DOCSLIB.ORG

Chaos Theory and Nanotechnology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chaos Theory and Nanotechnology 1 Indira Gandhi National Open University MPYE – 013 School of Interdisciplinary and Trans-disciplinary Studies Philosophy of Technology Block 1 REALITY: CHAOS THEORY AND NANOTECHNOLOGY UNIT 1 Introduction to Theory of Chaos UNIT 2 Fractals and Roughness of Reality UNIT 3 Nanotechnology: Basic Ideas and Applications UNIT 4 Nature of Nature: Philosophical Implication 2 Expert Committee Dr. Jose Kuruvachira Prof. Gracious Thomas Salesian College & Director, School of IGNOU Study Centre Social Work Dimapur, Nagaland IGNOU Prof. Renu Bharadwaj School of Humanities Dr. Sathya Sundar IGNOU Sethy Dept of Humanities Prof. George IIT, Chennai. Panthanmackel, Senior Consultant, Dr. Joseph Martis IGNOU St. Joseph’s College Jeppu, Mangalore – 2 Dr. M. R. Nandan Govt. College for Dr. Jaswinder Kaur Women Dhillon Mandya - Mysore 147, Kabir park Opp. GND University Dr. Kuruvila Amristar – 143 002 Pandikattu Jnana-deepa Prof. Y.S. Gowramma Vidyapeeth Principal, Ramwadi, College of Fine Arts, Pune Manasagangotri Mysore – 570 001 Dr Babu Joseph CBCI Centre New Delhi Prof. Tasadduq Husain Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh Dr. Bhuvaneswari Lavanya Flats Gangai Amman Koil St. Thiruvanmiyur Chennai – 600 041 Dr. Alok Nag Vishwa Jyoti Gurukul Varanasi 3 Block Preparation Units 1 &2 Jeff Shawn Dharmaram Vidyakshetram Bangalore. Unit 3 Dr. P.Kesava Kumar Dept of Philosophy Pondicherry University. Unit 4 Dr. Kuruvilla Panikattu Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth Ramwadi, Pune. Content Editor Dr. V. John Peter St. Joseph’s Philosophical College, Kotagiri, Tamil Nadu. Format Editor Prof. Gracious Thomas IGNOU, New Delhi. Programme Coordinator Prof. Gracious Thomas IGNOU, New Delhi. 4 BLOCK INTRODUCTION Philosophical roots of the concept of chaos are very deep with references dating back to 2500 BCE in Asian, Egyptian and Mayan Cultures. Initially, human attempt was to tame chaos and bring harmony. The Greeks infused scientific attitude into the mythical idea of immense and creative chaos. Aristotelian holistic vision of the universe was replaced in the reductionist onslaught and was replaced my deterministic mechanistic vision of the universe. Newtonian mechanics gave the stamp of approval of to this rigorous deterministic vision of the universe. Newtonian mechanics treated the whole world as a machine in which each and every part could be brought under control. Chaos theory has brought in a ‘new paradigm’ both in scientific and social arena in the contemporary world. Unlike the mechanistic vision, chaos theory focus on a context which is in a state of becoming in an open environment that receives and exchanges data or information and are sensitive to the changes happening around. Unit 1 traces the significant philosophical developments in the evolution of the concept of chaos till the time of Newton. Both Newtonian and quantum mechanics are characterised by their affiliation to extreme determinism and indeterminism respectively. Chaos theory, without rejecting any of the theories and without proposing any new laws, brings in an alternative by bringing in the deterministic and indeterministic aspects. Chaos theory has shown that chaos in non-linear dynamical systems is not random but it has got a hidden order that helps us in making short term predictions as well as long term trends. Thus the alternative which chaos theory opens up reconciling the extremes gives an organic, holistic and ecological view of the world instead of the mechanistic or random vision. Unit 2 is to give a general introduction to the concept of fractals that can represent and analyse the roughness of reality. It goes into the scientific intricacies, the philosophical and scientific significance associated with fractals are emphasized. It enables the students to have a basic understanding of fractals and how fractals represents the roughness of reality. It not only analyses the practical applications of fractals but also creatively ponder on the philosophical implications. Unit 3 brings home to us the latest Nano technology which is an innovative development in science and technology. It has a convergence with many disciplines. It has revolutionary implications for society. It has even a potential to challenge the existing notions of reality. This unit provides the basic ideas and applications of nano technology. Further it explores the social ethical implications of this kind of technological developments in contemporary world situation. The Unit 4 on ‘nature of nature’ appreciates the evolving nature of humans. What is unique about contemporary nature? How does culture and nature differ today? Has technology transformed our culture and our nature beyond recognition? The unit makes us realize that our nature is engineered or our nature has become part of our culture and to appreciate the radical changes taking place in our self-understanding (“singularity”). The unit also explains the complex relationship to the triads of nature, nurture and culture. Because of the technology available to contemporary humans, we have developed our culture so much that it radically alters our nature. 