Human Dignity in the Technological Age
Romano Guardini on a Walk
2020 has brought a stark shift to our everyday lives and practical decision-making. While there are very few things that are certain in the coming months (Will my workplace be open? Will our children be in school? Will there be another toilet paper shortage?), we do know they mark a new moment in history.
Knowing this, I cannot help but wonder how I, my children, and my children’s children will react to our response. Will I be proud that I did my best or disappointed knowing I could have done better? Romano Guardini also found himself at the cusp of a new historical moment. He wrote The End of the Modern World in part to process what life meant after World War II. His book provides a way to judge these kinds of moments. He presents a genealogy that divides history into three principal parts (the Classical, Middle, and Modern Ages) and evaluates each of them according to one standard: “in view of its own peculiar circumstances, to what extent did it allow for the development of human dignity?”
At face value, the reader may be alarmed at the vagueness of this standard. Measuring human dignity, especially as relative to the public consciousness of a historical moment one is not a part of, is not like measuring death/birth rates, the distributions of political affiliation, or literacy rates. Throughout the book, Guardini clarifies how this standard is measured. The standard first concerns what the concept of “human” refers to—what is human nature? Second, all standards have the potential for the thing being measured to be more or less of the standard. If, for instance, you are measuring weight, there is a scale that gives a range of how many pounds something could weigh. The standard Guardini uses measures to what extent a group more or less fosters human flourishing. Guardini terms this as a group’s “use of power.” “Power” is the medium by which groups, and individuals within these groups, attain a deeper actualization and awareness of what it means to be human. By evaluating what human nature consists in and how people use power, Guardini gives readers a measuring stick for the development of human dignity in different historical moments.
Zeus of Artemision
The first group Guardini evaluates is the “Classical Age.” In this era, to be human meant to be in harmony with the larger cosmos. Transcending the world—that is, going beyond what is immediately available—was not desirable. The way that the person in the Classical Age grew in this understanding of how to become fully human was two-fold: “noble” work and philosophical thinking. Work is termed “noble” in this period because of the way it involves both the body and soul. This integration of body and soul fosters a fuller understanding of their creative capacity since it allows the person to experience harmony with the cosmos more directly. Philosophical thinking was used for a similar end. Philosophy considered the nature of things in order to help the person understand their place in the world and, therefore, achieve self-knowledge.
West Rose Window of Chartres
The Classical Age’s philosophical corpus was assumed in the Middle Ages, but with an added religious emphasis. According to Guardini, the Middle Ages saw all of reality in context of its relation to God. So, to be human meant to be part of God’s plan. Everything someone is and does was part of God’s sublimity, so the way that the person in the Middle Ages could become more human was by assenting to authority. The dominant sources of authority were the ancient philosophers and the Church. These figures illuminated the way that everyday life was symbolically expressive of God’s will.
Giulio D’Anna Il nuotatore
The Modern conception of humanity, emerging in the Industrial Age, breaks from these concepts. Guardini describes this transition: “An ethos based upon objective goodness and truth was discarded for an ethos based in the subjective where nobility and truthfulness to one’s own self prevailed.” The idea of human nature lost a great deal of what it previously meant to be human. The self becomes the center of the universe. Rather than being a part of a whole, the person is viewed as a whole. Everything one needs, one has in oneself. Another significant break that the modern person makes is in discovering nature through one’s own autonomous power, rather than understanding human nature relationally, whether that is in relation to the universe or authority. In the Modern Age, to be human ultimately means to be a “self-mastered genius.”
This view of humanity leads to a way of relating to the world in which we are always trying to overcome it, rather than seeking harmony with it. Life is about getting what one wants by means of what one wants. “Wanting” here does not necessarily mean something hedonistic, or pleasure-seeking. It simply means it is up to the individual’s own choice. In the Modern Age, “human” is what the individual declares as true or good.
