One of the most startling insights of our
times is that communi- cation is environment and that cultural change
closely follows the march of information technology. Parvez Manzoor
examines recent socio-philosophic thought that probes the dialectics
of media communication and cultural environment.I am in the position
of Lous Pasteur telling doctors that the greatest enemy was quite
invisible, and quite unrecognised by them. Our conventional response
to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is
the numb stance of a technolog-ical idiot. For the "content" of a
medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract
the watchdog of the mind. The effect of the medium is made strong
and intense just because it is given another medium as "content".
Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media.When the unassuming Canadian
professor of English and "media guru", Marshall McLuhan, caught the
attention of an unsuspecting world during the late sixties by his
catchy, though quintessential, formulation The Medium is the Message,
he was either in- stantly dismissed as a sensational crank or hailed
as one of the most insighted philosophers of our technological age.
McLuhan however was but the most publicly notorious representative
of a host of social scientists, historians and philosophers who had
been quietly working on the theme of communication and culture for
over three decades. And his insight about the form and con- tent of
media communication was like the proverbial tip of an iceberg: McLuhan's
apical discovery submerged a mountain of information and insight gained
from many different disciplines.
The cumulative result of these efforts, we now know, is pointing
towards a revolutionary theory which not only promises the dis-closure
of the inter-relationship between culture and information media
- and, in turn, between culture and knowledge, knowledge and technique
or culture and values, as the case may be -but which might also
lead towards a grand academic synthesis. The dialectics of technological
innovation and historical change, undoubtedly the grandest theme
of our age, may now be explained under the unitary theory of communication
as environment.The implications of this insight, one need hardly
emphasize, are likely to be far-reaching. Moreover, with electronic
media in- creasingly shaping the cultural profile of all human societies,
the import of this theory can hardly be other than prophetical.
Despite the facile and gratuitous assertion of our generation that
we are at the threshold of a new age - the age of informa-tion,
it goes without saying that only through an understanding of the
dynamics of cultural change and mass communication can we make any
impact on our future situation. Without doubt, the coming information
explosion is going to be as challenging for Muslim societies, merely
following and reacting to outside change, as it will be for the
progenitors of the change them- selves. Thus, needless to say, notwithstanding
the almost criminal neglect of our intellectuals concerning the
most exciting issues of our times - and the consequential, suicidal,
state of unpreparedness in our societies - we are duty-bound not
only to acquaint ourselves with the revolutionary notion of the
ecology of information, even if the source of this concept is foreign
to our milieu, but also to assess critically all its dependent insights
from our own Islamic vantage-point. In the following pages we intend
to follow just such a course.Technology as Substance:For the past
two centuries, the paramount concern of the Western intellectual
tradition has been with the construction of a `grand theory' of
universal history (for our earlier remarks on this theme see: Eunuchs
in the Harem of History: Afkar-Inquiry, Janua-ry 1985).
In this intellectual order, where the study of history is inevitably
engulfed by the elaboration of sociological schemes, the motif of
technology as the agent of change has also been of overriding interest.
Both Ellul and Mumford, for in- stance, recognise that technology
modifies man's behavioural and institutional patterns as well as
reorganises his environment. Leaving aside eschatological hopes
and fears that a technological reading of history inspires in these
two very serious thinkers (our intellectual portrait of Jacques
Ellul: The Metaphysician of Technology, (Afkar-Inquiry, May 1985)
gives a fair indication of the extreme sense of anxiety that is
also the unwanted by-product of the techno-historical consciousness),
the main limitation of this pioneering though however is that the
view of technology informing it at its core is essentially ontological.
Technology as Relationship:
Thus, technology in the view of these thinkers, is a substance
with which man interacts. Consequently, in his Technics and Civilization,
Mumford characterizes the technical development of western civilization
in terms of three, eotechnic, palaeotechnic and neotechnic, phases.
This classification is based ultimately on the sources of energy
that societies employ for executing technological task -a theme
that has received added actuality even in our own times. Moreover
technology for Ellul and Mumford is almost identical to mechanization.
There is very little aware- ness of electronic technologies or of
their role as shapers of environments in their thought. However,
from an ecological per- spective, which itself has been acquired
through the considera-tion of the differences of mechanical and
electronic media, one may perceive all technological change as environmental.