1 COURSE INTRODUCTION Our world-view truly shapes our understanding of ourselves and the world. For instance, the static world view of the ancients was radically altered by Newton’s model of the world as a machine. Such an understanding brought about by the scientific discoveries of Newton changed our understanding of humans, world and God also. In the last century two of the greatest scientific theories have been the theory of relativity (“the most creative theory”) and the theory of quantum mechanics (“the most successful theory”). Big Bang Theory, which is intimately connected to these two theories explain the origin of the universe. The very nature of time, space at the macro-world and micro-world that these two theories provide are quite different from the classical view of nature. Block 1 speaks of understanding reality through Chaos Theology and Nanotechnology. the theory of chaos tells us that there is a very close connection between apparent order and chaos. Nanotechnology, which is the science of building machines at a subatomic level, we have a lot to learn. The theory of chaos and nanotechnology, propose to us a world quite different from the classical, Newtonian or even Einsteinian worlds. These two theories through different insights into the nature of reality. The fractal nature of reality tells us that roughness in the world (not the idealisations of the world) is what really counts. It changes the way we understand the world.. The block 2, moves from reality to life. Quantum mechanics shattered our way of understanding the world. Biotechnology, most probably, will shatter the way we approach life, something much more intimate to us. Already there are talks about “artificial life” and “artificial cells.” Though they still remain at the theoretical realm, they will have quite significant repercussions on our own lives and on our understanding of life. The danger posed by such technologisation is the commodification of life. The opportunity provided by such technologies is the human ability to enhance life. Block 3 brings in the latest neurological findings that will surely throw further light on our self- understanding, consciousness, self-identity and all those aspects that make our human life so unique. Advances in brain studies, it is hoped, will provide solace to many sick people, prevent many neurological sickness and further help us to understand ourselves. Though we are just beginning in the process of understanding our brain, it is hoped, that technological advances will improve and enhance our own self-understanding. Closely connected with our self-understanding is our understanding of God. We do not believe that God is an illusion created by God. But we can rightly claim that it is the brain that enables us to experience God. Block 4 deals with highly developed technologies that try to address the perennial quest of humans to overcome death and attain physical immortality. Physical immortality is difficult, in a way, to talk about at length because it can be approached from so many different angles. The question of whether death is inevitable and with much advanced technology could humanity overcome it, is critically looked at from the philosophical point of view. 1 UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE THEORY OF CHAOS Contents 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Chaos in History 1.3 Newtonian Determinism and Quantum Indeterminism 1.4 Scientific Analysis of Chaos Theory 1.5 Philosophy of Chaos Theory 1.6 Relevance of Chaos Theory 1.7 Let Us Sum Up 1.8 Key Words 1.9 Further Readings and References 1.0 OBJECTIVES This primary objective of this unit is to introduce the chaos theory by analysing it from the scientific and philosophical perspectives. In chaos theory you will find a perfect blending of, once considered irreconcilable extremes of linearity and non-linearity, determinism and indeterminism which were the characteristic features of Newtonian mechanics and quantum mechanics respectively. The developments in scientific fields do not remain aloof from the real life settings instead they trickle down to various fields, including philosophy leading to the formation and transformation of human thought pattern. This can very well be seen in mechanistic deterministic vision of the universe that assured future to be present before us like past on one hand and the indeterministic vision that led to submission to randomness and chance on the other. Chaos theory brings in an alternative to these extremes views in both scientific and philosophical realm. The essential scientific features of chaos theory are discussed without going into the complex equations. The philosophical analysis of chaos theory will showcase the paradigm shift that chaos theory has initiated. Thus by the end of this Unit, you should be able to: • have a basic understanding of the chaos theory and its concepts. • analyse the chaos theory as an alternative to Newtonian and quantum mechanics. • understand how chaos theory initiates a paradigm shift • reflect on the relevance of chaos theory in the contemporary world.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Philosophy of Technology ‘Un-Disciplined’
    Philosophy of Technology ‘Un-Disciplined’ William J. Davis III Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Science and Technology Studies James H. Collier, Chair Joseph C. Pitt Richard F. Hirsh Ellsworth R. Fuhrman 25 March 2016 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Philosophy of Technology, Postphenomenology, Posthumanism, Science and Technology Studies Copyright 2016, William J. Davis III Philosophy of Technology ‘Un-Disciplined’ William J. Davis III Abstract Philosophy of technology (PoT) analyzes the nature of technology, its significance and consequences, and its mediation of human experiences of the world. Classical philosophers of technology describe mechanization as alienating: Technology causes humans to lose their connection with the natural world. Tehno-rationality replaces critical engagement and creativity. Failing to comprehend the essence/nature of Technology, and its consequences, portends disastrous social, political, and economic consequences. Such perspectives, however, neglect individual experiences of technologies. Filling that lacuna, contemporary philosophers of technology challenge the sweeping determinism of their intellectual forerunners and investigate how specific technologies mediate particular human experiences. Their descriptive prowess, however, lacks the normative engagement of classical PoT, and they emphasize micro effects of technologies to the detriment of macro implications. This dissertation describes an “un-disciplined” philosophy of technology (UPoT) that unites the macro and micro perspectives by providing narratives of human-technology symbiosis and co-development. Un-disciplined philosophers of technology present posthuman and transhuman perspectives that emphasize the symbiotic relationships between humans and technology. Thus, they deny disciplined philosophy’s first critical maneuver: define and demarcate.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Notes on Theories of Technology, Society and Innovation Systems for S&T Policy Studies
