Jon Clark’s study of the effect of the modernization of a telephone exchange on exchange maintenance work and workers is a solid contribution to a debate that encompasses two lively issues in the history and sociology of technology: technological determinism and social constructivism.
Clark makes the point that the characteristics of a technology have a decisive influence on job skills and work organization. Put more strongly, technology can be a primary determinant of social and managerial organization. Clark believes this possibility has been obscured by the recent sociological fashion, exemplified by Braverman’s analysis, that emphasizes the way machinery reflects social choices. For Braverman, the shape of a technological system is subordinate to the manager’s desire to wrest control of the labor process from the workers. Technological change is construed as the outcome of negotiations among interested parties who seek to incorporate their own interests into the design and configuration of the machinery. This position represents the new mainstream called social constructivism.
The constructivists gain acceptance by misrepresenting technological determinism: technological determinists are supposed to believe, for example, that machinery imposes appropriate forms of order on society. The alternative to constructivism, in other words, is to view technology as existing outside society, capable of directly influencing skills and work organization.
Clark refutes the extremes of the constructivists by both theoretical and empirical arguments. Theoretically he defines “technology” in terms of relationships between social and technical variables. Attempts to reduce the meaning of technology to cold, hard metal are bound to fail, for machinery is just scrap unless it is organized functionally and supported by appropriate systems of operation and maintenance. At the empirical level Clark shows how a change at the telephone exchange from maintenance-intensive electromechanical switches to semielectronic switching systems altered work tasks, skills, training opportunities, administration, and organization of workers. Some changes Clark attributes to the particular way
management and labor unions negotiated the introduction of the technology, whereas others are seen as arising from the capabilities and nature of the technology itself. Thus Clark helps answer the question: “When is social choice decisive and when are the concrete characteristics of technology more important?”
The author of the passage uses the expression “are supposed to" in line: technological determinists are supposed to believe primarily in order to
我有更好的解析 
暂无雷哥网文字解析
作者在25行使用的 “are supposed to”是为了？
A. 提出社会建构者关于决定论是不准确的理论
B. 定义决定论在技术实践方面的广为接受立场
C. 对决定论者的动机进行推测
D. 支持批评决定论者的评论
E. 比较决定论者的历史地位与现代化的地位
题目解析：
A. 正确。文章提出了社会建构者关于决定论是不准确的理论的观点
B. 此观点并未广为接受
C. 文中是对社会建构者动机的推测，并不是决定论者
D. 同样是对社会建构者的观点，并不是决定论者
文章并没有讨论到历史地位或者现代化地位
科目：
阅读RC
来源：
精选题库
1m4s
平均耗时
80.6%
平均正确率
该题由网友dmEnvee提供 上传GMAT题
分享
周末、晚班滚动开班 
24+35+35+6课时 
