Esha Shah. Who Is the Scientist-Subject? Affective History of the Gene. (Science and Technology Studies.) xii + 173 pp., notes, bibl., index. London/New York: Routledge, 2018. £115 (cloth); ISBN 9781138570337. E-book available.

Isis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 862-863
Author(s):  
Edna Suárez-Díaz
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
History Of

scholarly journals Introduction: Talking STS

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadhila Mazanderani ◽  
Isabel Fletcher ◽  
Pablo Schyfter
Keyword(s):  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Fiftieth Anniversary ◽  
Technology And Society ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of ◽  
The University

Talking STS is a collection of interviews and accompanying reflections on the origins, the present and the future of the field referred to as Science and Technology Studies or Science, Technology and Society (STS). The volume assembles the thoughts and recollections of some of the leading figures in the making of this field. The occasion for producing the collection has been the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the University of Edinburgh’s Science Studies Unit (SSU). The Unit’s place in the history of STS is consequently a recurring theme of the volume. However, the interviews assembled here have a broader purpose – to present interviewees’ situated and idiosyncratic experiences and perspectives on STS, going beyond the contributions made to it by any one individual, department or institution. Both individually and collectively, these conversations provide autobiographically informed insights on STS. Together with the reflections, they prompt further discussion, reflection and questioning about this constantly evolving field.

Thickening Transregionalism: Historical Formations of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Southeast Asia

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warwick Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Thought Style ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
History Of

AbstractThis article offers an overview of science and technology studies (STS) in Southeast Asia, focusing particularly on historical formations of science, technology, and medicine in the region, loosely defined, though research using social science approaches comes within its scope. I ask whether we are fashioning an “autonomous” history of science in Southeast Asia—and whether this would be enough. Perhaps we need to explore further “Southeast Asia as method,” a thought style heralded here though remaining, I hope, productively ambiguous. This review contributes primarily to the development of postcolonial intellectual history in Southeast Asia and secondarily to our understanding of the globalization and embedding of science, technology, and medicine.

The Sokal Affair in Context

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Hilgartner
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Sociology Of Science ◽  
Science History ◽  
Central Lines ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
History Of ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Social Scientific

The failure to consider the Sokal affair in light of other, related episodes has contributed to a wholesale misreading of its significance. The episode has often been offered as evidence for the bankruptcy of a broad and diverse collection offields, variously referred to as cultural studies of science, sociology of science, history of science, and science and technology studies. However, when viewed in context, the Sokal affair illustrates pre cisely why social scientific and humanistic studies of science are necessary. To develop this argument, the author explicitly compares Alan Sokal's experiment with a similar experiment, performed by William M. Epstein and published in this very journal. Comparing the research questions, methods, ethics, and reception of these two experi ments not only reveals the limitations of Sokal's critique but also shows that Sokal has unwittingly endorsed one of the central lines of research in science and technology studies.

scholarly journals THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGICAL CONCEPTS OF DESIGN CULTURE

2017 ◽  
pp. 9-12
Author(s):  
Y. O. Bytsykina
Keyword(s):  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Actor Network Theory ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Design History ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
Complex Concept ◽  
Design Culture ◽  
History Of

The article is devoted to introducing new theoretical frameworks and methodological concepts from the field known as science and technology studies (STS) and discussing their potential for design history. The concepts of design and culture are analyzed and compared within the article, providing the possibility of developing the complex concept of “design culture”. The study shows that design can be considered as a social and cultural phenomenon, that design historians may find that the sociology and the history of technology can provide an appropriate theoretical framework and methodological repertoire for studying design, not only as the part of art history. The article introduces main concepts from science and technology studies that might be of particular value to design history and culture, focusing on actor-network theory, script analysis and domestication.

scholarly journals Infrastructures as Ontological Experiments

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casper Bruun Jensen ◽  
Atsuro Morita
Keyword(s):  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
History Of Technology ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
History Of

