20  	21 !	22 "	23 #	24 $	25 %	26 &	27 '
28 (	29 )	2a *	2b +	2c ,	2d -	2e .	2f /
30 0	31 1	32 2	33 3	34 4	35 5	36 6	37 7
38 8	39 9	3a :	3b ;	3c <	3d =	3e >	3f ?
40 @	41 A	42 B	43 C	44 D	45 E	46 F	47 G
48 H	49 I	4a J	4b K	4c L	4d M	4e N	4f O
50 P	51 Q	52 R	53 S	54 T	55 U	56 V	57 W
58 X	59 Y	5a Z	5b [	5c \	5d ]	5e ^	5f _
60 `	61 a	62 b	63 c	64 d	65 e	66 f	67 g
68 h	69 i	6a j	6b k	6c l	6d m	6e n	6f o
70 p	71 q	72 r	73 s	74 t	75 u	76 v	77 w
78 x	79 y	7a z	7b {	7c |	7d }	7e ~	7f 

a
possibility
for
the
new
development

eine
möglichkeit
für
die
neue
entwicklung

Is it not obvious that there are always enough moral problems without
also taking a moral stand on technological grounds? [...] Print is
the extreme phase of alphabet culture that detribalizes or
decollectivizes man in the first instance. Print raises the visual
features of alphabet to highest intensity of definition. Thus print
carries the individuating power of the phonetic alphabet much further
than manuscript culture could ever do. Print is the technology of
individualism. If men decided to modify this visual technology by an
electric technology, individualism would also be modified. To raise a
moral complaint about this is like cussing a buzz-saw for lopping off
fingers. "But", someone says, "we didn't know it would happen." Yet
even witlessness is not a moral issue. It is a problem, but not a
moral problem; and it would be nice to clear away some of the moral
fogs that surround our technologies. It would be good for morality

                              Marshall McLuhan - The Gutenberg Galaxy