Ten Paradoxes Of Technology By Andrew Feenberg

Walls, doors, tables and other surfaces we regularly come across are commonly painted. Despite being surrounded by paint however, it’s an artifact that can be easily overlooked. This relates to Andrew Feenburg, Martin Heidegger and Ed Levine’s beliefs regarding technology and art. Even when looking at artwork that’s painted, it’s easy to only consider the formal aspects of the medium or how the medium helps convey a concept. What does it mean to be disconnected from how paint is made or to be heedless of the effects it has aside from the intended ones? Paint is often only thought of in relation to its function, with little regard for the process in which it’s made; in this essay I will investigate how paint is not merely a means to an ends, but has consequences both environmentally and concerning animals. …show more content…
In his lecture “Ten Paradoxes of Technology”, Andrew Feenberg points out the paradox of the means, where the means justify the ends. Instead of the means justifying the ends, the end product -whether it’s a painting or painted walls- is not the most important; how the end product is reached is equally important. This isn’t exactly a radical idea but Feenberg pushes the idea even further by saying the means and the ends aren’t just related “but that they are in fact one and the same”. For paint, this means that the end product is both the painting and the negative consequences that are a part of the production and use of paint. This raises the question, what kind of standard should artists and painters be held