    1 Some notes on theories of Technology, Society and Innovation Systems for S&T policy studies Mónica Salazar-Acosta and Adam Holbrook CPROST Report 08-02 2 3 Some notes on theories of technology, society and innovation systems for science and technology policy studies Mónica Salazar-Acosta and Adam Holbrook, with editorial comments by Glenda Shaw-Garlock CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Vancouver BC Report 08-02 Introduction Does technology shape society, or does society influence our technological choices? Is technological determinism a theory of society or a theory of technology? The debate on Science, Technology and Society (STS) studies has been animated by two opposite views on technology: one that affirms that technology shapes society, and the other that society shapes technology. The former, is commonly associated with the notion of technological determinism; while the latter could be labeled ‘social shaping of technology’ which covers various approaches, such as social constructivism and actor-network theory. Neither provides an overall view: one looks at the forest and the other at the trees, but both have failed to give us a comprehensive view of technological change and the major forces driving social change. What follows is an examination of technological determinism – the shaping of society by technology - and the influence of society on the evolution of technology . It does not pretend to be exhaustive or representative of the most recent scholarship on the subject. A good, recent,
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Theories of Technology
    Brian Martin, Technology for nonviolent struggle (London: War Resisters’ International, 2001) Appendix Theories of technology This book is based on the idea that technolo- comings of certain approaches and help clarify gies can and should be developed and chosen my approach.1 because they are helpful for nonviolent strug- gle. This in turn is based on a number of Essentialist approaches assumptions about the nature of technology. In chapter 2 on militarised technology, I An “essentialist” approach to technology argued that the military influences the devel- assumes that it has essential or inherent fea- opment of technology in a number of ways, tures. Common essentialist views are that including through funding, applications, technology is good, bad, neutral or inevitable. employment and suppression of challenges, Some people think that technology is inher- plus via deep structures including the state, ently good. Military technology provides the capitalism, bureaucracy and patriarchy. In best example that it isn’t. Bullets and bombs later chapters, I outlined a variety of actual kill. People who are killed by bullets and bombs and potential technological developments that would not see these artefacts as good—not good would be of special value for nonviolent strug- for them, anyway. It is difficult to argue that gle. In making these arguments I have assumed weapons of mass destruction are inherently that: good. In fact, it was the development of • technology is shaped by a range of social nuclear weapons that made many technolo- factors; gists realise that not everything they produced • any given technological system is more was of benefit to humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Feenberg's Critical Theory of Technology
    Technical politics Technical politics Andrew Feenberg’s critical theory of technology Graeme Kirkpatrick Manchester University Press Copyright © Graeme Kirkpatrick 2020 The right of Graeme Kirkpatrick to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This electronic version has been made freely available under a Creative Commons (CC- BY-NC- ND) licence, which permits non- commercial use, distribution and reproduction provided the author(s) and Manchester University Press are fully cited and no modifications or adaptations are made. Details of the licence can be viewed at https:// creativecommons.org/ licenses/ by- nc- nd/ 4.0/ Published by Manchester University Press Altrincham Street, Manchester M1 7JA www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk British Library Cataloguing- in- Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 1 5261 0532 5 hardback ISBN 978 1 5261 0534 9 open access First published 2020 The publisher has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for any external or third- party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. Typeset by Newgen Publishing UK Contents Acknowledgements vi Introduction: from critical theory to technical politics 1 1 Critical theory and technology 21 2 The theory of bias and the ethics of technology design 46 3 Technical politics 70 4 Aesthetic critique 96 5 From critique to utopia 122 Beyond critique: utopia 148 References 156 Index 161 v Acknowledgements I could not have written this book without the assistance of many people, principal among them Andrew Feenberg, who, ever since I first turned up on his doorstep in 2002, clutching an apple tart from one of the bakeries near his apartment in Paris, has been unstintingly generous with his time and unbelievably patient when listening to my criticisms of his ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Acknowledgements
