AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60

DOI 10.1007/s00146-009-0234-1

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A different way of seeing: Albert Borgmann’s philosophy

of technology and human–computer interaction
Daniel Fallman

Received: 25 December 2008 / Accepted: 20 September 2009 / Published online: 30 October 2009

Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Abstract Traditional human–computer interaction (HCI) that we need to be cautious and rethink the relationship as
allowed researchers and practitioners to share and rely on well as the often-assumed correspondence between what
the ‘five E’s’ of usability, the principle that interactive we consider useful and what we think of as good in tech-
systems should be designed to be effective, efficient, nology. This junction—that some technologies may be
engaging, error tolerant, and easy to learn. A recent trend in both useful and good, while some technologies that are
HCI, however, is that academic researchers as well as useful for some purposes might also be harmful, less good,
practitioners are becoming increasingly interested in user in a broader context—is at the heart of Borgmann’s
experiences, i.e., understanding and designing for rela- understanding of technology. Borgmann’s notion of the
tionships between users and artifacts that are for instance device paradigm is a valuable contribution to HCI as it
affective, engaging, fun, playable, sociable, creative, points out that we are increasingly experiencing the world
involving, meaningful, exciting, ambiguous, and curious. with, through, and by information technologies and that
In this paper, it is argued that built into this shift in per- most of these technologies tend to be designed to provide
spective there is a concurrent shift in accountability that is commodities that effortlessly grant our wishes without
drawing attention to a number of ethical, moral, social, demanding anything in return, such as patience, skills, or
cultural, and political issues that have been traditionally de- effort. This paper argues that Borgmann’s work is relevant
emphasized in a field of research guided by usability and makes a valuable contribution to HCI in at least two
concerns. Not surprisingly, this shift in accountability has ways: first, as a different way of seeing that raises impor-
also received scarce attention in HCI. To be able to find tant social, cultural, ethical, and moral issues from which
any answers to the question of what makes a good user contemporary HCI cannot escape; and second, as providing
experience, the field of HCI needs to develop a philosophy guidance as to how specific values might be incorporated
of technology. One building block for such a philosophy of into the design of interactive systems that foster engage-
technology in HCI is presented. Albert Borgmann argues ment with reality.

1 Introduction

Traditionally, human–computer interaction (HCI) has

D. Fallman (&) allowed researchers and practitioners to share and rely on
Department of Informatics,
what is commonly referred to as the ‘five E’s’ of usability,
Umeå University,
90187 Umeå, Sweden the principle that interactive systems should be designed to
e-mail: daniel.fallman@tii.se be effective, efficient, engaging, error tolerant, and easy to
learn. Usability is hence, as the ISO 9241-11 standard
D. Fallman
defines, ‘‘the extent to which a product can be used by
Interactive Institute,
Box 1197, 16426 Kista, specified users to achieve specified goals with effective-
Sweden ness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of