One can thus distinguish between three types of technological environ-
ments: those serving an ecology of goods (manufacturing, facto-
ries etc.); those that serve an ecology of man (architecture, transportation
networks) and those that serve an ecology of information (communication
media). The revolutionary insight gained through this approach,
elicited first by Harold Adan Innis but later elaborated by Marshall
McLuhan, is that media and environment form a continuum and that
man interacts through the new media-environment (instead of technology),
restructuring in the process, the cultural bias of a society. Thus,
the nature of man's cultural environment is not spatial (environment
is not what surrounds us) but relational. The radical view of the
media philosophers is that it is what controls our relationship,
almost tacitly as it were, with one another, rather than what surrounds
us, that constitutes our culture. In the final resort, culture is
indistinguishable from the ecology of information. Before we turn
our attention to the two foremost proponents of this theory, namely
Innis and McLuhan, it would be profitable to have a curso-ry look
at the evidence produced by a number of disciplines which made the
above theorization possible.
Linguistic Relativism:
It is well-known that twentieth-century thought, psychological
but also sociological and even historical, has been grappling with
the problem that may be described as the `perceptual bias'. The
most sensational discoveries in this respect, no doubt, were those
of Benjamin Lee Whorf, whose well-known hypothesis of the `inquisitic
relativity' may today be justifiably construed as an early contribution
to the `media dictates culture' theme. Whorf, whose theories remain
contentious to this day, challenges two of the most fundamental
postulations of modern culture, namely that there are no boundaries
to thought and that communication between two entirely different
cultures is ultimately possible. He suggested, on the basis of evidence
gathered from the study of the Hopi Indian language, that the underlying
structure of the language used by a people almost totally controls
the way in which they perceive the would and structure their experiences
of it. The introduction of this new principle of relativity, namely
that the same physical perception does not lead all observers to
an identical picture of the universe, in some way anticipated the
Innis-McLuhan theory of media because it asserted that medium (in
this case linguistic tradition) and not sense-perception, affects
man.
Orality vs Literacy:
Another original thinker whose thought closely parallels as well
as supplements the insights claimed by the media philosophers is
Walter J Ong. Ong's principal concern has been with the differ-
ence in thought-patterns and social structures between oral, pre-
literate societies and the ones affected by the knowledge of writing.
Synthesizing numerous strands of academic thought, Ong has been
able to show that the technique of writing, once interi-orised,
wrought monumental changes in human consciousness. His Orality and
Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word (1982), and The Presence
of the Word (1967) are two of the most important works that have
followed in the wake of McLuhan's Understanding Media and Gutenberg
Galaxy, though decidedly less categorical. Ong is also less prescriptive
and involved than Innis-McLuhan. His meditation on the question
of what values would distinguish a return to an aurally based society
still constitutes an important contribution to the elaboration of
the theme of information ecology. By raising the question of values,
Ong has also been instrumental in bringing in the much--needed ethical
dimension to the somewhat bland philosophy of the media, just as
his identification of media phases with categories of Freudian psychology
reflects the imaginativeness of his approach in the field.
# Art and Visual Perception:
From their own idiosyncratic perspective, art historians too have
been gathering evidence that confirms the postulation of perceptual
bias in our normal experience of the physical world. Art history
has increasingly been showing a tendency to merge art with psychology.
Some of the most commonly used text-books, such as Arnheim's Art
and Visual Perception (1966), Gombrich's Art and Illusion and Wolfflin's
Principles of Art history, reveal this trend. Similarly, Arnheim's
debate with Gombrich, whose emphasis on artistic convention rather
than faithful sense-perception went against the tenets of gestalt
psychology so ardently championed by the former, is too well-known
to need any elaboration. We may simply be content to note that the
existence of a perceptual bias on the cultural level is regarded
as a real possibility in many art historical circles, just as it
is a working hypothesis with many social anthropologists.
