Talk:Technological determinism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (major fields): Philosophy of science Related task forces (periods): Contemporary philosophy

[edit] Structure:

• Should "Pessimism towards techno-science ... in academia" be under the main area or Criticism? Fullerian 00:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The normal structure we try to use is called Summary style; this means that for a substantial article, the lead section should be a concise summary of the main points of the whole article, and the following sections should go into more detail. In this case... the negative assessment among many scholars is (I'd say) an important thing to mention about technological determinism, and should remain in the lead (though that bit could possible be trimmed), but it should also appear, with more details backing up the claim, in the Criticism section. At least, that's how I would do it.--ragesoss 01:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)