ety

Flo

Social evolutionCommunication technologiesSocial complexity

he foon communication. This means that every huge change that humanity has experienced

nd co

tions

takes place in relation to the structures of the systeme thatis, expectations that guide communication. Selection is

e relationship be--stabilized, whichefore, sustainablens to have a places and make themnect among them-

selves and refer to a non-human environment. This theoryimplies that dening evolution as a series of episodes isarticial ([20]: 358e359). For this reason, we must assumethat these theories are vital to identify key moments in theevolution of human society and that they possess an arti-cial character, like every other theory about thehappening of life in which life merely happens, dis-regarding every explanation ([24]: 88).

This paper was based on the conceptual research conducted by DaroRodrguez and Carolina Busco, funded by Fondo de Desarrollo Cientco yTecnologico de Chile, FONDECYT 1140106.* Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: dario.rodriguez@udp.cl (D. Rodrguez), carolina_busco@yahoo.com (C. Busco), roresu@uc.cl (R. Flores).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technology

journal homepage: www.els

Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e72every huge change that humanity has experienced derivesfrom a technological discovery related to communication.For this paper, a detailed survey of societal evolution isunnecessary. Evolution proceeds slowly, accumulatingvariations in system elements; herein, we consider unex-pected, discordant communications. After this, selection

communication are rejected. Finally, thtween society and its environment is reenables sustainable expectations. Therexpectations allow these communicatioin the everyday lives of human beingpossible new ways of organizing to conmeans that humanity itself started when our ancestorsbecame human through language. This also means that

over communications with unexpected consequences.Variations that do not generate expectations of guiding1. Introduction: social evolution a

Society is based on communicahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2014.08.0060160-791X/ 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.society as a whole. Communications are the basic elements of social systems: Startingfrom this Luhmanian proposal and the theoretical approach of Social System's Theory, thispaper offers an analysis based on the impact that communication technology has had onsocial development over time. Language and writing, as the rst communication tech-niques, have been followed by a series of technologies, such as printing, telephone, radio,television, internet and cell phones, which are nowadays smarter than ever [37]. Thesenew technologies have increased the amount of communications, making world societymore complex than ever and accelerating social changes. This last observation introducesthe possibility of proposing the arrival of a new era.

2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

mmunication

([20]: 64). This

made by considering the expected communication advan-tages; among those unexpected, discordant communica-tions, those that yield anticipated structures are preferredCommunicationsSocial System's Theoryments, we propose to analyze how communication technologies have helped transform

Keywords:

derives from a technological discovery related to communication. As a way of studying theimpact of technology in society and its power to inuence human and natural environ-Information technology within soci

Daro Rodrguez a, Carolina Busco a, *, Rodrigoa Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago, Chileb Ponticia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Chile

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 9 January 2015

a b s t r a c t

Communication is t's evolution

res b

undation for social interaction and therefore society itself is based

in Society

evier .com/locate/ techsoc

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e72 65While humans originated over three million years ago([23]: 50), articulated language among humans aroseapproximately thirty-ve to forty thousand years ago withtheHomo sapiens [9].While previous hominids developed acommunication system for coordination in building cabinsas well as using re and fashion tools, communication onlyreferenced the contemporary conditions and includedshouts and general signals, the particular meaning of whichdepended on the moment. The same danger cry was usedto alert a group to a pack of wild animals, a predator, anearthquake or a prairie re, and the same food signal wasused to indicate edible berries, a small animal for capture orthe carrion abandoned by a tiger, after sating its hunger.

Articulated language allowed communication to createabstractions from the physical context and concrete situa-tions from which it was produced [21]. It allowed huntersto coordinate actions in advance to enhance success;without seeing prey, they would agree on their tactics incase prey would show up. Articulated language facilitatedabstract thinking and oral transmission of traditions andknowledge accumulated across generations. Mankindinhabited earth and tried to nd reasons for everything thatwould surround it. Humans cultivated the earth, becomingfarmers, and theymanaged to raise andmovewith cattle asnomads in search of pasture.

One of the most notable inventions in articulated lan-guage was negation, which was a highly conceptual in-vention, and needed a great capacity of abstraction becauseit is entirely articial; there is no such thing in nature asno, and nature does not have a no equivalent. In naturethere are trees and other things; there is no such thing as anegative tree, a non-tree. It is a human being who, usinglanguage, indicates that in a certain space there is not atree and that, for example, it would be good to have one, sothe human decides to plant one. Somehow, the creation ofnegation duplicated the reality in language. It generatedpotentiality and multiplied the human capacity to createthe nonexistent.

Communication also became more varied becausenegation can be used to reject an offer and communicatethis rejection. As communication variations increased,more alternatives became available for selection, and a fewsuch variations were maintained during societal evolution,re-stabilizing them. The evolution of society was doing itstask. Articulated language, therefore, marks the beginningof humanity; thereafter, nothing was the same. Oncehuman beings have language, everything is in that lan-guage: we exist in our own language and we conserve ouradaptation in the domain of meanings that this creates([25]: 139). The human being is a talking being ([13]: 165).Since the beginning of mankind, communication has,therefore, been the constitutional base of society.

The evolution of human society hastened its rhythm.Negation multiplied the possibilities and made it possibleto dream of potential realities. What did not exist in realitycould be imagined and communicated to nd, with others,how tomake it real. For each discovery, negation generatedoptions (e.g., we should not do it that way, but this wayinstead). In this manner it encouraged the capacity ofinnovation, bearing fruit such as the domestication of ani-mals and plants, the wheel, the use of metals, etc. [14].Over thousands of years, humanity continued with itsprocess of populating the globe. Knowledge accumulatedslowly, because oral traditions did not fully conserve ageneration's know how. A big part of this was lost when theones who experienced it passed away. There was also littleknowledge exchange amongst different peoples. The dis-tance would create a barrier difcult to cross. Human set-tlement sizes increased, and nomadic tribes razed theirterritories. However, there is no sense in speaking of con-quests because it was nearly impossible to maintainextensive territories under the same reign.