Vision vs Touch:
The notion of cultural bias in perception was raised from the
status of a conjectural hypothesis to that of a full-fledged theory
by another scholar of genius, William Ivins. In a remarkably succinct
statement, Art and Geometry: A Study in Space Intui-tions (1946),
Ivins showed that the Greek perception of reality and art was `tactile'
rather than `visual'. Contrary to the most jealously guarded myth
of Western civilization, Ivins argued that the Greek world-view
actually hampered the development of art and sciences and that it
fell on the lot of the Renaissance man to liberate the world from
this ancient misconception. Greek states suggest they were constructed
painstakingly by blind men whose sense of form could not encompass
any vista of wider perspective. Ivins was indeed the first one to
perceive art-productions pre- eminently as reflections of a perceptual
bias. The unity of form and content in artistic expression and its
cultural bias, the dominant note of media philosophers, thus found
a powerful and independent exposition in the study of William M
Ivins.Interpretation or Interaction:Other exponents of the same
insight have been psychologists such as FP Kilpatrick (Explorations
in Transactional Psychology, [1961]), James J Gibson (The Perception
of the Visual World, [1950]), or anthropologists like Edward Hall
(The Silent Language, [1965] and The Hidden dimension, [1966] or
even historian like Siegfried Giedion - a great philosopher of technology
in his own right (Space, Time and Architecture, [1967] and The Eternal
Present: The Beginnings of Architecture [1964]). The common assumption
with all these thinkers is that man uses his senses not essentially
to interpret his environment but to interact with it. The clearest
message among this group comes from Hall who says unequivocally:
`Man's relationship to his environment is a function of his sensory
apparatus plus how this apparatus is conditioned to respond'. Thus,
the cumulative thought of all the above-mentioned thinkers' arguments
is in the direction of but- tressing one of the major tenets of
McLuhan's thought, namely that the quality and nature of a culture
is determined by sensory worlds and the media that interpret them.
With this summary, the stage is now set for us to encounter perhaps
the more original and thoughtful, though decidedly lesser-known
and less provocative, of the two arch philosophers of the media
whose theories of the dynamics of information ecology have brought
such sweeping changes in the modern consciousness of culture, technology
and communication.
A Genuine Intellectual:
Harold Innis was once hailed by the London Times Literary Supple-
ment as `Canada's first and perhaps only genuine intellectual'.
He is best known however as one of the major names in Canadian economic
history. All his theoretical insights concerning the role of the
media have been derived from the vision of an econom-ic historian.
In fact, his intellectual development may be chart- ed as such:
Innis the economic historian turned into Innis the cultural historian
and then by the profound implications of his confusions became Innis
the philosopher. Born in Ontario in 1894, Innis studied at McMaster
University and later went to the University of Chicago to receive
his Ph.D. The academic circles in America during the first few years
after the First World War when Innis obtained his doctorate were
dominated by the social thought of Thorstein Veblen, George Herbet
Mead and Robert Ezra Park. Innis shows influences from all three:
Veblen's evolutionary theory of economic development, Mead's concern
with language, and Park's pre-occupation with control mechanisms
in culture may be detected as undergirding Innis thought. Innis
started his academic career as an economic historian, writing such
specific studies as The Fur Trade in Canada (1930), The Cod Fisheries
and Essays in Canadian Economic History. This early period was followed
by his `media bias' phase when he wrote his seminal works, Empire
and Communications (1950) and The Bias of Communication (1951).
Innis died in 1952.
Minerva's Owl:
A deeply pessimistic, perhaps pre-monitory, strand of recent Western
thought is much pre-occupied with the decline, decay and the eventual
demise of civilisations. The disturbing insight that a culture begins
to disintegrate when at the point of its highest creativity is the
focus of Spengler and Toynbee's historical thought. Even Hegel was
fascinated by this idea. Following him, Innis discover in classical
mythology the image that he thinks befits the theme of cultural
decay. The image is that of Miner- va's owl. Minerva, one of the
most trusted goddesses of Zeus, the legend has it, sprang fully-armed
and full-grown from the head of Zeus, the supreme diety. She became
the protector of the city and its professional artists and craftsmen.
In her movement, she was preceded by her owl. Innis starts one of
his most perceptive discourses by quoting Hegel: `Minerva's owl
begins its flight only in the gathering dusk...'.Innis follows the
flight of Minerva's owl, as it were, in history, showing that the
growth and decline of empires flows not from genius or faith or
`will to power' but from media! Minerva's owl flies, Innis suggested
with uncanny vision, over the route taken by the new form of communication
- be it script, print, or as it is now, the computer. Innis was
the first one to realize that genesis of a new culture as well as
the march of cultures in history, follow in the footsteps of information
technology.
