The maker movement and 3D printing: A critique

We live in a world where technological progress is a norm of society. Technology and its effects cannot be separated from what it means to be human. This is why it is important to understand why despite this relationship technology is still considered to be a neutral influence on society. For this thesis I review the technology of 3D printing and the users of this technology that are part of the Maker Movement community to better understand this neutral stance. From the Maker community I find that the members are also anti-government when it comes to policies or regulation of 3D printing because they feel that it will stall its progress. I critique their neutrality and anti-policy stance from the standpoint of historical theorists of technology such as Karl Marx, The Frankfurt School and Martin Heidegger and modern day theorist Harry Braverman, Sandra Harding and Andrew Feenberg. What I find is that the rational, or quantifying method, of how we experience nature and ourselves is why we view technological progress as neutral or deterministic to society. I also find a lack of connection between the innovators of technology such as 3D printing and those that create policies about technology in different political and social institutions. The issue that I find from this research is that most users of technology have little or no control over how technology is designed and how it can best function for all members of society and those that are in control cannot separate innovation from the capitalistic global economy.