123
54 AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60

use.’’ We may call this set of characteristics the usability move away from the dehumanizing tendency of traditional
paradigm.1 usability (Jordan 1999) and regard the human user more as
Within this paradigm, the most common methodological a whole person, not just as an entity with a set of cognitive
practice, adopted primarily from the cognitive sciences, has skills. This newfound wholly tends to have a life, too, full
been to perform various kinds of laboratory-based quanti- of social, cultural, moral and ethical concerns, individual
tative experiments to gather empirical data relating to some goals and interests, relationships, and so on.
aspects of a particular design’s usability, where a user Related to these new takes on usability, a concurrent
group is typically exposed to two or more similar but in contextual shift is also taking place related to HCI’s object
some aspects distinctive designs. To predict and analyze of study. The computer can no longer be seen as something
user behavior, a number of internal ‘laws’ have been that exclusively helps us perform our work—rather,
developed within the paradigm. One such law is Fitts’s information technology is everywhere these days; in our
law, a model of human movement that can be used to homes, our TVs, our cars, and even our pockets. According
assess and predict the time required to move from a starting to Gaver (2002), the computer has become something that
position to a final target area as a function of the distance to helps us pursue our lives, not just something that helps us
the target and the size of the target (MacKenzie 1992). perform our work. In this, as users of this technology, we
To carry out work within the usability paradigm is tend to want more from it than merely the ‘five E’s’; we
generally quite rewarding. There is a specific technical seek the enjoyable, exciting, and meaningful, something
terminology that everyone shares; a set of trusted tech- that is curious, playful, intimate, creative, and sometimes
niques, methods, and theories that can be assessed and even ambiguous and mystical.
discussed; and, perhaps most importantly, a communal Particularly from the early 1990s onwards, researchers
sense of what to strive for, supported by dedicated con- and designers in HCI and Interaction Design have become
ferences and journals. increasingly interested in better understanding and
Within the usability paradigm, it is quite straightforward designing for these new kinds of relationships between
to decide whether or not something is of ‘a good design’. users, artifacts, and contexts. For instance, rather than to
Here, a good design means a design that shows a high level look at a design’s efficiency, HCI researchers are now
of usability; which can be quantified, measured, analyzed, looking at what affective qualities it holds. Rather than
debated, and assessed according to the battery of laws, performance metrics, what is the user experience like?
methods, practices, and techniques that have been devel- Rather than finding out the error rate, is a particular design
oped within the paradigm. experienced as fun and exciting to use by its intended end
While few would probably argue against the practical users? While many of these newfound concepts are cur-
value in improving the usability of interactive systems, a rently being explored in the HCI literature, what is gen-
number of alternative conceptual frameworks and associ- erally lacking is what appears to be a necessary rethinking
ated methodological approaches have been proposed for of the concept of ‘good’. Within the usability paradigm,
new, post-cognitivist approaches to HCI that in different efficiency could generally be treated as a variable one
ways radically come to redefine the concept of usability. would always seek to maximize—it represented a com-
While far from a complete list, these new directions have monly understood and agreed-upon good in interactive
included ethnography and ethnomethodology (see Such- systems design. However, when the ‘five E’s’ of usability
man 1987; Dourish 2001), phenomenology (see Winograd are abandoned for other perspectives, what replaces them
and Flores 1986; Dourish 2001; Fallman 2003a), distrib- in terms of ideals for which to strive? What are ‘the new
uted cognition (see Hutchins 1995), and activity theory (see goods’? For instance, what makes a good user experience?
Nardi 1996). A recent trend in HCI is also to seek inspi- What is implied by the phrase ‘a good design’ is a much
ration in design methods, theory, and practice (see Gaver more complex question approached from the perspective of
et al. 1999; Jordan 2000; Fallman 2003b) rather than in user experience than from the perspective of traditional
formal methods of evaluation. A common theme in these usability. It is also a question that is not purely academic but
new perspectives on usability is that they have tried to rather of very practical and direct interest to researchers,
designers, and users—in fact, to society at large. For
1 instance, if one’s mobile phone could motivate one to
The use of the term paradigm here is metaphorical in the sense of
Kuhn’s (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, where it is exercise more, would that increase anorexia among young
used as a tool for describing the organization and process through girls? If online rating systems are designed to motivate
which scientific revolutions take place. A paradigm is a set of basic people to behave better online, what do we really mean by
beliefs, a foundational world view, which is often implicit but which
better—and who are we? Under the usability paradigm, in
strongly guides action. The applicability of the term to other areas
than that originally suggested is discussed by, for instance, attempting to understand itself more as an empirical science
Masterman (1970) and Thompson (1989). than a design discipline, HCI has systematically taken every

123
AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60 55

measure possible to avoid dealing with these questions. In most influential version of the device paradigm’’ (Borg-
this paper, it is argued that these questions have the possi- mann 2000, p. 352). Borgmann uses the notion of infor-
bility to open up and make explicit a dimension of HCI that mation and the various kinds of technologies developed
traditionally has been largely de-emphasized due to the around it to cast light on the kind of reality we have today
community’s desire to be accepted as an empirical science, and to question what he sees as the decline of meaning.
morally and ethically neutral. This is the dimension of the While Borgmann is contemporary in this respect, there is
nature of the technologies that HCI develops—the human, still a clear legacy between Borgmann’s thinking and
social, cultural, ethical, and political implications of those classical philosophies of technology. By looking at Borg-
technologies, i.e., a philosophy of technology for Human– mann’s philosophy of technology, we thus come to connect
Computer Interaction. technologies of interest to HCI with particular strands of
thought in classical philosophy.