Five or six thousand years ago, a new communicativeachievement announced a leap in evolution: the techniqueof writing [15]. Like many big inventions, writing was notdesigned for its later use; the objective sought upon itscreation was not communication because no one knewhow to read. In different places it had its various reasons. Inancient Egypt, writing had a religious purpose: to praisegods, present them with deceased souls and make thempropitious. Gods knew how to read, because writing camefrom them.

In China, writing was represented by the drawings thatcould be found in bones and turtle shells after beingthrown in the re, in the art of prediction. It was estimatedthat it was faster and easier to represent in dice and coinsthe signs that would appear when, under the inuence ofre, the outer layer of bones and shells would crack. Thesedice and coins would be simply thrown or chosen at chanceand with these the Chinese would predict their destiny. InChina's case, Luhmann said, people knew how to readbefore writing because they used to copy the signs frombones and shells that would have a previously denedpredictive meaning ([20]: 202). In general, as demonstratedin these two cases, writing typically had a secret qualitythat only a select few understood; it was used not tocommunicate, but to conceal. It was not used for passingknowledge, but for preserving it. It was used not to shareknowledge, but to hide it. It was meant not to reveal, but toencrypt.

Much time passed before the communication utility ofwriting was discovered. Egyptians slowly realized not onlythat gods could decipher their messages, also that inposterity the messages could be deciphered, becausewriting lasts longer than human lives. The inscriptions intombs started to be addressed to the people of the future,telling of the lives, achievements and virtues of their oc-cupants. If writing would transcend time, it could alsoovercome the difculties of space. Regardless, it was usefulto simplify it, for it to be easier to learn in broader segmentsof the population. In Egypt, the hieroglyphics extended tove levels of complexity, with the most basic one being forcommercial purposes. The phonetic alphabet came later; itwas derived from Phoenician syllabic writing and it seemsto have beenmotivated by communication needs that arosefrom the development of commercial relationships in theeighth and ninth centuries B.C. ([20]: 203).

Thirty or thirty-ve thousand years were strictlynecessary for this advance in communication. Its effectswere unpredictable and it involved the change of thehuman being's lifestyle. If language had permittedcommunication to become abstracted from the specic

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e7266situation in which it took place, writing made it possible toovercome the restrictions of interactions among those whowere present. To speak with others you require theirpresence; to write or read what has been written, others'presence is not needed, and can even be bothersome ([20]:212). From a societal evolution perspective, writing is anundeniable advantage that exponentially increased thepotential of negation; thus, new alternatives were gener-ated that were not inextricably connected to the past. Theinteraction implies a strong pressure for consensus; it isdifcult to dissent from a predominant opinion becauseboth the speaker and the circle of listeners tend to silencedissident voices. In contrast, text readers have much moretime to develop a critical thought that may oppose theauthor's ideas, and no one, neither the writer nor the cur-rent public, can actively oppose it.

However, by overcoming interactions between presentindividuals, writing lost certain evident advantagesinherent in being present. For conversations between pre-sent individuals, speech may be imprecise, because theyshare a time and place, and this sharing of space and timeaids in communicating the subject matter to such in-dividuals. When conversing with each other they can speakvaguely, and their co-presence is exactly what can allowthem to know what the subject of conversation is. Inaddition, interlocutors can perceive each other, observinggestures, tones of voice, glances, bodily attitudes, etc., thatmay contribute to the comprehension of what they arecommunicating. If one does not understand immediately,one can solicit explanations and additional information.The attempt to recuperate those advantages in interactionexplains the growth of newways of communicating, whichwill continue, without achieving all of the advantages untilfurther notice.

The growth and the exposure of writing permitted thecreation of big empires, because people could depend on astate bureaucracy, extended throughout territories evenbroader as time passed, that would receive orders andwould spread information through hand-written docu-ments. Large monuments and buildings were constructedand international trade grew. Knowledge accumulated overgenerations and was shared among distant settlements.Philosophical thought benetted from past wisdom andremained available for future people. Inventions wereproduced more rapidly and were continually improved byother people who were spatially or temporally close ordistant.

The process of evolution was hastened once more and,for the rst time, humans started thinking about globalsociety. Alexander's and, later, Rome's conquering ambitionspanned the entire world. Reason was awakened, and sci-ence developed. Knowledge became an end in itself, andthe unknown was explored everywhere, whether throughdiscovering laws of the universe, mapping the face of theplanet or revealing mysteries of the body and mind.

2. Technology communication and social evolution

Five hundred years ago, the printing press was inventedin the western world. Between forty-ve hundred and vethousand years have passed since writing was invented,and approximately twenty-ve hundred years passed sincethe alphabet was introduced, which demonstrates howrapidly change accelerated. Although the printing press hadalready been invented in China, its effects were not asimportant there as in the west because the Chinese Empirecontrolled the state bureaucracy that printed ofcial doc-uments ([20]: 226).

The printing press is a technological advance thatrevolutionized communication. It facilitated access tobooks from antiquity, for which hand-written copies wererare; they were nearly inaccessible. An interesting conse-quence of printing old texts related to the errors that hadbeen introduced and repeated each time they wererecopied through laborious hand-copying multiple timesover the centuries. Thus experts, printers and humaniststhat worked on the printing chose to adhere in their workto the original versions, when this was possible, or to themost ancient copies that were in their reach, if the originalones were lost. The result was that, for the rst time in thehistory of mankind, the new, printed books were betterthan the old, hand-written copies. Until that moment, so-ciety always treasured the ancient over the new. From thatmoment on, the new, the modern, was considered to havemore value than the old ([20]: 229).

