General Introduction

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

General Introduction General Introduction The origin of this book can be traced back to the Burg Landsberg, an old castle crowning a steep hill in Deutschlandsberg, Austria. This is a remote place without worldly temptations, and the participants of the first meeting of the newly formed European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (EASST) could but stick together and work hard.1 It was here, during a cocktail session in the early eve­ ning of September 25, 1982, that two of the three editors of this book met for the first time. Encouraged by their concurring interests in a constructivist approach to the study of technology and by drinking the famous regional pink champagne, Trevor Pinch, a sociologist of science, and Wiebe Bijker, a sociologist of technology, decided to start a joint project. The object would be to bring together Pinch’s detailed studies of the development of science with Bijker’s studies of technology. Pinch obtained a scholarship and moved for half a year from the University of Bath to the Twente University of Technology. Even­ tually this research resulted in a number of papers in which Pinch and Bijker argued that an integrated approach to the social study of science and technology would be feasible and fruitful. Specifically, they proposed a social constructivist approach, thereby extending the relatively new but already well-established sociology of scientific knowledge into the realm of technology. In passing, they discarded most of the existing approaches to technology advocated by histo­ rians, philosophers, and economists. This general condemnation, although it had the benefit of defining their stance quite clearly, obviously lacked subtlety. Whatever its cause—youthful enthusiasm or the pink champagne— they would soon be corrected. The first results of the joint project were presented to an atelier de recherche in Paris, March 1983. At this meeting were a number of French and British sociologists of science. The response was somewhat more than Bijker and Pinch had expected. Clearly, among students of scientific knowledge there was an emerging interest in the social study 2 General Introduction of technology. A snowball started rolling. In some Paris restaurant a group of four agreed to convene a meeting later that year in order to pursue this new approach—a sociology of technology. Two months later a letter was dashed off to inform more colleagues of this meeting. The number of participants by this stage had increased to fifteen. In their reactions some of these sociologists argued for the need to invite historians of technology also. Now, being a couple of months older and a little wiser, Bijker and Pinch happily agreed. Tom Hughes was spotted in Europe, and other American historians of technology were contacted during a visit by Bijker to the United States in November 1983. The number of participants increased to twenty. Now the rolling snowball was growing almost out of control. Offers to participate in the workshop started to come in from unexpected corners. We felt like football trainers who have to decide which players are allowed on the field and which are condemned to the substitutes’ bench. The only solution we saw to this problem was to continue in the “pink champagne style”: without any formal guidelines and with just our own implicit criteria about the works’ being interesting. We had decided to adhere strictly to a maximum of thirty participants, because we thought that a larger number would hamper the emer­ gence of the kind of collective discussion we hoped for. Inevitably this excluded many scholars who could have contributed greatly. How­ ever, we did not want to run the risk of the workshop breaking down into small subgroups with parallel lines of discussion. After all, we were organizing a workshop, not a conference. Drawing on our experiences in the Burg Landsberg, we located the workshop in De Boerderij (“The Farm”) on the campus of the Twente University of Technology. The modern architecture of De Boerderij, with its combination of high ceilings and low timbers, into which many a head bumped, constrained and concentrated our intellectual endeavor. Escape from this building would lead you into the Dutch countryside with even fewer worldly temptations than the Austrian mountains could offer. A heavy program, rental bicycles to move between the hotel and De Boerderij, and the food and drink at hand further defined the circumscribed environment. The work ethic prevailed. As has been noted elsewhere,2 this pressure cooker could have easily exploded. The differences in historical, sociological, and philo­ sophical approaches and the idiosyncracies of six different national­ ities meant that the workshop could have been a dialogue of the deaf. However, quite the contrary happened. All the participants ap­ peared to have come not only to talk but also to listen. Almost every­ General Introduction 3 one played an active part, either by presenting a paper or by acting as a discussant. The workshop was marked by an open and sympathetic