How does contemporary architecture deal with the new technology,  which has evolved more and more into something intangible, detached from the human component?

How can we mediate the idea of tangible architecture in a digital environment?

At first glance, it is hard to imagine how the Law Building can be incorporated in the present context of the Cite Multimedia. It stands alone in a sea of new construction. To the immediate eye the difference are quasi inconsolable, however, technology out of all things can make it all work. though construction techniques are different today then they were last century, both new and old architecture  use high-technology. Indeed, though this term relates to present and future, all past was once present and even future.
Furthermore, new architecture must not attempt to immitate old, in order to relate to it, quite the contrary. Contemporary architecture must make reference to old, through proportions, use of materials, use of light, etc., yet it must remain faithful to its time. 
 

Architecture has always relied on contemporary (and by that i mean current at any epoch) technology as means to an end. These means are associated with an aesthetic of mediation. The look of the building documents and reinforces its technology. 

Architects must use new technology to facilitate the building process, but also to allow more human encounters. This technology can be expressed through the architectural language. Where most contemporary architecture fails however, is that technology often becomes a simple exercise in style, an empty formal game. Fidelity to context is no longer a criteria for design. Rather, detached elements inhabit the city with no regard for the neighbors. 

Technology has always existed and put to use. The only reason the question of technological representation in architecture comes up now is that scientific improvements are not linear. Rather, an exponential relationship exists between technological discovery and time. Our generation will face more technological breakthroughs than past centuries combined. We do not have the time to digest discovery and study related topics such as environmental consequences, need for such technology, ways to best apply this technology in built form, etc. We seem to be more and more intimidated by this high-technology and this produces distant architecture, an architecture that attempts to master something that is not thouroughly understood. Instead, we must take the time to comprehend all repercussions of technology and use it to our advantage, for advancement is in itself a virtue. We must adopt an optimistic approach to new technology, one that reminds us of the fact the technology is created by man, and thus can and should be controlled by man.

"Le Corbusier's optimism is one in which scientific and technical changes need not be regarded as threateningly inhuman, dangerously destructive of the individual and the life of society, but rather as beneficent products capable of reconciling subject and environment through the introduction of architecture as mediation."

"The mission of that so-called high-tech architecture seems to have chosen for itself is precisely that of responding positively, with prophetic optimism, to the need for a reconstructed relationship between new technology and new architecture."

Arise the paradox of the etymology of the word Technology. Techne, at its origins was related with the act of making, skill of craft. It seems as though technology has dropped the tangible aspect for a more virtual dimension. Expressed in all areas including architecture, we build things that are more and more intended to be seen from afar, experienced on the web, understood through images instead of through bodily presence and engagement. We become dissociated with our bodies and thus with our environment, detached from the products of our making.

GEORGES ROUSSE: LA LUMIÉRE ET LA RUINE film by Gilles Peru