The Bias of Communication:
Innis' path to the realisation of the media's capital role in
the formation and dispersion of cultures, as mentioned earlier,
crossed the terrain of economic history. The perennial question,
what is the ultimate source of authority and power in a culture
and how is it transmitted to the succeeding systems, made him look
into the relationship of social institutions and communication media.
By so doing, Innis also overstepped the traditional confines of
economic history and joined the rank of philosophically-oriented
historians of culture. The key to cultural change, Innis asserted,
lies in the use of the pre-dominant medium of communication. It
is not so much what is communicated but how specific communication
media function, that creates the forms of power in a culture. The
critical factor in the culture is the medium which determines its
contents as a whole.In universal history, with a heavy western bias,
let it be added without any diffidence, Innis discerns seven main
stages of media transformation. The first information medium was
the use of clay, the reed stylus and the cyniform script that originated
in Mesopotamia. It was followed by the Oral tradition of Greece
in which he also sees the amalgamation of the written word after
Plato. Later, papyrus, brush and pen combined with alphabet became
the universal medium of communication. It had the greatest spatial
dispersion. The written medium experienced a setback, of sorts,
when the orally-conscious Church came to dominate the power pyramid
of Western history. The Church withdrew to monasteries taking its
parchment and pen, the most prestigious means of writing, with it.
The whole civilisation, it appears, withdrew in some kind of mystical
trance. After the twelfth century, paper and pen made the written
word available on an unprecedented scale and made the waning of
Church power possible. The introduction of he printing press and
movable type started the process of secularisation in the West.
Vernaculars replaced the ecclesiastical Latin; nationalism usurped
the ecumenical state, revolutions and mechanization became the order
of the day. With the mechanization of paper production and printing
press, the boundaries of writ- ten language were stretched beyond
anything experienced hitherto. The idiosyncratic medium of yesterday,
still not obsolete, the newspaper, experienced its greatest expansion
in human history. Literacy and populism were the outcome. Finally,
we are once again returning to the oral media through the inventions
of cinema, radio and TV. One might now add to the last category,
the computer and the communication satellite as well. Such, roughly
speaking, is the canvas of history as communication rather than
chronology from which Innis draws his philosophic conclusions.
Space and Time:
In this largely empirical historical scheme based on the role
of communication media, Innis then introduces two key concepts,
that of communication bias in terms of space and time that impart
a normative, evaluative quality to his thought. Media, Innis suggests
in his characteristic way, not only create the pathways of information
in a culture, but by controlling the movement of communication they
also determine a culture's ecology of information. Thus, the unique
and dialectical relationship between a people and the knowledge
available to them is thus, in some real way, a function of their
communication media, or media possess an inherent bias. Innis interprets
this bias as spatial, when the medium is able to attain widespread
dispersion in space, and consequently its influences extends over
geographic regions other than the place of its origin. Societies
acquire temporal bias when the media they command are characterised
more by their durability than dispersion. Clay tablets that were
used in Baby- lon, Innis observes, were difficult to carry over
vast distances. In comparison, papyrus which was used by the Romans
was easily transportable. It enabled official information to reach
far-flung corners of the Roman empire and made possible the administration
of distant rations. Babylonian culture thus imbued with a tempo-
ral bias, Rome was a culture with a sturdy spatial orientation.Innis'
characterization of spatial and temporal bias however is not value-neutral.
In his view, spatially-oriented cultures tend to be secular, centralised,
bureaucratic and imperialistic. Temporally - biased societies, on
the contrary, ultimately become religious, legalistic, conservative.
Orality, thus, favours temporal bias, whereas literacy produces
spatial preferences. Writing, however, is too varied and comprehensive
a human phe-nomenon to show only one single bias. In fact, in pursuing
the theme of writing, Innis makes many perceptive observations.
For instance, parchment, which after the collapse of Rome came to
assume the dominant medium of writing, gave impetus to the rise
of monasteries! The distinguishing quality of parchment is that
it preserves well and thus is more suitable for permanent re- cords.