intellectual atmosphere, and discussions of a genuinely interdisciplin­ ary nature occurred. More specifically, a high tolerance was shown for different and sometimes even incompatible concepts and ap­ proaches. If a new idea was not found to be immediately convincing, it was not knocked down but discussed critically and then “carried along” to later sessions while we suspended final judgment. New strands of discussion emerged, linking different papers together on a level that no one had envisaged in advance. At the end of the workshop the intellectual excitement was such that it was decided to publish a special journal issue or a book on the basis of the papers and the discussions. This volume is the result. The intellectual excitement, if we may use these grandiose words once more, has continued long after the workshop. Authors have been stimulated by the discussions and have revised their contributions substantially. In some chapters new empirical results have been incorporated. Of course, the workshop cannot claim all, or even most, of the credit for this. On the contrary, the success of the workshop is symptomatic of a generally emerging interest in a new type of tech­ nology study. Other indications of this new interest are the recently published books edited by Rachel Laudan (1984a) and by Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (1985). This new type of technology study can be characterized by three trends in the sort of analysis attempted. Authors have been concerned with moving away from the individual inventor (or “genius”) as the central explanatory concept, from technological determinism, and from making distinctions among technical, social, economic, and political aspects of technological development. The last point has been aptly summarized by using the metaphor of the “seamless web” of society and technology. The two edited collections mentioned provide an adequate account of the origins of these trends. Moreover, together they provide a fairly comprehensive review of the relevant literature of previous traditions in the history, sociology, and philosophy of technology. Hence we have restricted ourselves in this book to giving only a short sketch of the well-established traditions from which we define our point of departure (Pinch and Bijker, this volume). “Technology” is a slippery term, and concepts such as “technolog­ ical change” and “technological development” often carry a heavy interpretative load.3 It seems unfruitful and indeed unnecessary to devote much effort to working out precise definitions at least at this stage of the research in progress. Three layers of meaning of the word 4 General Introduction “technology” can be distinguished (MacKenzie and Wajcman 1985). First, there is the level ofphysical objects or artifacts, for example, bicycles, lamps, and Bakelite. Second, “technology” may refer to activities or processes, such as steel making or molding. Third, “tech­ nology’’can refer to what people know as well as what they do; an example is the “know-how” that goes into designing a bicycle or operating an ultrasound device in the obstetrics clinic. In practice the technologies dealt with in this collection cover all three aspects, and often it is not sensible to separate them further. Also, instead of trying to distinguish technology from science (or indeed from any other activity) in general terms, it seems preferable to work from a set of empirical cases that seem intuitively paradigmatic. In this volume a broad range of technologies is examined, including bicycles, missiles, ships, electric vehicles, electric power systems, the cooking stove, pharmaceuticals, ultrasound, dyes, and expert systems. Having said what we are trying to get away from, where are we heading? It is too early to specify this with any precision without violating the fruitful and stimulating heterogeneity of the emerging field. In the context of the workshop, however, it can safely be said that three approaches played a more or less dominant role and hence have guided the studies in this volume. The first, the social construc­ tivist approach, has been inspired by recent studies in the sociology of scientific knowledge.4 Key concepts within this approach are “inter­ pretative flexibility,” “closure,” and “relevant social groups.” One of the central tenets of this approach is the claim that technological artifacts are open to sociological analysis, not just in their usage’but especially with respect to their design and technical “content.” The second approach, stemming largely from the work of the historian of technology Thomas Hughes, treats technology in terms of a “sys­ tems” metaphor. This stresses the importance of paying attention to the different but interlocking elements of physical artifacts, institu­ tions, and their environment and thereby offers an integration of technical, social, economic, and political aspects. Moreover, the key concepts of “reverse salient” and “critical problem,” which define the parts of a system where at certain stages innovative energy is focused, enable us to link the micro- and macrolevels of analysis.