Printing diminished the price of books, incorporatingnew readers. The number of people who knew how to readgrew considerably. Only a century later, national languageswere imposed and quickly replaced Latin as the language ofknowledge, which sparked an individualization processboth due to demand for book authorship that developed tocontrol publications and because individuals interested inknowledge required a personal copy of the necessarybooks. Self-education became possible and reason achievedgreat importance as a means to acquire knowledge aboutthe world, nature, people and society. Scientic, politicaland philosophical thinking experienced an expansive mo-mentum. While knowledge from writing could be shared,hand-written texts greatly limited the potential for storingthis valuable information in multiple locations; thus, suchinformation was only maintained in a few important li-braries that were difcult to access.

The printing of books increased signicantly thenumber of libraries and, thus, access to information pre-viously unavailable. The Protestant Reformation wasrelated to the German-edited Bible and led to importantreligious, political and economic changes. Based on theProtestant work ethic, capitalism facilitated an initialcapital accumulation [43]. The modern age began and setthe stage for the eighteenth century, which denitivelychanged history; industrialization in the economy anddemocracy as a form of government in politics were someof the changes to come. The nation state began to developthrough language in certain cases and through politicalcontrol in other instances. Monarchy was absolute andwas later fully replaced by a sovereign state or took a moredecorative role. Constitutions established a link betweenthe legal and political systems and yielded the rule of law.Human rights, unimaginable in a world with public exe-cutions and torture, were declared. Shortly after theywould become accepted by the majority of nations aroundthe world.

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e72 67Some examples that help explain better what is statedin this paper are weekly gazettes that were published byprivate editors beginning in 1609, and were quicklycontrolled by absolutist states for propaganda favoring themonarchy. The most famous gazettes were French: LaGazette, Le Journal des Savants and Le Mercure Galant, all ofthem from the seventeenth century. In 1702, Englandpublished The Daily Courant, the rst newspaper in theworld, which later led to the appearance of other news-papers of daily circulation. With the development of thepress the world gave birth to public opinion. Thus, masscommunication was created, which would have a biggerpart during the twentieth century.

Printing increased the availability of the knowledgecontained in books and this generated a market of readers,one that boosted, at the time, the publication of new books.The printing press provided an incentive for writing downideas, scientic discoveries and ctional creations,including popular novels as well as social and politicalcritiques in the new form of adventurous books aboututopian worlds. Different types of current news printed inpapers or magazines facilitated sharing such informationbeyond a local context, which broadened people's interestin world events and their underlying ideas. Philosophical,scientic, economic and political concepts were read anddiscussed in different places around the world, despiteattempted circulation restrictions on books and newspa-pers by political authorities in certain regions. In this way,the rationalist inuence from the enlightenment as well aspositivism and independence movements, among otherevents, was widely shared and resulted in modern society.

A new era of rapid communication change was intro-duced four hundred years after the printing press. In 1833,the telegraph marked the beginning of electricity-basedcommunication media. Multiple inventions followed, somebecoming immediately obsolete and being replaced bymoreefcient ones, while other inventions remained for longerbut were modied to incorporate new designs and im-provements [27]. Thus, the telegraph (1833), telephone(1876), radio (1906), telex (1925), television (1948), fax(1975), mobile phone (1982), email (1985) and Facebook(2004) were invented in succession. Electricity use expo-nentially improved approximately one hundred years afterits beginning, due to the discovery of the characteristics ofquartz, transistors, printed circuits and chips, among otherinventions, which yielded electronics. Electronics alone andcombined with information technology have produceddizzying advances. Thus, telephone and radio technologiesgave birth to the mobile cellular telephone [37], and thecomputer technology tied to the networks led to theinternet. Thereby technological development is an outcomeof social interactions between relevant social groups [30].

All these inventions, as well as many others unmen-tioned and others yet to come, were generated by the needto communicate faster and safer, by adding factors that canrecover the advantages of face to face communication. Eachnew technology was designed to make interlocutors feelcloser and overcome distance, but without managing toreproduce the conditions of interaction between them, likewith Skype, for example. Such technologies have alsoproduced new and unique communication conditions.Writing created the necessity of solitude and isolation tofacilitate communication! Printing generated a way ofcommunicating between an identiable speaker andnumerous anonymous receptors; mass media broadenedsuch conditions and generated mass communication.Electronic media, such as cell phones, Facebook and email,promise to better identify interlocutors, albeit, as certainscholars say, without getting closer to face to face interac-tion [31]. What is most interesting, according to others, isthat they will create new symbolic ways of incorporatingspecic information from interaction, which is currentlylacking in the new long-distance communication tools [26].

Nonetheless these new and important changes incommunication technologies open many doors, as theothers did, to a profound modication of society. Althoughthe concept of postmodernitywas coined several decadesago, and current society has been diagnosed as becomingpostmodern [18,41], there is nothing post in it, save fora few denominations proper to the avant-garde artisticmovement. Modernity, a project that was outlined duringthe turbulent eighteenth century, is now a constructedreality. And, like every nished project, it is not as beautifulas its model. It promised more than it managed to give. Itoffered more happiness than what it could effectively giveand less distress than what the modern man experiences.The society at the beginning of the twenty-rst century isthe most accurate denition of modernity. All of the fea-tures that were shaping the modern society became fullydeveloped. It is impossible to predict the form that thepostmodern, postindustrial society e however youwant to call it ewill adopt, but it will never be the same asthe social system that we are living in today. The processhas begun and, although we do not currently live in theresulting society, we are part of the transition leading up toit. In this societal transformation process, internationalnetworks share information, such as data, photos, moviesand music, etc. This greatly facilitates professional workefciency. Researchers around the globe can easily collab-orate, sharing information as they deem necessary [1].These are communication networks that allow one to speake through a simple microphone e with a person who canbe on another continent, observing them due to a smallcamera that is installed on top of the screen.