Thus, its main use is confined to libraries and other centres of
reference. However, the exorbitant demands of the parchment scripting
and production required organised institu-tions - monasteries. Knowledge
thus got monopolised in the Middle Ages. Other insights presented
by Innis are no less impressive. The use of clay tablets in Mesopotamia,
Innis notes further, produced conform writing, while the Egyptians
who had easy access to papyrus introduced a pictographic form of
writing. Clay, a material clumsy and difficult to handle, favoured
a frugal and compact system, papyrus a more elaborate one.Not content
with the mere postulation of the categories of space and time, Innis
then elaborates his more evaluative concept of Homeostasis. Taking
his cue from medical science, which defines homeostasis as the organic
process by which the body maintains an equilibrium of energy resources,
Innis argues that the actions of balanced media guarantee the existence
of cultural homeostasis - an equilibrium of unstable and disruptive
forces that tend to destroy every civilization. The modern West,
in his view, is not chararcterised by that cultural equilibrium:
it has too much of a robust spatial basis to be able to attain the
state of cultural homeostasis.
Monopoly of Knowledge:
Another salient contribution made by Innis to philosophy of media
is through his elucidation of the interaction between power mechanism
in a society and its means of dispersing information. Knowledge
in his opinion not only forms the key to power but constitutes the
sub-structure of a civilization as well. As every medium gives the
knowledge it conveys a certain character, it impresses its own imprint
so to speak, the power within a culture ultimately resides in the
communication media that it commands. `Monopoly of Knowledge' is
thus a favourite term with Innis. However, by it he means a number
of things. This monopoly con- sists in the mode of knowledge, i.e.
oral, written, printed etc., itself, just as it is made possible
by the `monopoly of re- sources'. The ultimate expression of this
monopoly is of course the restriction of knowledge to a special
class of men. From the point of view of sociology of knowledge,
who controls the commu- nication media thus is not an abstract speculation.
Summing up, we may say that Innis' usage of monopoly of knowledge
presupposes three factors: the constriction of knowledge to one
single medi- um, the limitation imposed by the form of knowledge
and the control exercised by a power hegemony.
Fighting an Empire:
It is this monopoly of knowledge, Innis holds, that empowers and
sustains empires. Empire, another idiosyncratic term of Innis' lexicon,
signifies the ability of a civilization to exercise and maintain
its control over vast stretches of space and time. Empire, thus
for Innis, is `an indication of the efficiency of communication'.
In his Empire and Communication (1950), Innis pursues the theme
of `media conflict' in all the major empires since Sumer. It is
the introduction of newer media, promising a different sort of monopoly
of knowledge, that undermines the authority of power establishment
in an empire. In fact, when the old medium is in the process of
being replaced by a newer one, the old culture experiences its most
dangerous phase of instabil-ity, even if the established order rarely
shows any signs of such awareness. The greatest weakness of any
civilization, according to this scheme of things, is itsinability
to detect, confront and challenge the dominant medium and its bias.
Thus, new medium replaces the old one subversively. As a matter
of fact, at first the new medium appeals only to those who are shut
out of the existent information system. By their skilful use of
the newer medium, not under the control of information monopoly,
outsiders are able to wrest power from the established ruling class
(one may mention as an interesting modern example of this phenomenon
the last phase of the Iranian Revolution. By adroitly manipulating
a new medium - the easily disposable tape cassette- which lay outside
the reach of the information monopoly of the Shah's regime, the
entrenched dictator was toppled by an unarmed populace!). The story
of human civilization thus is not the rise and fall of empires but
the birth and death of information systems!
The Sage of Aquarius:
Though in this essay we have dwelt at some length on the dynamics
of information ecology as presented by Harold Adam Innis, it is
no secret that despite the greater profundity and perspicacity of
his thought, it is his disciple and fellow Canadian, Herbert Marshall
McLuhan, who has been crowned as the media philosopher par excellence
of our age. McLuhan, moreover, has gained enormous notoriety, not
least because of his hippie following, whereas his mentor Innis
is relatively little known outside a close circle of scholars. Because
of the greater awareness about McLuhan's thought among the general
public, we feel no compunctions at neglecting to present his ideas
in as much detail as that of Innis. Moreover, since McLuhan's strength
also lies in the comprehensiveness of his theoretical insights,
we'll be content with a discussion of the implication of his ideas
rather than a sys- tematic presentation of his intellectual arguments.Born
also in Canada (Edmonton, Alberta in 1911), McLuhan spent most of
his boyhood in Winnipeg and took a degree at the University of Manitoba.