Recommended publications
  • Capitalism and Morality ______
    Capitalism and Morality _________________________ THE TEMPORAL DIMENSION OF TECHNOLOGY AND THE MOVING PICTURE OF THE GOOD Richard P. Mullin Professor Emeritus Wheeling Jesuit University Appeared in Wheeling Jesuit University’s Cardinal Perspectives Spring 1996 Picture of the Good One of the most urgent tasks of philosophy is to understand how ethical, social, and technological goods can be integrated in the midst of rapid change. The problem is to a large extent caused by moral myopia and tunnel vision.1 It is hard to get a clear focus when the viewer and the picture are moving so rapidly and irregularly. Technical advance and social change have a reciprocal relationship. This spawns a myriad of ethical problems which are distinctive to a technologically advancing society. Many of the social and ethical problems which involve technology result from the fact that technology does not advance evenly. When the technical aspect of social change combines with non-technical facets of life such as morality, legality, and politics, the unevenness becomes more pronounced and more troublesome. The Temporal Dimension Ethics must take account of the temporal dimension, i.e., the dimension of change. As the world and our interpretation of it change more and more rapidly, the past fades quickly out of sight while the future rushes on us ready-or-not. Past decisions were made without much of the information now available to us and within world-views which we can recapture only with great difficulty. The decisions which we make today will affect a future of which we are largely ignorant in ways at which we can only guess.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Research & Social Science
    Energy Research & Social Science 70 (2020) 101617 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Energy Research & Social Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/erss Review Sociotechnical agendas: Reviewing future directions for energy and climate T research ⁎ Benjamin K. Sovacoola, , David J. Hessb, Sulfikar Amirc, Frank W. Geelsd, Richard Hirshe, Leandro Rodriguez Medinaf, Clark Millerg, Carla Alvial Palavicinoh, Roopali Phadkei, Marianne Ryghaugj, Johan Schoth, Antti Silvastj, Jennie Stephensk, Andy Stirlingl, Bruno Turnheimm, Erik van der Vleutenn, Harro van Lenteo, Steven Yearleyp a University of Sussex, United Kingdom and Aarhus University, Denmark b Vanderbilt University, United States c Nanyang Technological University, Singapore d The University of Manchester, United Kingdom e Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States f Universidad de las Americas Puebla, Mexico g Arizona State University, United States h Universiteit Utrecht, Netherlands i Macalester College, United States j Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway k Northeastern University, United States l University of Sussex, United Kingdom m Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire Sciences Innovations Sociétés, France n Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands o Universiteit Maastricht, Netherlands p The University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The field of science and technology studies (STS) has introduced and developed a “sociotechnical” perspective Science and technology studies that has been taken up by many disciplines and areas of inquiry. The aims and objectives of this study are Sociotechnical systems threefold: to interrogate which sociotechnical concepts or tools from STS are useful at better understanding Science technology and society energy-related social science, to reflect on prominent themes and topics within those approaches, and to identify Sociology of scientific knowledge current research gaps and directions for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Science & Technology Studies
    ALEXANDRA HOFMÄNNER SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY STUDIES ELSEWHERE A Postcolonial Programme SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY STUDIES In April 2017, scientists took to the streets in a historically unprecedented Global March for Science. The event was seen as symbolic of a crisis in the relationship of science and society. This book considers the Global March ELSEWHERE for Science from a postcolonial perspective to inquire into the toolkit that the academic field of Science & Technology Studies (STS) has to offer. It HOFMÄNNER ALEXANDRA argues that new concepts and analytical approaches are necessary to in- A POSTCOLONIAL vestigate current global dynamics in science, technology and society, so as to deliver insights that the recent expansion of STS scholars beyond PROGRAMME Western Europe and North America alone is unlikely to provide. The book presents a Programme in Science Studies Elsewhere (SSE) to demonstrate the urgent need to carry postcolonial issues right into the centre of STS’s intellectual programme. Hofmänner possesses a potent antidote for the field’s inability to see science and technology outside of European or North American experiences. Rayvon Fouché, Professor and Director, American Studies, Purdue University, USA A compelling case for revisiting some of the traditional assumptions in the field of STS. Prof. Dr. Sabine Maasen, Director of the Munich Center for Technology in Society Alexandra Hofmänner is assistant professor in Science & Technology ELSEWHERE STUDIES TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE Studies ( ST S) at the University of Basel, Switzerland. She received a PhD at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ( ETH Zürich ) and has carried out extensive research in Switzerland and South Africa. www.schwabeverlag.de Alexandra Hofmänner Science & Technology Studies Elsewhere A Postcolonial Programme Schwabe Verlag Published with the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    CURRICULUM VITAE Geoffrey Charles BOWKER Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences University of California, Irvine 6210 Donald Bren Hall Irvine, CA 92697-3425 [email protected] http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~gbowker POSITIONS Professor, Director Values in Design Laboratory, School of Information and Computer Science, University of California at Irvine, 2012+ Professor and Senior Scholar in Cyberscholarship, School of Information Sciences, University of Pittsburgh. 