Talk:Technophilia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikicho7.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kh928. Peer reviewers: LokiLaufeyson2019.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 February 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Someonestolemysweetroll.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Politics of technology

Also mention conservatism/liberalism in technophobia/technophilia EnerJen

There are people of both views in both political camps. Noclevername 00:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Sources

I read through the Osiceanu paper that was cited and a good amount of the article is taken verbatim from the source. Additionally, it really only mentions technophilia to springboard into a deeper, psychological, discussion on technophobia, so I wonder whether or not we should consider moving away from this as the primary source. Someonestolemysweetroll (talk) 01:15, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Did some expansion/reorg. off the top of my head, but this article desperately needs sources. Soundguy99 16:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sentence in opening Paragraph

What does this sentence mean?:

"Technophilia is the antimodernist epigee of postmodern existence from the soft aesthetics of taste"

It may be an important statement, but it seems way to intellectually dense for the first paragraph of an encyclopedia article. mennonot 10:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. It is written from an innaccessible, intellectualist standpoint. I've marked it {{confusing}} and {{technical}}. ··gracefool |☺ 03:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

"Epigee" is not a word I could find in the dictionary.

Perhaps the author meant apogee, and is not as intellectual as they are trying to appear... --Ratinox 14:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Correct: "Epigee" is not found in the dictionary. This includes the newest unabridged verison of the Merriam Webster dictionary. Also, while "Apogee" is similar, I do not think it is contextually appropriate to use it, a word meaning the point of a satellite's orbit where it is farthest from the Earth's core. The first statement should be edited to be understandable to the common user. 71.126.89.38 01:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)freedomlinux

'Epigee' means 'upon the earth' (http://dict.die.net/epigee/)

Jesus wept

Here are the two major complaints: "The technophiliac aesthetic is comfortable function." and "the idea of technophilia is also used in connection with a behavior which realizes forms of sexual deviance with the help of the computer and the Internet." - FrancisTyers · 08:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Sexual deviance?

I do not believe technophilia necessarily implies any kind of sexual deviance whatsoever. Defined by Merriam Webster, a technophile is merely an enthusiast of technology. A sexual deviant who is an enthusiast of technology should be classified as a sexual deviant, not just a technophile

Removing tags

I've removed all the tags from this article after doing some clean up. --Loremaster 09:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)