Communication from an identiable and active centerto an undifferentiated and passive public, which is themasscommunication that resulted from the printing press,including books written by authors, dailies and magazines,paved the way for mass consumption radio and television,which has undergone an extremely important trans-formation, whose consequences are still not fullyexpressed. Such transcendent changes include the loss of acentralized source of communication as well as individu-alization and activation of the former undifferentiated andpassive public. Internet lacks a center, and informationmayarise anywhere in the world. Its recipients, meanwhile, arenot waiting passively for information to arrive, nor waitingfor different media to select their news. Instead they areconstantly searching for information that they decide tochoose. Information recipients do not passively but ratheractively search for information. Everything seems toannounce that the ability of mass media to x the issues

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e7268that people discuss and form public opinion, a mediafeature called agenda setting [22], is ceasing to be amonopoly. Searching is the concept that denes currentcommunication, and different search engines are availableto meet user demands [37].

Coordination has also changed. To carry out a publicdemonstration, for example, from ancient times until thetwentieth century, there was an increasing need to count onorganizations able to coordinate the actions of groups thatwere getting larger everyday. Unions joined as federations,which joined political parties for hundreds or thousands ofpeople to meet at a previously agreed set location, day andtime. It was not easy and it demanded time. Communica-tions had to be precise and motivating and to reach from thecentralized organizational heights to the dispersed bases.You could summon the masses through pyramidal organi-zations, but it was necessary to conrm by being presentthat the call had reached its objective. Only then could youachieve a successful demonstration.

Internet and cell phone communication help gathermany people in a few hours; such gatherings do not requireorganization due to the enhanced effect of interconnectedsocial networks [37]. Any person can convince their friendswhose phone numbers are stored in their mobile phone;each one of them calls their own contacts and so forth untila crowd composed of hundreds of small close-friendgroups that hardly know each other meet to protest orcelebrate an achievement. The call to gather is effectivebecause it is based on friendship and trust amongmembersof each group. However, controlling such gatherings can bedifcult because the group does not have common joiningcriteria beyond the immediate purpose of the call, whichmay be understood differently by each group.

The situation also changes for the civic authorityresponsible for maintaining citizen order. When unions,federations or political parties organized public actions,their leaders approached a mayor for permission. Theywould agree on the place of the meeting, the date, the timeand the street routes inwhich theywould need to circulate.The groups were responsible for the potential damage orexcesses during the event, which is why the leadersmaintained order and respect for the agreed-upon com-mitments. To impose order and respect, they relied onrecognition by each participant.

A mobile phone- or Twitter-coordinated meetingneither recognizes leaders nor counts on representativescapable of negotiating with authority. Thus, there is neithera demonstration route nor prior notice for the meetinglocation; further, no one can be held responsible for po-tential excesses or damages. Such concerns are new prob-lems for people charged with maintaining public order. Theunexpected turn in Spanish elections after the Atochaattack and student demonstrations in Chile clearly showsthat it is an efcient system. The uprisings in Paris, Egypt,Turkey and Brazil further illustrated that such gatheringsare difcult to manage through political power.

3. World society and communication

As we have said in this paper, contemporary society isthe nal product of the deep transformation derived fromthe printing press; the last stage of this process began inthe eighteenth century through passage into modern so-ciety. Democracy, which began as a philosophical idea andwas later slowly incorporated into the political system, iscurrently the most widespread and validated form of gov-ernment. Industrial capitalism, which revolutionized theagro-artisan world that dominated the economic systemfor millennia, nowadays is a central characteristic of thissystem.

Newspapers with daily circulation and that werehawked loudly on city streets began the current era of masscommunication, wherein we canwitness (live and directly)simultaneous events anywhere on the planet. The secu-larizing rationalism that sought to expand its sphere ofinuence extends beyond reason, even leading to theemergence of irrational answers to the hunger for God.Travel andmeans of transportation independent fromwindor natural conditions paved the way to the rst steamboat,and afterwards fully developed into modern aircrafts andhigh-speed ships. The idea of a world society that insinu-ated itself as a timid utopia embodies itself in the global-ized world in which we live. Individualism was expressedas a desire in the Declaration of the Rights ofMan and of theCitizen and is clearly widespread under current conditions.

One of the consequences of modern society is thatcooperation agreements are reached that develop equiva-lences, leading to unify the local characteristics of func-tional systems: University degrees are recognized, butuniversities must rst be accredited, criteria dened byscientic policy must be consistent with international sci-ence, and patents for inventions in one country must beobserved by others. Furthermore, crimes against humanitycommitted in a national territory can be judged in another.(The International Criminal Court was established in 1998and endorsed by the United Nations to try crimes, such asgenocide and rape, and Pinochet was arrested in England in1999 [16].) The World Trade Organization establishesguidelines that direct competition between several actorsin economic terms, independent of their country of origin,organization size or the type of product offered to themarket [39]; developing nations can receive funds from theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF), but they must acceptstrict conditions, such as maintaining a balanced budget,lowering tariffs, abolishing subsidies, deregulating thelabor market, privatizing, and liberating the movement ofcapital [40]. Naturally, the IMF has been condemned inthose countries and its strategies have been the subject ofpower struggles in national political scenarios [10].

Beginning with the eighteenth century in Europethrough construction of the nation states, political identi-ties were attempted wherein all people could feel part of agreat community. Such attempts followed two paths toyield self-described, homogeneous nation states, such as acommunity of free persons, a motherland or sovereignpeople. One of these routes included granting the in-habitants in a state-like politically organized territory anidentity and a nation that they should love. The othersought to demand state political autonomy for a culturallyunited nation. Such nations are characterized as politicaland ethnic. Since then people have spoken of politicaland ethnic nations ([38]: 49).