2009-2011 Executive Director, Regis and Dianne McKenna Professor, Center for Science, Technology and Society, Santa Clara University. Professor in Communication and Environmental Studies. 2005-2009 Chair, Department of Communicaton, University of California, San Diego, 2002-2004. Professor, Department of Communication, University of California, San Diego, 1999+. Teaching ethnography of information systems, computing and communication. Research project in biodiversity informatics. Participating Faculty, Interdisciplinary PhD Program in Cognitive Science, UCSD, 2001+. Fellow, San Diego Supercomputer Center, 2000+. Adjunct Professor, Department of History, University of California, San Diego, 1999+. Zero time appointment. Faculty Affiliate, National Center for Supercomputing Applications, 1998-1999. Assistant then Associate Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign, 1993-1998. Teaching information resources management, research methodologies in information science, information systems analysis and management. Research projects in history and sociology of the International Classification of Diseases, the Nursing Interventions Classification and organizational memory. (Promoted to Associate Fall 1996). May - June 1994 Visiting Professor, Department of Computer Science, Aarhuis University, Denmark. Teaching course in computer supported cooperative work and the ethnography of information systems. Visiting Scholar, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Actor-Network Theory to Understand Inter-Organizational Network Aspects for Strategic Information Systems Planning
    Using actor-network theory to understand inter-organizational network aspects for strategic information systems planning Danchao Hu February, 2011 Master thesis Business information technology School of Management and Governance (SMG) University of Twente Enschede, The Netherlands Graduation Committee: Dr. ir. Ton Spil Dr. P. A. T. van Eck School of Management and Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Governance, Mathematics and Computer Science University of Twente, University of Twente, Enschede, Enschede, The Netherlands The Netherlands 1 ABSTRACT Network perspective has been an important factor in inter-organizational strategic information systems planning (IOSISP), and has consequently become a conspicuous concern for scholars. Bearing in mind the increasing cooperation between organizations by virtue of information and communication technology, we argue that, in order to survive and prosper, realistic research must draw on the dual foundation of network theory and strategic information systems planning (SISP) research. However, network theories are as yet diversified in information systems research. In this paper, we argue that the network perspective, more specifically, the actor-network theory (ANT), is positioned to enhance the understanding of network composition and its development during the information systems planning. The controversial insistence on the agency of non-humans distinguishes the ANT from other network theories (e.g., social network theory, strong and weak ties, etc.). Meanwhile, the translation process introduced by ANT indicates a reasonable approach to understand the network evolvement. Thus, the theory has superiority over other network theories with its understanding of network composition and network development. This study draws largely from and originates from the SISP research field, and illustrates the appropriateness of the ANT in investigating SISP, specifically in the context of inter-organizational cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Dedehayir Makinen Determining Reverse Salient Types
    Tampere University of Technology Author(s) Dedehayir, Ozgur; Mäkinen, Saku Title Determining reverse salient types and evolutionary dynamics of technology systems with performance disparities Citation Dedehayir, Ozgur; Mäkinen, Saku 2011. Determining reverse salient types and evolutionary dynamics of technology systems with performance disparities. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management vol. 23, num. 10, 1095-1114. Year 2011 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2011.621308 Version Post-print URN http://URN.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tty-201311271475 Copyright This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, volume 23, issue 10, 01 Nov 2011. Copyright Taylor & Francis, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09537325.2011.621308. All material supplied via TUT DPub is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, and duplication or sale of all or part of any of the repository collections is not permitted, except that material may be duplicated by you for your research use or educational purposes in electronic or print form. You must obtain permission for any other use. Electronic or print copies may not be offered, whether for sale or otherwise to anyone who is not an authorized user. Determining reverse salient types and evolutionary dynamics of technology systems with performance disparities Ozgur Dedehayir∗ and Saku J. Mäkinen Department of Industrial Management, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland ∗ Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Technological system evolution is marked by the uneven evolution of constituent sub‐systems. Subsequently, system evolution is hampered by the resulting state of unevenness, or reverse salience, which results from the presence of the sub‐system that delivers the lowest level of performance with respect to other sub‐systems, namely, the reverse salient.