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisors, Dr. Peter-Paul Verbeek and Dr. Tsjalling Swierstra. Dr. Verbeek, as principal supervisor of the thesis, has closely followed the development of this work right from the choice of the topic through the organization of the proposal to the write up of the chapters. This final product wouldn’t have been a reality without his relentless comments on each and every step of the analyses and interpretations I made. I am also very much grateful to Dr. Swierstra, my second advisor, for giving me very decisive comments on the proposal and the first draft of the paper. My gratitude also goes to all of the professors who introduced me to the various areas of philosophy of science, technology, and society. I cannot forget the warm reception and help I always get from Ms. Petra Bruulsema, Secretary of the Department of Philosophy. Ato Shiferaw Bekele, associate professor of history at Addis Ababa University, has generously assisted me in selecting archival materials for the case analysis as well as commenting on the third chapter of the thesis where I discussed historical narratives. Thanks Gash Shiferaw. My study was sponsored by Addis Ababa University. I would therefore like to acknowledge the support I received from the university. I would more specifically like to thank Dr. Bekele Gutema, then Dean of the College of Social Sciences, Professor Endeshaw Bekele, then Academic Associate President for Research, and Professor Andreas Eshete, President of the University, for facilitating the grant. I have also received a waiver for the program fee from the University of Twente.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminist Theories of Technology
    Cambridge Journal of Economics 2010, 34, 143–152 doi:10.1093/cje/ben057 Advance Access publication 8 January 2009 Feminist theories of technology Judy Wajcman* Feminist theories of technology have come a long way over the last quarter of a century. The expanding engagement at the intersection of feminist scholarship and Downloaded from science and technology studies (STS) has enriched both fields immeasurably, and I will largely focus my reflections on the literature associated with these sites. I begin by highlighting the continuities as well as the differences between contemporary and earlier feminist debates on technology. Current approaches focus on the mutual shaping of gender and technology, in which technology is conceptualised as both a source and consequence of gender relations. In avoiding both technological cje.oxfordjournals.org determinism and gender essentialism, such theories emphasise that the gender- technology relationship is fluid and situated. These deliberations highlight how processes of technical change can influence gender power relations. A feminist politics of technology is thus key to achieving gender equality. Key words: Gender, Technology, Power JEL classifications: B54, J16, 031 at BIUS Jussieu on February 3, 2011 1. Introduction This article provides an overview of the various approaches to conceptualising the link between gender and technology, both past and present. In turning to this task, I should emphasise that feminist discussions have always taken diverse and overlapping forms. While standard accounts of feminist thought tend to present liberal, socialist and post- modern feminisms as distinct perspectives, in reality they did not develop as independent strands or in a simple chronological order.
    [Show full text]
  • Diffusion Theory & Instructional Technology
    Diffusion Theory & Instructional Technology Diffusion Theory and Instructional Technology Daniel W. Surry University of Southern Mississippi Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), Albuquerque, New Mexico February 12 - 15, 1997. [email protected] © 1997, DAN SURRY Abstract This paper discusses how the theories of innovation diffusion have been incorporated into the field of instructional technology. The paper begins with a brief description of general diffusion theory that includes mention of the four most commonly discussed diffusion theories. Following the discussion of general diffusion theory, the author describes how general diffusion theories have been used to form diffusion theories specific to the field of instructional technology. The paper states that the two màjor categories of IT-related diffusion theory are Systemic Change Theories and Product Utilization Theories. Examples of each category are provided. The paper identifies and describes two opposing philosophical views of technology: Determinism and Instrumentalism. The author uses the two philosophies of technology to create two subcategories of IT-related diffusion theory: Developer Based Theories and Adopter Based Theories. Examples of both subcategories are provided.The author contends that Developer àBased Theories are flawed in that they overstate the role of technological superiority in the diffusion process. DIFFUSION THEORY AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY The purpose of this paper is to describe how the theory of innovation diffusion has been incorporated http://www.gsu.edu/%7Ewwwitr/docs/diffusion/ (1 of 14) [11/22/04 8:09:31 AM] Diffusion Theory & Instructional Technology into the field of instructional technology. Professionals in a number of disciplines, from agriculture to marketing, have used the theory of innovation diffusion to increase the adoption of innovative products and practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Innovation Diffusion at the University of Botswana: a Comparative Literature Survey