2 Philosophy of technology
3 Borgmann’s focal things and practices
Philosophy of technology is the field of philosophy dedicated
to studying the nature of technology and its implications. In Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life
What separates a philosophy of technology from other kinds (1984), Borgmann outlines his style of thinking in relation
of philosophies is disputable, yet—as Ihde (1993, p. 38) to technology and human life. Where much of contempo-
notes—‘‘to qualify as a philosophy of technology … the rary technological development is focused on issues sur-
philosopher must make technology a foreground phenome- rounding the ‘usefulness’ of different kinds of technology,
non and be able to reflectively analyze it in such a way as to for instance the usability tradition within HCI, Borgmann
illuminate features of the phenomenon of technology itself.’’ suggests that we need to be cautious and rethink the rela-
Trying to understand the role and importance of technology tionship—and the often-assumed correspondence—
in our lives has a very long tradition within Western thinking, between what we consider useful and what we think of as
dating at least back to the Greeks. Whereas many earlier good in terms of technology: ‘‘One the one hand, ambu-
philosophers took great interest in technology, it is, however, lances save lives and so are eminently useful; on the other
not until the twentieth century—with John Dewey and hand, cars save us bodily exertion and the annoyances of
Martin Heidegger—that it makes sense to talk about any real fellow pedestrians or passengers and are thus, at least in
philosophies of technology. They both regard technology as part, a threat to the goods of community and our physical
central to modern life, where Dewey holds a largely opti- health in the form of exercise’’ (Strong and Higgs 2000,
mistic outlook toward modern technologies while Heidegger p. 21).
develops a more dystopian view. This junction between the useful and the good—that
This basic utopian/dystopian divide is still visible within some technologies may be both useful and good, while
the field of philosophy of technology. In Thinking through some technologies that are useful for some purposes might
Technology (1994), Mitcham distinguishes between the also be harmful, less good, in a broader context—is at the
engineering strand in philosophy of technology, which heart of Borgmann’s understanding of technology.
seems to assume the centrality of technology in human life, Through his concept of focal things, Borgmann addresses
and the humanities approach, which is more concerned those things that ‘‘of themselves have engaged mind and
with technology’s moral and cultural boundaries. This body and centered our lives. Commanding presence, con-
dichotomy is however becoming increasingly questioned tinuity with the world and centering power are the signs of
and refined not only by Mitcham himself but by some of focal things’’ (Borgmann 1992, p. 119). As a primary
the major contemporary philosophers of technology, example of a focal thing, Borgmann draws on the hearth. In
including Albert Borgmann, Andrew Feenberg, Donna a traditional, fairly romanticized depiction of what life
Haraway, Larry Hickman, Don Ihde, and others. ‘used to be like’ in a country house, Borgmann points out
In the following sections, we will introduce and discuss that the heart for the inhabitants of this house, be it settlers,
a contemporary philosophy of technology that seems farmers, or ranchers, used to be its fireplace. It was a nat-
especially relevant in light of the recent advances in HCI ural gathering point around which most activities were
that have been discussed earlier. Borgmann’s work should either centered or to which they were in some ways related.
be relevant to consider in the context of HCI in several To keep the house warm, trees had to be cut down, split
ways. Unlike many classical philosophies of technology, into wood and dried, the fire had to be built and maintained,
Borgmann specifically addresses and deals philosophically and it was here that food preparation naturally took place.
with the same technologies with which HCI is concerned; In this way, the fireplace as a focal thing was inseparable
‘‘information technology is currently the prominent and from our involvement and engagement with the thing in the