According to Guardini, technology is the catalyst for this new concept of what it means to be human, since it has allowed humans to appear to succeed in being radically independent. For example, because I can rely on a single factory to dye, spin, thread, and ship my clothes, I do not need to rely on the farmer, spinner, and seamstress. My network of relationships contracts because of mechanical efficiency, giving the illusion that I alone am the sole cause of acquiring clothing. Guardini is quick to note that this system causes a loss of personal creativity and a growing indifference to the existence of people and things outside the self. Growing dependence on technology allows the kind of independence the modern person craves: self-willed autonomy.
It is important to remember that technology is power for the modern person. We develop and depend on it because it helps us attain what we believe is most human. In Guardini’s paradigm, “Power receives its character only when someone becomes aware of it, determines its use, and puts it to work.” Power, in its various forms, requires the intentionality of the people who are using it. As Guardini puts it, technology “awaits” our direction. This is significant because using technology is still dependent upon human authors who use it according to their ends. As a power, technology has a great deal of fluidity in how it is used and with what intentions.
Guardini is especially critical of technology in its current form, tied as it is to this idea of human nature. He believes that it has trapped us in a ruthless system that seeks to disintegrate the ties that connect us with others and even our own bodies. He says that technology has even made much of the world inaccessible. Without the proper technical tools, one can no longer accomplish what one may have been able to do without technology in prior times. For example, I am dependent on my iPhone to give me directions while driving whereas in a different time I would have developed navigational skills. Technology has made so many things possible, but it has also hindered us in fundamental ways.
This year marks a new level of dependence on technology. Technology has enabled us to continue work, education, and communication even amidst a global pandemic. Guardini notes that the modern person often uses technology in a way that lacks awareness of the isolation it creates. When we don’t consider what we are doing, we naturally advance the dominant principles of our historical time. Technology was created in an historical environment that advanced a radically autonomous view of the human person. So, when technology is thoughtlessly used, it advances the isolated, autonomous view of human nature.
Neither I nor Guardini is saying that technology is necessarily bad. In fact, it is part of human nature to gain “freedom of knowledge, power over things, and fulfillment of life.” Technology enables us to do all of these things. At the same time, technology was born in an age with a certain standard of human nature. Thus, technology has often been used to perpetuate this modern idea of human nature as the “self-mastered genius.” Though we may be inescapably dependent on technology, we can still choose how to use it. Guardini instructs us to a path by which we may come to “integrate power into life in such a way that man can employ power without forfeiting his humanity.”
First, he proposes that we “try to rediscover something of what is called the contemplative attitude, actually experience it ourselves, not just talk about it interestingly.” We must consider for ourselves what it means to be human. What is my purpose? What is life about? How do I relate to my environment, other people, and society? Do I have responsibilities here? What are they? These kinds of “life questions” are the first step to realizing our assumptions about what it means to be human.
Next, it is important that we directly question how our vision of humanity is either served or hindered by our technological use. One thing I have noticed about technology is how it shifts my attitude from being an active participant in the world to being a passive observer. I watch my screen, and then continue to “stand-by,” missing out on the beauty and goodness of the world and others around me. I have found it beneficial to ask myself, “Am I so used to technology that I find myself continuing to observe my life instead of living it? Do I notice my surroundings or am I too distracted by technology to be an active part of the world I live in?”
Carlo Carra Interventionist Demonstration (Manifestazione Interventista)
By reflecting on these kinds of questions, I believe we can all begin to find ways to use technology that can be said to promote human dignity. Technology has the potential to help us develop a kind of humanity that is fully alive in its relationships with others and engagement with the world. There is a way we can continue to live creatively and freely, but it necessarily entails a new awareness of our view of human nature. If we take up Guardini’s task of rediscovering a contemplative attitude, we will be able to look back at this time satisfied that we made the most of the new conditions of this moment to become the best people we could.
Catherine Yanko is currently a PhD Student at the Catholic University of America where she studies Moral Theology/Ethics. Her main interests are in theological/philosophical anthropology, action and virtue theory, and metaethics. In her free time, you can find her enjoying new coffee shops, books, and hikes.