Whose territory is technology/race?

Heidegger introduces "The Question Concerning Technology" by posing the problem of who has access to knowledge about technology in which cases, and which fields should be considered a valuable source of information about technology. There are some aspects of the study of technology, he argues, that are " 'technical philosophical' questions which none but the philosopher can answer." On the other hand, there are " 'technical technological' problems that the philosopher had best let alone" (284). Is it possible to approach technology from both sides at ones, to look at the philosophical implications of its technical aspects and use philosophy to inform its mechanics? Is the latter an ethical imperative?

The Noble reading expresses similar confusion over whose place it is to assess various racial paradigms and statistics as tools for grouping people — one could say, as technologies, as means to determine blacks' freedom and other contentious political questions. Solon Borland (D- Ark) expresses concern that statistical information should be reserved for "scientific men of the country" (40). In contrast, William Butler (D-SC) claims it is inappropriate for the government to use statistics about race as "a vehicle for information of a philosophical kind" (41). Already, the tension between technical and philosophical approaches to technology that Heidegger talks about is evident. Philosophy and science are conventionally considered separate, yet the privilege to proclaim truths about race was seen as both too scientific and too philosophical for the government. The question concerning race as a technology, then, is so muddled because it has been both a factual and a moral issue.