123
56 AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60

context in which it appeared. This context, or ‘world’, is possibility of technological good—as was the case with the
made possible and brought into being only by the appear- fireplace—he is, however, highly skeptical about the con-
ance of the focal thing (Borgmann 1984). The fireplace, as ventional view that technology frees us to attend to other,
hearth, hence assembles a set of focal activities; it becomes more stimulating pursuits (Strong and Higgs 2000). He
the center of what inhabiting that house means: ‘‘Thus a argues, on the contrary, that we are typically not freed up at
stove used to furnish more than mere warmth. It was a all by technology but rather made passive—and if we are
focus, a hearth, a place that gathered the work and leisure freed up it is only to have time for more technology. In this
of a family and gave the house a center. Its coldness downward spiral, we become consumers, increasingly dis-
marked the morning, and the spreading of its warmth the engaged from things and from each other. Technology tends
beginning of the day. It assigned to the different family to seduce us toward a focus upon material goods, quantita-
members tasks … It provided for the entire family a regular tive thinking, commodities, and disposability, where any
and bodily engagement with the rhythm of the seasons that kind of guidance from considering issues of the good and the
was woven together with the threat of cold and the solace excellent is left out. Borgmann envisions that a particular
of warmth, the smell of wood smoke, the exertion of technology could be placed along a continuum, in which a
sawing and carrying, the teaching of skills, and the fidelity focal thing would become placed on the one end while what
to daily tasks’’ (Borgmann 1984, p. 42). he calls a device would be placed on the opposite end.
Focal things seem to be characterized by commanding Devices are hence the opposite of focal things; they are
presence. A focal thing such as the fireplace puts demands disposable, often mass-produced, discontinuous and
on us—to cut down trees, to chop and dry wood, and to detached from any larger context, and appealingly glamor-
keep the fire burning—requiring patience, endurance, skill, ous. Devices, in their effort of being useful, are often dis-
and some amount of resoluteness. Keeping the fire alive is engaging in their attempt to do things for us; without us
also a continuous activity; it is something that connects us having to lift a finger, requiring very little of us in terms of
with our other activities and with the larger context of life, skill, patience, effort, and attention (Strong and Higgs 2000).
one’s community, one’s place. In this way, ‘‘a focal thing is Borgmann’s point is that modern technology, propelled
not an isolated entity; it exists as a material center in a by the advances in information technology, tends to operate
complicated network of human relationships and relation- to deconstruct things and reconstitute them into devices,
ships to its natural and cultural setting’’ (Strong and Higgs which contributes to the style of modern life being devoid
2000, p. 23). Focal things also have centering powers, of a natural center, a hearth, because of which it is lacking
through which the fireplace comes to affirm the place a larger and richer social and ecological context: ‘‘In this
where one lives and the direction of one’s life, a kind of rising tide of technological devices, disposability super-
long-term, growing insight about the right way of living sedes commanding presence, discontinuity wins over con-
(Strong and Higgs 2000). Hence, a key characteristic of tinuity, and glamorous thrills trump centering experiences’’
focal things, according to Borgmann, is that they tend to (Strong and Higgs 2000, p. 24).
unify means and ends. Achievement and enjoyment are A key characteristic of a device is that it typically only
brought together; so are individual and community; mind provides what Borgmann calls a commodity, only one
and body; and body and world. aspect of the original thing the device replaces. His most
well-known illustration of this is the shift from wood-
3.1 The device paradigm burning fireplaces to central heating systems. His argument
is that a central heating system (a device) provides a single
Nevertheless, according to Borgmann, the understanding commodity (warmth), which in Borgmann’s view is only a
and appreciation of the role of focal things and practices small part of the role and meaning of the replaced fireplace
seems to have disappeared from modern technology. It (the thing, as discussed earlier). Hence, in the switch from
seems that the latter is rather guided by another kind of things to devices, the quality, context, texture, and
promise: ‘‘Technology … promises to bring the forces of involvement in our relationship with the thing disappear
nature and culture under control, to liberate us from misery and we are left with merely a number of disengaged
and toil, and to enrich our lives. […] Implied in the tech- commodities.
nological mode of taking up with the world there is a A device such as the central heating system that gives us
promise that this approach to reality will, by way of the the commodity of warmth also has the character of hiding
domination of nature, yield liberation and enrichment’’ the mechanisms by which commodities get produced.
(Borgmann 1984, p. 41). While there is a strong and obvious connection between the
Borgmann argues that this promise has led society to number of wood blocks one puts in the stove, the corre-
believe that the good life should be technologically mediated sponding boost in the size of the fire, and an increase in
and supported. While Borgmann does not reject the warmth, the connection between the machinery that comes