After taking his doctorate at Cambridge, he spent most of his life
teaching: at the University of Wisconsin (1936-37), St-Louis University
(1937-44), Assumption University in Windsor (1944-46) and finally
the University of Toronto (from 1946 to his death). His early The
Gutenberg Galaxy (1962) was as much dependent upon Innis' method
as upon his ideas (McLuhan himself called it "a footnote to the
work of Harold Innis"). It is however a landmark. In it McLuhan
combines seminal ideational insight with enough scholarship to have
earned the critics' verdict of it being his finest work. Though
his next book, Under- standing Media (1965) brought him the dubious
distinction of being Pop Philosopher of the Vietnam generation,
critics were not at all satisfied with this work. A single comment
so aptly de- scriptive of McLuhan's intellectual idiosyncracies,
will be enough to put his thought and method in its proper place.
This, for instance, is how Dwight MacDonald assessed Understanding
Media: "A single page is impressive, two are `stimulating', five
raise serious doubts, ten confirm them, and long before the hardy
reader has staggered to page 359 the accumulation of contradic-tions,
non-sequiturs, facts that are distorted and facts that are not facts,
exaggerations, and chronic rhetorical vagueness has numbed him to
the insights". McLuhan's later works like The Medium is the Message
(1967) and War and Peace in the Global Village (1968) are popular
syntheses that are found unread and undigested in paper-back edition
on every shelf and require no comments.Though one is struck by the
similarities between Innis and McLuhan, the differences between
them are also striking and substantial. Instead of the former's
categories of time and space, the latter chooses the direct sensory
bias as an explanation of cultural variety. Innis thus concentrates
on the institu-tional effects of media, whereas McLuhan's focus
in on perceptual and psychic effects. The two philosophers of environment
differ in their conception of environment as well. For McLuhan,
environ- ments become perceptible not as much by their effects as
by their interaction with other environments. For Innis, the major
environment becomes visible though the reshuffling of power within
the structure of a society. Despite his erudition and scholarly
competence, however, Innis failed to articulate a total theory of
what he was doing. It fell to McLuhan's lot to compress the most
comprehensive theory of the nature of technical change in a quintessential
dictum: Medium is the Message.
The Electronic Illusion:
McLuhan has been severely criticised for the `moral neutrality'
of his thought. Lewis Mumford, for instance, has claimed with justification
that McLuhan's `global village' is a humbug. `Real communication',
says Mumford, `whether oral or written, ephemeral or permanent,
is possible only between people who share a common culture - and
speak the same language; and though this area can and should be
enlarged by personally acquiring more languages and extending one's
cultural horizon through travel and active per- sonal intercourse,
the notion that it is possible to throw off all these limits is
an electronic illusion'. McLuhan's - and Innis' - bias against the
written word and in favour of oral communication does not cut much
ice with Mumford either. Here is how he responds to the favourite
McLuhanian scenario: `A population entirely dependent upon such
controlled oral communication, even if it reached every human soul
on the planet, would not merely be at the mercy of the Dominant
Minority but would become increasingly illiterate and soon mutually
unintelligible:... here in prospect is actually the electronic Tower
of Babel' (emphasis is mine). Even on philosophical grounds, McLuhan
has been much indicted. For instance, his seminal insight and oft-quoted
dic-tum, The Medium is the Message, has been castigated as being
tautological!
The End of Writing:
McLuhan has also had a fair share of admirers, most of whom have
followed him slavishly. Drawing heavily on the insights provided
by the Media Sage, the German journalist and debator Hans Magnus
Enzenberger, for instance, claims that all written literature is
bourgeois and individualistic. That it is a `monologue means of
communication' and that it favours `caste thinking'. The very act
of writing, claims Enzenberger, calls for an unnatural posture!