    [Show full text]
  • Technoscience the Politics of Interventions
    Technoscience The Politics of Interventions Kristin Asdal, Brita Brenna and Ingunn Moser (eds.) Unipub 2007 © Unipub AS 2007 ISBN 978-82-7477-300-4 Contact info Unipub: T: + 47 22 85 33 00 F: + 47 22 85 30 39 E-mail: [email protected] www.unipub.no Publisher: Oslo Academic Press, Unipub Norway Printed in Norway: AIT e-dit AS, Oslo 2007 This book has been produced with financial support from Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK) at the University of Oslo and The Research Council of Norway The introduction has been translated by Connie Stultz All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without permission Contents Introduction Kristin Asdal, Brita Brenna, Ingunn Moser The Politics of Interventions A History of STS .........................................................................................................7 Part 1: Networks and Critiques Michel Callon Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay .................................. 57 Susan Leigh Star Power, Technology and the Phenomenology of Conventions On Being Allergic to Onions ..................................................................................... 79 Donna Haraway Situated Knowledges The Science Question in Feminism and The Privilege of Partial Perspective ...................... 109 Part 2: Modest Interventions Deborah Heath Bodies, Antibodies, and Modest Interventions ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations
    Science,Klein, Kleinman Technology, / Social & Human Construction Values of Technology The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations Hans K. Klein Georgia Institute of Technology Daniel Lee Kleinman University of Wisconsin–Madison Although scholarship in the social construction of technology (SCOT) has contributed much to illuminating technological development, most work using this theoretical approach is committed to an agency-centered approach. SCOT scholars have made only limited contributions to illustrating the influence of social structures. In this article, the authors argue for the importance of structural concepts to understanding technological development. They summarize the SCOT conceptual framework defined by Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker and survey some of the methodological and explanatory difficulties that arise with their approach. Then the authors present concepts from organizational sociology and political economy that illuminate structural influences in shaping phe- nomena of interest to SCOT scholars. These structural concepts can be applied to the study of the design, development, and transformation of technology. The authors con- clude that the limited amount of scholarship on structural factors in the social shaping of technological development presents numerous opportunities for research. Researchers in the field of science and technology studies (STS) have pro- duced a great deal of scholarshipin recent years that documents and analyzes the social shaping of technology.1 An important area of this scholarship, known as the social construction of technology (SCOT), traces its origins to Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker’s (1987) article, “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other.” From this seminal work has flowed a body of research that is rich and diverse—but that has largely remained com- mitted to an agency-centered approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Reijo Miettinen, University of Helsinki
    For Matti Sintonen’s Festschrift Reijo Miettinen, University of Helsinki The problem of the problem in inventive activity Some prominent researchers of creativity regard “the problem of the problem”, that is, the finding and definition of important problems, as a key phenomenon of the creative process (Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi 1976; Getzels 1982 and 1987). Getzels cites Einstein who stated that the formulation of problems is often more essential than their solution (1982, 37): “To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science.” Therefore, instead of the problem-solving process, creativity research should focus on how important problems are being found and formulated (Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi 1976, 81): “The problem solver must become a problem finder (….). To turn a problem solver into a problem finder one must feel that there is a challenge needing resolution in the environment, one must formulate this feeling as a problem, and then attempt to device appropriate methods for solving it (…) Not only the solution but the problem itself must be discovered.” Getzels rightly points out that the world is teeming with conflicts and dilemmas. However, they must be specified and formulated in fertile and radical ways if they are to be moved to productive termination (Getzels 1982, 38). An important and fruitful problem is open to resolution and leads to a line of inquiry in the inventive activity. A German researcher Rainer Seidel (1976) has proposed that to solve the problem of the problem a social history of problems is needed. The tensions and contradictions of human practices are the starting point for the creation of new artifacts and methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Free and Open Source Software As a Contribution to Digital Security in the Arctic