Ontology has recently gained renewed attention in science and technology studies and anthropology (e.g. Gad, Jensen and Winthereik 2015; Holbraad, Pedersen and Viveiros de Castro 2014; Woolgar and Lezaun 2013). Yet, it has a considerably longer pedigree than these recent debates might lead one to think. Experiments, of course, have long held the attention of sociologists, historians, and philosophers of science (Collins 1985; Gooding 1990; Shapin and Schaffer 1985). And infrastructures have been the focus of sustained inquiry in the sociology and history of technology (Bowker 1994; Hughes 1983). Once these terms are put into conjunction, however, each gets a somewhat different inflection. The following note briefly explores the conceptual purchase of considering infrastructures as ontological experiments. 

scholarly journals HOW TO USE THE VISUAL IN SCIENTIFIC STUDIES? (FOLLOWING PETER GALISON AND LORRAINE DASTON)

2021 ◽  
pp. 117-130
Author(s):  
Михаил Андреевич Новиков
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Technology Studies ◽  
Visual Science ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
It Practices

В отличие от визуального как компонента научных практик, исследование научных визуализаций – достаточно молодая, совсем недавно начавшая набирать обороты область эпистемологии. Несмотря на свой «юный» возраст, данная сфера исследований уже успела обогатиться разного рода подходами, концептами и самостоятельными выводами. На наш взгляд, книгу Питера Галисона и Лоррейн Дастон «Объективность» можно рассматривать в качестве труда, который и привносит очевидные новшества в понимание того, как производится знание, в том числе знание о производстве знания, и суммирует все достижения современной эпистемологии и истории науки, в первую очередь эпистемологии визуального, или Visual Science and Technology Studies. Исходя из этого, делается вывод, что, помимо изучения объективности, авторы изобретают новый способ говорения о науке. Визуальное в науке, со всеми возможными способами его практиковать, позволяет авторам, так или иначе двигающимся в русле прагматических подходов, избежать экстерналистских вариантов объяснений производства знания. Это достигается благодаря тому, что исследователи рассматривают не какие-то локальные визуализации, но работают с целыми ассамбляжами образов, исходя из предпосылки, что визуальное – неотчуждаемая часть науки. Чтобы разобраться с тем, что из себя представляет «Объективность», невозможно не обратиться к работам, которые также исследуют визуальное. Оказалось важным продемонстрировать, что современные исследования зачастую проводятся на стыке разных дисциплин, причем предполагается, что строгие дисциплинарные различия для данных исследований столь же реальны, как и пасторальные идеалы. Возвращая статус отчужденным научным компонентам, подобные подходы демонстрируют, что наука отнюдь не сводится к каким-то исключительно априорным или трансцендентальным пропозициям. Напротив, подтверждается, что наука делается здесь и сейчас и невероятно близка к нам, а это значит, что нельзя просто так пройти мимо любого из практикуемых ею элементов. Unlike the visual as a component of scientific practices, the study of scientific visualizations is a young field of epistemology that has only recently begun to gain momentum. Despite its “young” age, this field of research has already been enriched by all kinds of approaches, concepts, and independent conclusions. In my opinion, Peter Galison and Lorraine Daston’s book Objectivity can be considered as a work which, besides bringing obvious innovations in understanding how knowledge is produced, including knowledge about knowledge production, summarizes all achievements of modern epistemology and history of science, first of all, epistemology of the visual or VSTS (Visual Science and Technology Studies). From this it can be inferred that, among other things, in addition to the study of objectivity, the authors are inventing a new way of speaking about science. The visual in science, with all the possible ways of practicing it, allows the authors, moving in one way or another in the direction of pragmatic approaches, to avoid externalistic versions of explanations of knowledge production. This is achieved by the fact that the researchers do not look at some local visualizations, but work with whole assemblages of images, based on the premise that the visual is an inalienable part of science. In order to understand what Objectivity is, one must refer to works that also investigate the visual. It turned out to be important to demonstrate that contemporary research often takes place at the junction of different disciplines, with the assumption that strict disciplinary distinctions for this research are as real as pastoral ideals. By reclaiming the status of alienated scientific components, such approaches demonstrate that science is by no means reducible to some exclusively a priori or transcendental propositions. On the contrary, it confirms that science is done here and now, and is incredibly close to us, which means that one cannot simply pass by any of the elements it practices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document