123
AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60 57

into operation from handling a knob on one’s thermostat (Borgmann 1999). A sign is hence not a thing but rather the
and the warmth produced by the central heating system is promise of a thing, a relationship between humans and
much more unclear and unfamiliar; perhaps even to such an reality (Verbeek 2002).
extent that the relationship transforms into an alterity There are three main types of information, according to
relation, where the central heating system becomes a kind Borgmann, each rendering a different connection between
of unknown ‘otherness’. In this, it is obvious that the humans and reality: natural information, cultural infor-
commodity of warmth as generated by the central heating mation, and technological information. Natural information
system results in division between the commodity as a is information about reality, i.e., signs that tell us some-
technological foreground and the commodity’s background thing about the world we inhabit; such as the way smoke
machinery. According to Borgmann, the resulting distance tells us that there is a fire somewhere. Obviously, if there
is how devices tend to split means and ends, whereas things were no natural information, the world would be unin-
tend to connect means and ends (Strong and Higgs 2000). habitable for humans—natural signs are what make reality
This implies that we can have ends without knowing, understandable for human beings.
caring for, or getting in any way involved with the means. All signs are not natural, however. Information can also
One way of interpreting this is to say that although we can have the form of being for reality, Borgmann argues—
have the commodity of warmth without effort, the meta- addressing this kind of information by the name of cultural
phorical and literal warmth that comes from the effort itself information. Cultural signs cannot be found in nature but
and its social character becomes lost. have meaning by convention. These signs include letters,
Borgmann uses the notion of the device paradigm to put text, and musical notes and scores. Unlike natural infor-
emphasis on the ongoing transformation of things into mation, cultural information is an invitation to realize and
devices and the technologization of our lives and our shape reality, rather than an expression of it. A musical
society that follows. This also involves what Borgmann score, according to Borgmann, demands realization; it has
calls the irony of technology: ‘‘The good life that devices to be played—it is information for reality.
obtain disappoints our deeper aspirations. The promise of Borgmann’s third form of information, technological
technology, pursued limitlessly, is simultaneously alluring information, is quite specific to recent information tech-
and disengaging’’ (Strong and Higgs 2000, p. 31). Borg- nology. This form of information can be found in devices
mann’s prophecy seems to be that we have become mes- providing information neither about nor for reality, but
merized by the promises of modern technology—‘‘to bring rather as reality. The information stored on a Compact Disc
the forces of nature and culture under control, to liberate us (CD), for instance, is not a report of a live rock concert or
from misery and toil, and to enrich our lives’’ (Borgmann instructions about how to play the music. Rather, the
1984, p. 41)—whose devices demand less and less of our information a CD contains is realized as reality, consti-
own skills, efforts, patience, and risk. But in this shift from tuting its own reality. Using Borgmann’s terminology, this
engagement with focal things and practices to disengaged kind of information is hyperreal, as it is actually more real
consumption of devices, his fear is that we have come to than reality itself. The information stored on a CD—the
disappoint our own, deeper aspirations. Rather than the music one hears—is qualitatively superior to any actual
promise of technological enrichment and consumption, we reality. First, it is present at our command at any time. We
have come to find ourselves disengaged, diverted, and do not have to be at a specific place in time to hear our
distracted, and—ultimately—lonely. favorite music; we can listen to it at any time in the comfort
of our homes, our cars, and through our mobile devices,
3.2 Holding onto reality wherever we so choose. Most of the sounds on the CD are
typically also sampled, modified, mixed, resampled, and
Borgmann’s Holding onto Reality: The Nature of Infor- digitally altered and enhanced. In this way, sounds appear
mation at the Turn of the Millennium (1999) is in many richer and clearer than they were at the time they were
ways a continuation and an elaboration on his earlier recorded. Human voices are recorded, fragmentized, and
Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life. fine-tuned by computer applications to better harmonize
Leaving the realms of the cultural role of technology, with the music; drums are samples that are played back by
Borgmann focuses on specific aspects of information and a computer sequencer at a pace and rhythm inconceivable
communication technologies and the way that they help for a human drum player; live instruments are recoded one-
shape people’s experiences with reality. In developing a by-one, mixed, and juxtaposed in a manner impossible to
philosophical analysis of information, Borgmann comes to duplicate by any band made up of a group of human
view information as a relationship between humans and musicians. Thus, as opposed to both natural and cultural
reality. Within a certain context, he argues, information information, technological information does not provide
consists of signs that inform people about things in reality access to reality—it rather replaces reality.