    Free and open source software as a contribution to digital security in the Arctic Gerald Zojer Digital technologies have become an integral part of everyday life for most inhabitants of the Arctic, diffusing so deep into society that even traditional activities are becoming digitised. All Arctic states have endorsed cybersecurity strategies, highlighting the significance that is attributed to digitalisation in today’s societies. Yet, these strategies reproduce a state-centric traditional security approach. Since digitalisation affects all spheres of human security, cybersecurity needs to be redefined in a more comprehensive way to be inclusive to challenges on the individual and community level. This paper discusses a digital security approach. Acknowledging the importance of software in contemporary information societies, this paper looks at how private and public software property regimes are related to digital security in an Arctic specific context. Following approaches from science and technology studies, with special attention to innovation research, this paper discusses the interrelations of proprietary software, open source software (OSS), and free and open source software (FOSS) approaches with digitalisation, considering the peculiarities of Arctic societies. The paper argues that FOSS provides advantages for the often small user base and niche markets of region specific applications, and thus utilising a FOSS approach promotes digital security in the Arctic. Introduction The motivation for this paper emerged in summer 2018 during a reindeer calf marking event in Sápmi, the Sámi homeland. During this event, reindeer were gathered in a fence system. First the calves were tagged by giving them a numbered collar. Then calves and adult female reindeer were left together in another fenced area so that the mother animal and the calf could find one another again.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamics of Reverse Salience As Technological Performance Gap: an Empirical Study of the Personal Computer Technology System
    Received May 15, 2008/ Accepted August 29, 2008 J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2008, Volume 3, Issue 3 DYNAMICS OF REVERSE SALIENCE AS TECHNOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE GAP: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE PERSONAL COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM Ozgur Dedehayir, Saku J. Mäkinen* Abstract The evolution of technological systems is hindered by systemic components, referred to as reverse salients, which fail to deliver the necessary level of technological performance thereby inhibiting the performance delivery of the system as a whole. This paper develops a performance gap measure of reverse salience and applies this measurement in the study of the PC (personal computer) technological system, focusing on the evolutions of firstly the CPU (central processing unit) and PC game sub-systems, and secondly the GPU (graphics processing unit) and PC game sub-systems. The measurement of the temporal behavior of re- verse salience indicates that the PC game sub-system is the reverse salient, continuously trailing behind the technological per- formance of the CPU and GPU sub-systems from 1996 through 2006. The technological performance of the PC game sub-system as a reverse salient trails that of the CPU sub-system by up to 2300 MHz with a gradually decreasing performance disparity in recent years. In contrast, the dynamics of the PC game sub-system as a reverse salient trails the GPU sub-system with an ever increasing performance gap throughout the timeframe of analysis. In addition, we further discuss the research and managerial im- plications of our findings. Keywords: technology system, personal computer, reverse salient, computer games * - Dedehayir, Ozgur. Tampere University of Technology.
    [Show full text]
  • Actor-Network and Translation in Engineering Laboratory: a Case Study of Universitas Indonesia Civil Engineering Testing Laboratory
    MASYARAKAT Jurnal Sosiologi Vol. 24, No. 2, Juli 2019: 187-209 DOI: 10.7454/MJS.v24i2.9229 Actor-Network and Translation in Engineering Laboratory: A Case Study of Universitas Indonesia Civil Engineering Testing Laboratory Fazar Ramdhana Sargani Purusha Research Cooperatives E-mail: [email protected] Abstrak Penggunaan Teori Aktor-Jaringan (TAJ) di Indonesia telah diterapkan di berbagai bidang, seperti kajian kredit mikro, budi daya terumbu karang, kontestasi energi terbarukan, dan relasi sipil-militer. Namun, di Indonesia TAJ masih sangat jarang digunakan untuk meneliti laboratorium sebagai perkumpulan (assemblage) yang berjalan, kendati peranan- nya yang penting dalam memproduksi pengetahuan teknis. Guna mengisi kekosongan tersebut, artikel ini bertujuan untuk menggambarkan penerapan TAJ pada kerja labora- torium, khusus di Laboratorium Struktur dan Material serta Laboratorium Uji Teknik Sipil Universitas Indonesia menggunakan konsep proses translasi. Artikel ini menemukan bahwa laboratorium tersusun bukan hanya oleh aktor manusia, seperti ahli-ahli yang otoritatif, tetapi juga aktor non-manusia –cth. gedung dan peralatan atau mesin. Seiring performanya, laboratorium membentuk asosiasi, yang tidak hanya menbangun tetapi juga memutus atau memilih relasi sesuai dengan kebutuhan jaringan tanpa harus seluruh aktor menyadari akan proses tersebut. Hal ini mengindikasikan keterbatasan ANT dalam men- deteksi ihwal-ihwal di luar tindakan dalam pembentukan jaringan. Pendekatan metode kualitatif diterapkan mengingat itulah yang paling tepat untuk dapat menerapkan prinsip pelacakan aktor dalam TAJ. Abstract Actor-Network Theory (ANT) has been implemented to study various topics in Indone- sian contexts such as microcredit, coral reef, contestation within the sustainable energy project, and civil-military relations. However, ANT is seldom used to examine laboratories as working assemblages in Indonesia, despite its crucial role in producing technological knowledge.
    [Show full text]