Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Nanomachine : One word for three different paradigms

Abstract : Scientists and engineers who extensively use the term “nanomachine” are not always aware of the philosophical implications of this term. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the concept of nanomachine through a distinction between three major paradigms of machine. After a brief presentation of two well-known paradigms - Cartesian mechanistic machines and Von Neumann's complex and uncontrolled machines – we will argue that Drexler's model was mainly Cartesian. But what about the model of his critics? We propose a third model - Gilbert Simondon's notion of concrete machines – which seems more appropriate to understand nanomachines than the notion of “soft machines”. Finally we review a few strategies currently used to design nanomachines, in an effort to determine which paradigm they belong to.
Complete list of metadata

Cited literature [36 references]  Display  Hide  Download

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00350723
Contributor : Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Wednesday, January 7, 2009 - 3:33:26 PM
Last modification on : Thursday, October 21, 2021 - 3:16:25 PM
Long-term archiving on: : Tuesday, June 8, 2010 - 6:56:18 PM

File

02BBV.pdf
Explicit agreement for this submission

Identifiers

  • HAL Id : halshs-00350723, version 1

Citation

Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent. Nanomachine : One word for three different paradigms. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, Philosophy Documentation Center, 2007, 11 (1), pp.71-89. ⟨halshs-00350723⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

132

Files downloads

847