123
58 AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60

The fear that Borgmann holds echoes a classical dys- being a part of HCI is almost inexorably also about
topian argument in the philosophy of technology; that nurturing the strong link between consumerism and HCI
‘‘information is about to overflow and suffocate reality’’ work. Many of us tend to like to buy and use new
(Borgmann 1999, p. 213). When it comes to technological devices, longing for new models, and look forward to
information, Borgmann argues that it is increasingly being software upgrades. As a different way of seeing, Borg-
used as a substitute for reality. Popular virtual worlds such mann’s work thus serves as inspiration as well as justi-
as Second Life and World of Warcraft are becoming places fication for new kinds of HCI communities to develop and
where people live their lives; where they do things and grow, communities that may have radically new per-
through their avatars become regarded in a way they cannot spectives on what are important issues to consider when
do or be in their real lives. The downside with this, designing interactive systems.
according to Borgmann’s philosophy, is that these virtual As an example, the sustainable interaction design (SID)
worlds lack the eloquence and engaging power of actual movement has been gaining ground in recent years. Despite
reality. In these hyperreal worlds, reality also becomes some internal turbulence that exists within most new
treated as a commodity—one’s avatar in Second Life can communities, it is interesting to see that rather than simply
be switched on and off and one can take a pause from reject technological development per se—which would
World of Warcraft. Returning to the irony of technology— probably be the most sustainable approach altogether—
that the good life technological devices obtain disappoints Blevis (2007) argues that one important aspect of a sus-
our deeper aspirations—Borgmann notices how informa- tainable approach to interaction design and HCI might
tion technology does not enlarge our engagement with actually be about ‘‘promoting quality & equality … the
reality. Rather, it creates a new reality—a hyperreality— idea that the design of new objects or systems with
that is both easier to control and experience as well as embedded materials of information technologies implies
qualitatively superior, but which is parasitic on reality itself the need to consider quality as a construct of affect and
and fails to engage us. While technology on the one hand longevity and quality in the sense of anticipating means of
makes information available, it on the other hand has a renewal & reuse, thereby motivating the prolonged value of
tendency to strip it of its tie to reality (Verbeek 2002). such objects or systems and providing equality of experi-
ence to new owners of such objects and systems whenever
ownership transfers,’’ (Blevis 2007, p. 504). In relation to
4 Borgmann’s device paradigm such new strands of thought within HCI, Borgmann’s
and current HCI research notion of a ‘thing’ would clearly be useful as inspiration in
finding and designing things that have such qualities and
Borgmann’s notion of the device paradigm and his concern that engage us with the realm of the social, the ethical, and
for our engagement with reality seems to be of primary other important dimensions of situated, real life.
interest to the field of HCI in several ways. This section This brings us onto the second kind of contribution
will propose and discuss some of the potential contribu- Borgmann’s device paradigm can offer HCI. This contri-
tions of Borgmann’s philosophy of technology to the field bution is about providing guidance as to how specific
of HCI. values might be incorporated into the design of interactive
First, Borgmann offers what we may term a different systems that foster engagement with reality.
way of seeing. His device paradigm offers an alternative From the description of Borgmann’s thoughts provided
perspective that unlike many current HCI perspectives is earlier in this paper, we get that Borgmann tends to cor-
inherently reformist in nature. As such, it provides a much relate effortlessness with disengagement. However, as we
richer understanding of the many elements that make up a have discussed earlier in this section, a good design from
user experience, one that incorporates much more than just the point of view of usability is generally one that delivers
what goes on in the interaction between a user and a piece a commodity in an as effective and efficient way as pos-
of technology, and one that dares to go beyond the strong sible. According to Borgmann, these commodities do not
individualistic focus of user-centered design. enlarge our engagement with reality. On the contrary, he
If we approach Borgmann’s account of the device argues, the good life that is promised by these well-
paradigm as a different way of seeing, we are for instance designed and usable devices and the commodities they
able to recognize that there is a close resemblance bring come to disappoint our deeper aspirations. This is the
between the ‘five E’s’ of traditional usability and what irony of technology, according to Borgmann—the promise
Borgmann calls a device, i.e., the effective delivery of a of technology is both tempting and disengaging. Rather
commodity. Through Borgmann’s lens, we recognize how than being technologically enriched by the devices we buy,
technology and perhaps especially information technology use, and eventually dispose of, we tend to find ourselves
tends to invite a consumptive way of being, and that disengaged, diverted, and distracted.