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e72 69The functional political system is clearly connected withthe functional legal system. The political system offers thelegal system premises for decision-making in the form ofpositively enacted laws. The legal system, at the same time,offers the political system the necessary legality for it toexercise its power through legal premises that guide theuse of physical violence monopolized by the state [42]. Inturn, the political system grants the necessary binding forceto the legal system. Judicial decisions must be obeyed, andsuch obedience may be enforced. Such concerns areconsidered in judicial decision-making, and without themthe legal system in society would not exist ([19]: 168).

The possibilities of threatening depend on the society'sstructure; therefore, a mechanism arises to condition thepower so it cannot be used arbitrarily. It requires a consti-tution and a state based on the rule of law. This socialarrangement can ensure that any citizen does not need tocarry arms to enforce their rights, because they have thecoercive capacity of their state at their disposition. Everyindividual member of society can rest assured that no one,not even the state, may act with legitimate violence againstthem. Political power is subordinate to its legal codes, suchthat public force requires the right to use such force. (Forexample, I have been robbed and I demand that the thievesbe arrested and judged; I have demonstrated that my de-mand for repayment is legitimate and expect the defendantto make a public explanation; and I have been arbitrarilydetained and my family seek a writ of protection on mybehalf.) Political power is subordinate to legal power, but italso has the right (awarded by law) to modify law; the na-tional congress may legislate in accordance with theconstitution as well as study and approve constitutionalchanges. This evolutionary achievement is known as therule of law ([20]: 278).

The constitution establishes immutable laws whosescope is characterized by the positive law. Historically,such constitutions are not quickly established: princes,sovereigns, and territorial states take up to two hundredyears and sometimesmore. Even currently, onemay doubtwhether all states in the world are effectively controlledby a constitution. When juries discover the legal tech-nique of examining situations to know if, besides agreeingwith the law, they are unconstitutional e which in evo-lution it has been accredited as the solution to certainproblems e it means that the constitution has beenpolitically accepted. This does not mean that politiciansare always bowing before the constitution or that theyagree with it: it only takes reading of the newspapers tond information that in numerous countries, politiciansfrequently act in a manner that is inconsistent with oreven against the constitution.

Thus, we are facing a process of functional differentia-tion of the world society that, while becoming more com-plex, seems to develop legal systems in global terms,bringing into question the existence of a jurisdictionrestricting territorial boundaries. One of the concepts toemerge in this sense is transconstitutionalism, which at-tempts to describe the effects on constitutional law upon itsemancipation from the state, wherein non-state legalbodies are involved in resolving basic constitutional prob-lems. Transconstitutional problems arise when aconstitutional issue involves national, international, supra-national and transnational courts [29].

National border functions have also been redenedunder the notion of a world society ([38]: 26e27); thisorganization helps divide world society into states withclearly dened borders and delivers the opportunity toattribute membership to certain individuals. Currently, aworld state is impossible, in part because it is difcult tooptimize global consensus due to diverse regional interests.For example, European integration and the Euro are polit-ical projects whose success has been doubted by the eco-nomic subsystem [6]. While a legal system still prevailssince the conception of territorial limits is sustained in thesovereignty of the nation state, certain scholars believe thatsuch jurisdiction is contingent, observing a process thattends to develop a transnational, and at the same time,subnational, jurisdiction, wherein the weight of commu-nity experience is rescued by the legitimacy of the law [4].Thus, supranational institutions gain importance andgeopolitical criteria change, while regionalisms take onnewmeaning and politics addresses problems that directlyaffect people. Mayoralties and local government positionsbecome more visible than national government positions.

Roger Cotterrell uses the legal transnationalism conceptto explain how the nation state looks outweighed from twopoints of view. On one hand, regimes with a supranationalfocus and ambition emerge and expand, developing lawsthat cross state limits, bypassing or using them as conduits.On the other hand, direct inuence is recognized in politicsand regulatory practices of a state pressured by the econ-omy, politics or culture that are developed outside of theirborders, in circumstances that escape their control [8].Something similar happens with the appearance of cyber-crime, regulations for telematics and robotics, etc. [5]. Ac-cording to Leonel Rocha, we are facing hypercomplexity inthe autopoietic process of the systems that are invigoratedto deal with the disruption of states' power and rights [34].

Another example we can note in this paper on theconcept of world society emphasizes the importance oforganizations. In the twentieth century, organizationsbecame very important, such that the concept of organi-zational society was even discussed [20,35]. In fact, if youlook back into history, it is possible to note that organiza-tions were the biggest constructors of modern society.These were not organizations of just any type, but the onesof a special caliber and worldwide spread: bureaucracy.Articulating the efforts of dozens, hundreds, and eventhousands of human beings, this kind of organizationchanged, in around two centuries, the face of the earth. Itspread in all the areas of human activity. Big industrialcompanies produced massively for the increasing popula-tion. State bureaucracies organized services demanded bycitizens. The armies, following the Prussian model, orderedthemselves bureaucratically as well.

Due to bureaucracy, education reduced illiteracy,extended secondary instruction and developed universitiesto host thousands of students. Scientic investigationcounted on resources and multidisciplinary research teamshosted by highly efcient bureaucracies that allowedtechnological advances such as landing on the moon,sending satellites into space, creating vaccines and

Having achieved the dream of modern society, thoughsome may view it as a nightmare, does not mean a halt or

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e7270remedies for the most diverse diseases, studying humanDNA, cloning animals, discovering the properties of quartz,testing printed circuits, developing computers and linkingthem to a network. Through such breadth, bureaucracyproved to be well appreciated byMaxWeber, who saw in itthe most rational form of organization known [44]. Theother side of the coin is that efcient bureaucratic organi-zations were also used to design the deadly atomic bomb,along with cold and rational planning of where to throw itand, thus, destroy two Japanese cities. Bureaucratic orga-nizations also managed genocide of six million Jews inconcentration camps and sent several other millions ofhuman beings to Siberia. The twentieth centurymerged thegood and the worst of mankind, amplifying it with the helpof the bureaucratic organization.

