiting the Human–Society–Technology Nexus: Intercultural Communication Studies as a Looking Glass for Scientific Self-Scrutiny in the Digital Human Sciences

Jonas Stier

doi:10.16993/bbk.c

Abstract

This chapter starts from three assumptions: (1) that digital technologies (DTs) are products of humans, and reversibly that such technologies have effects on and consequences for humans; (2) that DTs have profound, long-term effects on culture and social interaction; and (3) that research on such effects often disregards inherent social and cultural biases in DTs and discourses on digitalization and innovation. DTs tend to be depicted as “objective” and void of cultural contents and underpinnings. Therefore, and with an emphasis on the usefulness of combining different research methodologies, this chapter sheds light upon a number of discursive blind spots in these domains: technocentrism and normativism, homo- and heterocentrism, ego- and ethnocentrism, and what I call the reversed problem imperative. Drawing upon intercultural communication studies (ICCS), these blind spots are discussed in the light of DTs, scientific theories, and research methodologies. Moreover, the case is made that digital human sciences (DHV) offers a valuable contribution to the scientific understanding of the manifestations and consequences of digitalization. In particular, this chapter argues for the usefulness of “intermethodological,” interdisciplinary, intercultural, and integrative approaches in DHV.

Highlights

We—each one of us—live intermittently though quite often simultaneously, in two universes: online and offline
The second of the two is frequently dubbed “the real world,” though the question whether such a label fits it better than it does the first turns more debatable by the day.[1] (Zygmunt Bauman)
In the field of digitalization, distinctions and differences yield to unreflected universalism—at least at the collective level, where people are viewed as an almost monocultural collective, albeit different in their capacities, literacy, or susceptibility to new digital technologies (DTs)

Summary

Introduction

We—each one of us—live intermittently though quite often simultaneously, in two universes: online and offline. In the field of digitalization, distinctions and differences yield to unreflected universalism—at least at the collective level, where people are viewed as an almost monocultural collective, albeit different in their capacities, literacy, or susceptibility to new DTs. by contrast to the assumptions of ICCS, technocentrism and normativism are commonly anchored in ideas of a homogenous world, where DT design is featured by both cultural universalism (“one size fits all”) and individualism (DTs help me to find my personal lifestyle, define me as a person, or enable self-actualization).

Results

Conclusion