By Ruth Statz  
Staff Writer

Friday, 7:30 p.m. in Christ the Teacher, Franciscan University of Steubenville hosted Sister Anna Wray from the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia of Nashville, Tennessee. Wray gave a lecture, as the third part in a three-part lecture series, entitled “The Use of Tools in a Technocratic Age: The Death of Wisdom.” 

Though it was a small turnout, the lecture was quiet, pleasant, and a leisurely close to a long week. Wray opened with some light humor by introducing her three-part tour as her “Tech-Talk Tour,” a play on both TikTok and Ted Talk. She introduced the lecture with this question: does our use of technology hasten the death of wisdom?  

Wray referenced an old example, Plato’s Phaedrus. Theuth, an Egyptian god peddling his wares, offers King Thamus the gift of writing, saying, “writing will improve the memory and the wisdom of all the Egyptians.” Theuth responds wisely, “I don’t think that’s what it will bring about, in fact, I think writing will bring about forgetfulness. Why? Because with writing people will rely on external signs and not on their own internal resources.”  

The possession of words, and the tool of reading and writing, gives the impression of wisdom. However, that only masks ignorance, says Wray. Having posited this earliest argument against the use of technology, Wray posed this question to her attentive listeners: “If we know that our use of technology makes it more difficult for us to become wise, why are we still using technology in that way?” 

She gave two answers in response to this question, the first, taken from Socrates: the reason why people continue acting in ways that are bad for them is simply because they don’t know that what they’re doing is bad — namely, ignorance — and the second, from Aristotle: people do know what’s bad for them, they’re just too weak to resist. 

“So what is a tool?” asks Wray. “A tool is anything external to us that we use to accomplish an activity and that removes or extends a natural limit that we have.” As an example, she suggested a mirror — something that is external to us, used to accomplish an activity, namely “seeing,” which removes the natural limit we have on our vision.  

Wray then subdivided the kinds of tools into eight categories, the most important of these being the tools that are aimed at useful activities, such as a toothbrush, and the tools that are aimed at useless but pleasant activities, such as violence. The “useful” activities she called kinetic activities. They are activities for which it makes sense to be efficient, again, such as brushing one’s teeth. 

The kinetic tool, Wray also called the technocratic tool, saying: “These are the ones that are designed for efficiency and ease — for saving us time and saving us energy. They are designed for activities wherein being efficient isn’t nonsensical.” 

The age that we now live in is full of just this kind of tool, the technocratic tool, and the technocratic use of it. Therein, says Wray, lies the death of wisdom. These tools “save time and energy” but they don’t tell us what they’re saving time and energy for. For example, the car gets us to places faster and with much more ease than otherwise, yet even so people still rush around as though they have no time or energy. 

Wray closed her lecture with the question: “How can we change our use of tools?”  

First, she said, we must stop using tools unreflectively. Think about and reflect on what you’re using the tool for and how it affects our agency. Second, look for people who are willing to ask the questions that you’re asking, namely “how far can we push back against technology?” And third, start contemplating; rest both your desire and attention which ultimately is the goal we were made for. 

“You might have noticed that these sound suspiciously familiar,” Wray chuckled, “they may have sounded like I just recommended that you, pray (contemplate), fast (push back on the drive for ease), and give alms (spend time with people). Perhaps it shouldn’t be so surprising that the remedies for the loss of wisdom are themselves perennial wisdom.”  

To that delightfully simplistic yet wise close to her lecture, Wray was met with a chorus of clapping. The subject matter itself was so intriguing and Wray’s gift of speaking so engaging; no one wanted it to be over, and the audience plagued her with questions, to which she happily and satisfactorily replied for over an hour after it was over.