The relationship between technological progress andsocial evolution has been called world society, a term thatNiklas Luhmann refers to contemporary society [20]. Theconsequence of all this is that today's world society is thefull expression of modern society. Luhmann suggests thatmodern society is better than all prior societies due to itsenormous complexity. Previous societies had much lessmaterial wellbeing, fewer resources, more dominant ill-nesses and lower life-spans. He also adds that modern so-ciety is worse than the ones before, which did not have somuch capacity for destruction, widespread pollution, worldepidemics, loss of meaning and total exclusion of millionsof people.World society is composed of communications; itis limited by its communication, outside of which there isno communication. Furthermore, society and its sur-roundings do not communicate. World society comprisesall possible communications; thus, the different functionalsubsystems in this global system also recognize thecommunication limits of society as their own outer limits.To the extent that its constituent elements are communi-cations, theworld society subsystems compose society, andas communication for each subsystem takes a differentform, they differ from each other ([20]: 113).

As shown by the Spanish sociologist Alejandro Navas,economic activity has effectively been globalized throughhomogenizing processes, similar judicial systems indifferent countries, customs barrier suppression andtransport cost decreases. In certain cases, such as Europe,this process even produced a single currency. Every yeardue to tireless work there are new advances in robotics,nanotechnology, bioelectronics, biotechnologies and in-formation technology. Naturally, all of this leads to newforms of machinery and production methods, altering therelationships of human beings with them and the organi-zation of their work. Organizations both follow and facili-tate social transformation. Many businesses have becomemultinational and enter markets that were once ercelyprotected. An important consequence is that products willno longer have a nationality that characterizes them; theirmanufacturer's brand is sufcient. Such manufacturers arealso globalized, and to install their production plants, nolonger seek proximity to the raw materials, but lower laborcost [28].

Regional alliances and a resurgence of separatist at-tempts give the impression of the decreasing importance ofnation states as an identifying symbol. We have witnessedthe end of history as someone stated [11]. What actuallyhappens is that the stone that begins to roll downhill,instead of stopping, unleashes an avalanche, the nal ef-fects from which are barely perceived. Similarly, the orga-nizations that led to the highest peak of modernity seethemselves being caught up by the same acceleration ofprocesses they generated. The changes in the rst decadesof the twenty-rst century have a magnitude that is likelythe equivalent of or greater than the changes that began inthe sixteenth century. If this is a fact, a new society will betheir result, just as the transformations that began in thatcentury produced the modern society. We nd ourselves atthe dawn of a new era that is starting to take form, as wellas the modern age that had already started to be demon-strated with clarity in the incipient changes of the eigh-teenth century. Although it is impossible to predict thefuture, we can estimate the possible course of evolutionwithout knowing with exactitude its scope or the drift itwill nally pursue. The important part, in every case, con-sists of being aware of the trends, to take maximumadvantage of them and avoid unpleasant surprises.how the Catalonian people search for their autonomy, butthey wish to maintain themselves in the Euro zone. Polit-ically dened borders with national customs checkpointsthat control what belongs to a nation in global functionalsystems have begun granting free passes to modern, globalinstitutions. Nation states establish international relation-ships, a consequence of which is cooperation agreementsand equivalencies that unify local characteristics of func-tional systems. Virtual companies have also arisen. Manysporting good brands are little more than virtual com-panies; such brands take advantage of worldwidecommunication, transport and trade facilities to requestdesigns from Italian fashion workshops and then latercontract with businesses distributed among Asian coun-tries to produce goods bearing their brand that are trans-ported to Europe or America by external transportcompanies. Such goods are nally sold in large departmentstores or specialized stores that also do not belong to thebrand. In short, these companies are large contact networksthat extend across the globe, and their only effectiveproperty is a prestigious name brand [12].

4. Conclusion

Society is based on communications. This means thatevery huge change that humanity has experienced derivesfrom a technological discovery related to communication.Language and writing, as the rst communication tech-niques, have been followed by a series of technologies, suchas printing, telephone, radio, television, internet and cellphones, which are nowadays smarter than ever. These newtechnologies have increased the amount of communica-tions, making world society more complex than ever. In-formation and communication technology, characterizedby continual innovation and rapid technological change, ishaving a tremendous impact on society [17] and acceler-ating social changes. However, evolution does not stop.

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e72 71However, changes involving people always have twosides. In the past decades many national states have haddifculties in controlling violence, whether in large cities orin war-torn regions, and whether due to civil conicts orterrorism. The ethnic conicts in a lot of countries have to dowith the scarce legitimacy achieved by a political nation inits attempt to shelter different ethnic groups. The nationalborders become increasingly unable to control the access tothe territory. Ethnic nations are invaded by immigrantswho differ in race and culture. Ideas and informationcirculate via the internet, television, radio, books, newspa-pers and magazines or are transported by travelers, whohelp spread them. Thus, urban tribes, instead of staying aslocally attached tribes, have become part of the scenery ofeach and every city worldwide. Also, they mimic large-scalebehaviors that originated elsewhere; for example, eventhough stadium violence has a history in Chile that datesback to the rst decade of the twentieth century, the Englishhooligans seems to have copied it deliberately and withgreat joy from the Chilean barras bravas [33]. Terroristsand drug trafckers operate on a global scale, and despitethe increased control measures implying a hassle for thou-sands of innocent travelers, such dealers remain evasive.Furthermore, illnesses do not respect national borders,crossing the globe in a predictablemanner, or threatening tobecome a pandemic and causing panic.