123
AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60 59

Borgmann notes that a character of many of our devices ethical issues seems unavoidable. For instance, when
is that they tend to demand less and less of our own skills, designing or evaluating a user interface for euthanasia
efforts, patience, and risk. The link between these charac- assistance, then clearly traditional usability concerns do
teristics and the ideals of usability is obvious. If we thus not tell the whole story; researchers and designers
take providing guidance as to how specific values might be cannot remain morally and ethically aimless.
incorporated into the design of interactive systems that
foster engagement with reality as a second perspective to
how Borgmann’s work could come to influence HCI, what
5 Conclusions
would be desirable characteristics of technology for which
to strive? Which are the values we should incorporate into
While Borgmann’s philosophy of technology may not
designing interactive systems as ‘things’ as opposed to
provide complete answers to the questions that ended the
‘devices’?
last section, at least answers that everyone can agree upon,
As we have seen, Borgmann places value on things that
his work raises important social, cultural, ethical, and moral
engage mind and body and that centers our lives. Common
issues from which contemporary HCI cannot escape. Still,
characteristics among such things are that they generally
from one perspective, Borgmann’s position could be dis-
require a lot from us as involved participants: effort,
missed as just a slightly more modern strand of the kind of
patience, and skill. Borgmann does this because he
alienating philosophy of technology previously championed
appreciates their role in shaping relations to technology
by Heidegger, Jaspers, Ellul, and others. In different ways,
that draw us closer to genuine places, people, and things,
they also claimed that technology alienates humans from
whereas devices that deliver commodities without effort on
what they ‘really are’ or what reality ‘really is’. As noted by
our part tend to shape ‘hyperreal’ relations between
for instance Verbeek (2002), the alienating thesis is prob-
humans and our world, a reality that fails to engage us.
lematic in several ways. First, it romantically presupposes a
Approaching and interpreting Borgmann’s work from a
kind of original, more authentic, pre-technological way of
design perspective put forward a number of prominent and
being with reality, yet it is highly questionable if, when, and
important questions for future HCI research, whose
where such a reality in fact existed. Second, Borgmann’s
detailed answers are clearly beyond the scope of this paper.
ideas about the alienating role of technology are also at odds
Notwithstanding, preliminary guidance as to how specific
with what many would state to be their lived experience
values might be incorporated into the design of interactive
with technology. Many kinds of information and commu-
systems that foster engagement with reality is sketched out
nication technologies on the contrary appear to enhance
below:
people’s lives. Chat technologies make it possible to keep
• What is a good user experience? Examples of good up relations with people over geographical distance; web
user experiences are experiences that cultivate the value forums allow people with a shared, specific interest to take
of individual patience; experiences that require sub- part in very detailed and advanced discussions with the like-
stantial effort; experiences that require a great deal of minded, practically impossible to organize at the local
skill on the part of the user; experiences that find a clubhouse; shared virtual worlds like Second Life allow
suitable balance between patience, skill, and effort. people from different parts of the world, not only geo-
• What user experiences are to be avoided? Avoid user graphical, to experience equality and community, and so on.
experiences where a user’s wishes are effortlessly Thus, rather than either reject or accept Borgmann’s ideas,
granted and nothing is demanding in return as well as it seems valuable to use his work within HCI as an alter-
technological solutions that attempt to do things for their native to the unproblematic and unreflective approach to
users. Avoid designing for user experiences that might technological development that is currently permeating the
become substitutes for genuine, real-world experiences. field—as a different way of seeing.
• How does one determine the success or failure of a user Information technology currently permeates our lives.
experience? User experiences are to be considered Sensors, electronics, and displays are becoming integrated
failures if they fails to motivate and engage the user into almost everything, rapidly blurring the boundary
either positively or negatively. User experiences are between digital and physical products. The web has rapidly
successful if they bring us closer to genuine places, emerged to touch on so many aspects of human life that it
people, and things. is arguably starting to blur the distinction between having a
• Do designers have moral and ethical responsibility for ‘user experience’ and experience as a whole. We use laptop
what they design? When HCI starts to ask rich computers, mobile phones, and digital music players at
questions about what goes on between a user and a work, in our homes, on the bus home, in meetings, during
computer interface, then also dealing with moral and lectures and talks, and so on. Borgmann’s work is useful in

