IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v14y2023i5p768-775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology as a paradigm to investigate war

Author

Listed:
  • Xi Lin

Abstract

Critiquing Paul Kelly's unsophisticated grouping of political thinkers into two broad camps of a pre‐state and (post‐)state era, this article attempts to use the paradigm of technology as an alternative narrative to examine the phenomena of war, conflict and revolution. Drawing on Heidegger and Stiegler, the technology in war is regarded as a way of not only revealing our being in the world, but unconcealing the way we interact and construct intersubjectivity. Five paradigms of technology in war can be discerned, namely the first paradigm of primitive tools (from classical times to 1500 A.D.), the second one of early sciences and machines (1500–1830), the third one of interconnected systems (1830–1945), the fourth one of instruments of automation (1945–2000), and the current fifth one of artificial intelligence. These paradigms offer us a logical (while not necessarily linear) way to (re)examine the history of political thoughts.

Suggested Citation

  • Xi Lin, 2023. "Technology as a paradigm to investigate war," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(5), pages 768-775, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:14:y:2023:i:5:p:768-775
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13293
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13293?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bettina Koch & Eva‐Maria Nag, 2023. "Debating Conflict, war and revolution: Introduction to the special section," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(5), pages 742-745, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:14:y:2023:i:5:p:768-775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.