Traveling and tourism become accessible to anincreasing amount of people. Millions of individuals travelto countries different than theirs to vacation, pursue betterjob opportunities, receive medical treatments, study, oreven seek a partner or adopt children. The enormousphysical mobility of people and the global reach of de-cisions have led to claims that the technological annulmentof distance in time and space tends to polarize humanbeings in terms of differences ([2]: 28). The polarization isrelated to the capacity of movement that outlines a radicaldifference between those who have managed to insertthemselves successfully into global society e who travelwith great facility to different parts of the world or transfer,from their home, ofce, personal computer or mobilephone enormous amount of money from one stock to theother, from one bank to the other, from one company toanother, and from any part of theworld to anothere versusthe ones who nd themselves obliged to permanently stayin their local area, because they lack resources to travel orparticipate in the global stock market. Stock marketschange 2.3 billions of dollars daily, making it impossible forany government to sustain their currency against massiveturbulences in the nancial markets ([7]: 16).

Inwhat Bauman calls liquid modernity, the capacity tokeep on moving is the material used to build a new powerhierarchy. In it, velocity and acceleration are the primarystrategies for upward mobility. Flexibility and the capacityto rapidly adapt to circumstances are necessary; one mustlack burdens, including affective concerns, and be versatileto avoid overspecialization or becoming a dilettante [3]. Ina global world, local space is devalued because whendistance loses meaning, the same thing happens withplaces separated by distances. But it predicts the freedomto create meanings for some, while for others it foretells acondemnation to insignicance. Some may be able to leaveplace e of any type e at their own will. Others will look onimpotently, while the only place they inhabit moves undertheir feet ([2]: 28).

At the same time, in this process of globalizationpollution also has turned into a worldwide problem.Despite modern romantic opinions of the noble savage,people have always polluted, which is demonstrated byancient midden cultures, that left as their mark giganticaccumulations of shells of shellsh consumed and laterdiscarded in archeological dumps. The primary differencebetween current citizens of large cities in the world societyand primitive coastland inhabitants is not that modernman pollutes and primitive people were committed envi-ronmental defenders with a sophisticated ecological con-science. They are different because the items we currentlydiscard cannot be processed by the planet, because theirorigins are articial. The consequence is that over a fewshort decades, global ecology has become endangered,solar radiation ltration by the ozone layer has decreased,global temperatures have risen, tree-covered lands havedecreased, and water has become scarce in numerous lo-cations, among other concerns. The management scenariohas changed drastically, making it impossible to continuewith the old bureaucratic model of organization that mademodern society possible. New structures for productiveactivities have already been produced, such as trans-national and virtual corporations. However, it is unthink-able that they have exhausted the repertoire of evolution. Itis highly probable, therefore, that such models willcontinue to arise that allow people to take the greatestadvantage of opportunities and avoid or diminish the effectof difculties presented by the current business environ-ment [32].

Transnational and virtual companies, for example, havetaken advantage of the connections that the informationtechnologies offer, and the mobility that the globalizationof the economic system provides, to structure their activ-ities following the principle of exibility. The result is thatthey can react more rapidly than organizations that use theold bureaucratic model. Virtual businesses can change,within a country or across continents, providers, designdevelopers for a particular brand, manufacturers andtransporters. They can also enlarge and change totally orpartially their network of distributors; it would not bedifcult for such companies to entirely change their prod-uct type or broaden or decrease production. Transnationalbusinesses, meanwhile, can close or open subsidiaries asconditions demand. Both organization types may operatein an unstable environment, but in so doing they introducestronger instability. In effect, organizations, whatever theirmodel is, that must relate to them e as providers or com-petitors e face an enormous instability. Their providersknow that their contract might end at any time and thecompetition ghts against a hydra of a thousand heads,which may concentrate on one site or disappear fromanother at great speed. The foundation of new companiesand the disappearance of others is one of the consequencesof such instability in the business environment. Anotherconsequence is that you cannot ensure job stability as bu-reaucracy and the old Japanese model did. Current workershave witnessed old jobs disappear; they can observe how

the ancient functional career vanishes before their eyes;they change jobs more often and must continue to learnthroughout their career to avoid unemployment due to

[13] Heidegger Martin. Sein und Zeit. Tbingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag;1979.

[14] Horn Laurence. A natural history of negation. Univ. of Chicago Press;2001.

D. Rodrguez et al. / Technology in Society 40 (2015) 64e7272obsolescence. This is not an alarmist prediction, but analready documented fact: according to a report by theUnited States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 75% of the currentworkforce in the U.S. should be trained to maintain itsemployment level [36].

Population aging in higher-income countries andtransfer facilities generate new migratory ows, provokinglabor multiculturalism and ethnic discrimination. Theworkers of the future will not work in the same companyfor their entire lives, but also, they will not be sure of doingit in the same city or country. In the world society, the labormarket is also global in that the search for work opportu-nities slowly raises its gaze above the national borders.

Talent is always a scarce resource; thus, organizationsalso seek talented people throughout the world, to offerthem attractive job opportunities that sometimes may notbe comparable to the ones that are available in the localarea. A common practice for large soccer teams is travelingthe world to watch third-world country national champi-onships for players with great potential to recruit, add tothe major leagues and sell their spot when they areworldwide stars. Other organizations have begun toreproduce this practice. For a long time, large universitieshave also selected their scholars and students throughglobal admissions processes, but this practice was previ-ously less widespread than is today. The process is only inthe initial stages, but developed countries currently face alack of highly qualied professionals, particularly in engi-neering and health, and they are hiring them whereverthey are [36].

References

[1] Atkinson Richard, Blanpied William. Research universities: core ofthe US science and technology system. Technol Soc 2007;30(1):30e48.

[2] Bauman Zygmunt. La globalizacion: Consecuencias humanas. Bue-nos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Economica; 2006.