123
60 AI & Soc (2010) 25:53–60

pointing out that this means we are increasingly experi- Borgmann A (1984) Technology and the character of contemporary
encing the world with, through, and by information tech- life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Borgmann A (1992) Crossing the postmodern divide. University of
nology that is most often designed to provide commodities Chicago Press, Chicago
that effortlessly grant our wishes without demanding any- Borgmann A (1999) Holding onto reality: the nature of information at
thing in return. For instance, while it from one perspective the turn of the millennium. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
is neat that I am able to do my email during another Borgmann A (2000) Reply to my critics. In: Higgs E, Light A, Strong
D (eds) Technology, the good life?. University of Chicago Press,
speaker’s presentation at a conference, Borgmann’s per- Chicago
spective asks: am I really there? Would perhaps not both Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied
my own experience of the conference as well as the whole interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge
conference’s outcome, focus, and centering powers have Fallman D (2003a) In romance with the materials of mobile
interaction: a phenomenological approach to the design of
been improved if no laptops were allowed? Borgmann’s mobile information technology. Doctoral Thesis, Umea Univer-
device paradigm provides the means to be able to ask sity, Sweden: Larsson & Co:s Tryckeri
questions like these as well as clues to finding answers. Fallman D (2003b) Design-oriented human–computer interaction.
In this paper, it has been argued that Borgmann’s work Proceedings of CHI2003, conference on human factors in
computing systems, CHI Letters, vol 5, issue no. 1 (Fort
contributes to current HCI research and design in at least Lauderdale, Florida, April 5–10). ACM Press, New York, pp
two ways: 225–232
Gaver B (2002) Designing for Humo Ludens, 13 Magazine. Nr 12:2–6
• As a different way of seeing. Gaver B, Dunne T, Pacenti E (1999) Design: cultural probes.
• As providing guidance as to how specific values might Interactions 6(1):21–29
be incorporated into the design of interactive systems Hutchins E (1995) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge
Ihde D (1993) Philosophy of technology: an introduction. Paragon
that foster engagement with reality.
House, New York
As an alternative, a different way of seeing, Borgmann’s Jordan PW (1999) Pleasure with products: Human factors for body,
mind and soul. Human factors in product design: current practice
analysis of information technology can be used to point to and future trends. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 206–217
the ambivalent role that various kinds of technologies come Jordan PW (2000) Designing pleasurable products: an introduction to
to play in our everyday existence, all of which are not the new human factors. Taylor and Francis, London
exclusively of a positive nature and point to a brighter, Kuhn TS (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of
Chicago Press, Chicago
more technologically enriched future. As an alternative, MacKenzie IS (1992) Fitts’ law as a research and design tool in
Borgmann’s device paradigm asks the right questions, human–computer interaction. Hum Comput Interact 7:91–139
questions that raise important social, cultural, ethical, and Masterman M (1970) The nature of a paradigm in criticism and the
moral issues from which contemporary HCI cannot escape. growth of knowledge. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A (eds) Criticism
and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge University Press,
Beyond asking the right questions, Borgmann’s work also Cambridge
provides designers and researchers with guidance as to how Mitcham C (1994) Thinking through technology: the path between
design and understand interactive systems that foster engineering and philosophy. University of Chicago Press,
engagement with reality. Chicago
Nardi BA (ed) (1996) Context and consciousness: activity theory and
In light of this, Borgmann’s thinking could form one of human–computer interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge
the building blocks for a philosophy of technology to Strong D, Higgs E (2000) Borgmann’s philosophy of technology. In:
emerge within HCI. To continue to be a relevant voice in Higgs ES, Light A, Strong D (eds) Technology and the good
interactive systems design, it is important for HCI to leave life?. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Suchman L (1987) Plans and situated actions: the problem of
the comfort zone of the moral, ethical, societal, and polit- human—machine communication. Cambridge University Press,
ical neutrality of the usability paradigm. If HCI as a field Cambridge
does not choose to deal with these ‘new’ questions—in the Thompson B (1989) The place of qualitative research in contempo-
way that many disciplines within the social sciences, rary social science: the importance of post-paradigmatic thought,
advances in social science methodology, vol 1
humanities, and design are dealing with them already—its Verbeek PP (2002) Devices of engagement: on Borgmann’s philos-
perceived relevance may blur and more relevant fields of ophy of information and technology. Techné: Res Philos
research will inevitably take over. Technol 6(1):69–92
Winograd T, Flores F (1986) Understanding computers and cognition:
a new foundation for design. Ablex Publishing Corporation,
Norwood

References

Blevis E (2007) Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal,

renewal & reuse. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on
Human factors in computing systems, pp 503–512

123