Moreover, `the anesthetics of written literature express a clear
contempt for life: pauses, slips of the tongue, hesitation and repetitions
are regarded as violation of the rules'. Not only in the protracted
process of learning to write a waste for Enzenberger, writing also
`tends to blot out, with the aid of forma- lised calligraphy, the
real contradictions of life'! TV camera and the microphone, the
same author notes with relish, are abolishing the class character
of the written form of communication. `The live interview, the debate
and the demonstration do not demand and do not allow either orthography
or calligraphy'. Though Enzenberger speaks in terms of the `egalitarian'
nature of the modern electronic media and is even anxious to explain
them in terms of `emancipation' from time, it is incontestable that,
if taken to its logical conclusion, Enzenberger would have to accept
as the ideal man a creature without memory, tradition or history
and living solely in the present!
Information and Cybernetics:
Through their insight that information controls society, the media
philosophers, especially Innis, come very close to formulating a
`cybernetic' theory of history and environment. Norbert Wiener,
who coined the term from the Greek Kubernetes (meaning "steersman"),
defines cybernetics as `the study of messages as a means of controlling
machinery and society'. Though Wiener, him- self a mathematician
who developed a theory of information by which one could interact
more effectively with the computer, developed serious doubts about
the `Pythagoras of the modern age, the computer, his name has come
to be associated with it. Besides his justly famous Cybernetics
(1948), Wiener came to be known chiefly as a humanist and a concerned
social theorist. In his brief collection of essays, The Human Use
of Human Beings (1950) he probed with great humanity and perspicacity,
the various implications of the computer and the new routings of
information that the computer creates.To concentrate only on the
humanistic thought of this sensitive scientist: Wiener likens the
introduction of the computer into a social system to a process which
is at once desirable because of the demands of the society and yet
precarious and uncertain in its outcome. The computer does not threaten
Winener with some vague very real possibility that we humans might
be unable to maintain a conceptual, and hence implicitly moral and
social, control over the machine. If we let the computer define
its own territory, without first analyzing the more likely consequences,
he suggests, `we may witness a series of capitulations of man to
the machine that far out-scale anything previously suggested by
history'!Within this disturbing yet prophetic note, we may take
leave of the media philosophers, this time merely noting that the
insights supplied by them will have to be filtered through the Islamic
consciousness before these can be applied to a Muslim historical
context. Though a succeeding article will attempt to evaluate the
Islamic implications of our knowledge of the dynamics of informa-tion
ecology, suffice it to say here that Muslim thinkers have not been
altogether oblivious of the importance of communication media in
determining the cultural profile of the Muslim civilisation. The
`phenomenology of the communication media', even the confusion of
form and meaning in a communicational environment has been a favourite
theme with the Sufis. Some of these topics must become subjects
of further reflection in the light of above discussion. Moreover,
though it is not for a Muslim to deliberate upon the nature of the
most sacred and excellent communication medium of them all, the
Divine Scripture which is also a Noble Recitation, it is legitimate
to enquire into its role in Muslim history and consciousness. Could
it be that, because of some special act of Divine rahma, the Qur'an,
which has been venerate in Muslim consciousness both as an oral
recitation and as a writ- ten discourse, has been instrumental in
conferring on the Muslim culture that special quality of homeostasis
which is the envy of other cultures? Could the harmony and spiritual
equilibrium of Muslim culture be a gift of the Qur'an whose orality
and literacy are both equally part and parcel of Muslim consciousness?
With respect to the Qur'an, the propitious equilibrium of spatial
and temporal biases in Islam must be regarded as an established
fact. The question which Muslims have to answer, however, is how
best to devise institutional setups that would help us maintain
this precious balance. How, for instance, in the teaching of the
Qur'an, can equal emphasis be given to its aural as well as visual
ambience? These and a host of other questions may legitimately -
and profitably -be deliberated in the light of our knowledge of
the ecology of information. For, no one need dispute the words of
William Kuhns, whose incisive The Post-Industrial Prophets: Interpretations
of Technology has been so useful in producing this synopsis, that
`Media can liberate or confine man; just knowing that may one day
make the difference'.
The Knowledge section consists of a wide variety of current news
analysis and comment. On the side menu just click on to each link
to view material that is relevent to the current reality of Muslims
comming up to the 21st century.
If you would like to contribute to this section please send articles
to knowledge@salaam.co.uk