[3] Bauman Zygmunt. Modernidad lquida. Buenos Aires: Fondo deCultura Economica; 2007.

[4] Berman Paul. The globalization of jurisdiction. Univ PA Law Rev2002;151(2).

[5] Carcova Carlos Mara. A opacidade do direito. Sao Paulo: LTR Edi-tora; 1998.

[6] Carriere-Swallow Yan, Claro Sebastian. Cueste lo que cueste. Labatalla por salvar el euro y Europa. Santiago: Ediciones UniversidadCatolica; 2013.

[7] Castells Manuel. Globalizacion, desarrollo y democracia: Chile en elcontexto mundial. Santiago: Fondo de Cultura Economica; 2006.

[8] Cotterrell Roger. The growth of legal transnationalism. In:Febbrajo Alberto, Harste Gorm, editors. Law and intersystemiccommunication. Understanding structural coupling. Surrey, En-gland: Ashgate Publishing Limited; 2013.

[9] Dawkins Richard. The ancestor's tale: a pilgrimage to the dawn ofevolution. NY: Mariner Books; 2005.

[10] Dezalay Yves, Garth Bryant G. The internationalization of palacewars. Lawyers, economists, and the contest to transform LatinAmerican States. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2002.

[11] Fukuyama Francis. El n de la historia y el ltimo hombre. BuenosAires: Planeta; 1992.

[12] Goldman Robert, Papson Stephen. Cultura Nike: el signo del swoosh.Barcelona: Deusto; 2007.[15] Houston Stephen. The rst writing: script invention as history andprocess. Cambridge University Press; 2004.

[16] Jimenez Jhonny. Pinochet y la Corte Penal Internacional. Nuevoorden internacional en materia de Derechos Humanos. In: RojasAravena Francisco, Stefoni Carolina, editors. El caso Pinochet.Visiones hemisfericas de su detencion en Londres. Santiago:FLACSO-Chile; 2001.

[17] Jordan Angel. Frontiers of research and future directions in infor-mation and communication technology. Technol Soc 2008;30(2):388e96.

[18] Lyotard Jean F. La condicion postmoderna. Madrid: Catedra; 1997.[19] Luhmann Niklas. Ausdifferenzierung des Rechts. Beitrage zur

Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp;1981.

[20] Luhmann Niklas. La sociedad de la sociedad. Mexico: Herder; 2007.[21] Marcus GF, Fisher SE. FOXP2 in focus: what can genes tell us about

speech and language? Trends Cogn Sci 2003;(1/6):257e62.[22] McCombs Maxwell, Shaw Donald L, Weaver David. Communication

and democracy. Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1997.

[23] Maturana Humberto. La realidad: Objetiva o construida? I. Fun-damentos biologicos de la realidad. Barcelona: Anthropos/Uni-versidad Iberoamericana/ITESO; 1995.

[24] Maturana Humberto. La realidad: Objetiva o construida? II. Fun-damentos biologicos del conocimiento. Barcelona: Anthropos/Uni-versidad Iberoamericana/ITESO; 1996.

[25] Maturana Humberto, Varela Francisco. El arbol del conocimiento.Santiago: OEA/Editorial Universitaria; 1984.

[26] Menchik Daniel A, Tian Xiaoli. Putting social context into text: thesemiotics of e-mail interaction. Harv Bus Rev September 2008;144(2):332e70.

[27] Mumford Lewis. Tecnica y Civilizacion. Madrid: Alianza; 1992.[28] Navas Alejandro. Ponencia: Los medios de comunicacion de masas a

la luz de La sociedad de la sociedad. In: Congreso internacional:Niklas Luhmann. La sociedad como pasion. Universidad Iber-oamericana; 2007.

[29] Neves Marcelo. Transconstitutionalism. Oxford, U.K.: Hart Publish-ing; 2013.

[30] Olsen OE, Engen OA. Technological change as a trade-off betweensocial construction and technological paradigms. Technol Soc 2007;29(4):456e68.

[31] Pentland Alex. Como las redes sociales hacen mejores redes. HarvBus Rev Febrero 2009:28.

[32] Porter M, Kramer Mark. La creacion de valor compartido. Harv BusRev Enero-Febrero 2011:32e49.

[33] Recasens Andres. Las barras bravas. Santiago: Bravo y Allende; 1999.[34] Rocha Leonel Severo. Da epistemologia jurdica normativista ao

contrutivismo sistemico. pp. 9e47. In: Rocha Leonel Severo,Schwartz Germano, Clam Jean, editors. Introducao a Teoria do Sis-tema Autopoietico do Direito. Porto Alegre: Livraria do AdvogadoEditora; 2005.

[35] Rodrguez D. Organizaciones para la modernizacion. Mexico: Uni-versidad Iberoamericana, ITESO; 2004.

[36] Salkowitz Rob. Generation blend. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley& Sons, Inc; 2008.

[37] Stark David. The sense of dissonance: accounts of worth in eco-nomic life. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2009.

[38] Stichweh Rudolf. Die Weltgesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhr-kamp; 2000.

[39] Teubner Gunther. Constitutional fragments. Societal constitution-alism and globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.

[40] Useem Jerry. There's something happening here. What's thatsound? A noisy and growing challenge to the globalist consensus.Fortune; May 15 2000.

[41] Vattimo Gianni. El n de la modernidad. Barcelona: Gedisa; 1987.[42] Weber Max. Economa y sociedad. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura

Economica; 1964.[43] Weber Max. La etica protestante y el espritu del capitalismo.

Madrid: Sarpe; 1984.[44] Weber Max. Que es la burocracia?. Mexico: Ediciones Coyoacan;

2004.

Information technology within society's evolution1. Introduction: social evolution and communication2. Technology communication and social evolution3. World society and communication4. ConclusionReferences