    Technology innovation diffusion at the University of Botswana: A comparative literature survey Seitebaleng Susan Dintoe Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence adoption and diffusion of information and communication technology in developing countries through a thorough review of past and current literature, focusing on the case of University of Botswana. Despite the value in adoption and diffusion of technology innovation in the developing world, universities are faced with problems, and studies show that generally, use of accessible and available technology implementation is not successful. The Rogers (2003) concepts of social systems, compatibility of technology, early adopters and factors, are complex. This includes organizational characteristics focusing on policies, faculty support through professional development and training, time, beliefs, and workload. The article concluded that (a) the social system (university administration) develops policies, which accounts for little when the technology plan is not concrete for implementation, (b) technology is not compatible with faculty traditional teaching practices, and (c) university administration does not consider understanding the faculty (early adopters) in context. The study suggests that developing countries need to understand the faculty as early adopters from a bottom- up approach instead of top-down, and should not base success on outcomes, but rather, strategies based on the context. Keywords: diffusion and adoption of innovation technology; ICT; social system; compatibility of technology; early adopters, developing countries, University of Botswana INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND This article reviews the past and current related literature on adoption and diffusion of technology innovation in developing countries, particularly University of Botswana.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reevaluation of Marcuse's Philosophy of Technology
    A Reevaluation of Marcuse's Philosophy of Technology Michael Kidd Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of Tasmania, July, 2013. 1 A Reevaluation of Marcuse's Philosophy of Technology Michael Kidd 2 Declaration of Originality This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for a degree or diploma by the University or any other institution, except by way of background information and duly acknowledged in the thesis, and to the best of my knowledge and belief no material previously published or written by another person except where due acknowledgement is made in the text of the thesis, nor does the thesis contain any material which infringes copyright. This thesis may be made available for loan and limited copying and communication in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968. 3 Abstract This thesis provides a reevaluation of Herbert Marcuse's philosophy of technology. It argues that rather than offering an abstract utopian or dystopian account of technology, Marcuse's philosophy of technology can be read as a cautionary approach developed by a concrete philosophical utopian. The strategy of this thesis is to reread Marcuse's key texts in order to challenge the view that his philosophy of technology is abstractly utopian. Marcuse is no longer a fashionable figure and there has been little substantive literature devoted to the problem of the utopian character of his philosophy of technology since the works of Douglas Kellner and Andrew Feenberg. This thesis seeks to reposition Marcuse as a concrete philosophical utopian. It then reevaluates his philosophy of technology from this standpoint and suggests that it may have relevance to some contemporary debates.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Subject Today Is What Is Philosophy of Technology
    1. What Is Philosophy of Technology? Andrew Feenberg Introduction In this chapter I will attempt to answer the question posed in my title from two standpoints, first historically and then in terms of contemporary options in the field, the various different theories that are currently under discussion.1 But before I begin, I would like to clear up a common misunderstanding: philosophy of technology is not closely related to philosophy of science. Science and technology share a similar type of rationality based on empirical observation and knowledge of natural causality, but technology is concerned with usefulness rather than truth. Where science seeks to know, technology seeks to control. However, this is by no means the whole story. Our image of premodernity is shaped by the struggles between science and religion in the early modern period. From those struggles we derive the notion that traditional societies restrict questioning of their basic customs and myths. In the premodern West, the principle of authority was the basis not just for church doctrine, but for knowledge of the world as well. Modern societies emerge from the release of the power of questioning against such traditional forms of thought. The 18th century Enlightenment demanded that all customs and institutions justify themselves as useful for humanity. Under the impact of this demand, science and technology become the new basis for belief. Eventually, technology becomes omnipresent in everyday life and scientific-technical modes of thought predominate over all others.2 In a mature modern society, technology is taken for granted much as were the customs and myths of traditional society.
    [Show full text]
  • Enchantment Paper CLASS
    1 The Technology Enchantment Churn: Technology Adoption and Disenchanted Enchantment RUSSELL W. BELK, HENRI A. WEIJO & ROBERT V. KOZINETS Abstract Dominant perspectives on technology adoption and consumption tend to be cognitive, deliberative, and individualistic. We offer a more desire-centered and cultural alternative. Leaning on historical evidence and revised Weberian theories of enchantment and disenchantment, we show how technology consumption became enchanted. Providing an important cultural counterbalance to models such as the technology acceptance model (TAM), the paper outlines a novel process we term the Technology Enchantment Churn (TEC). This process drives contemporary technology adoption and consumption by overtly or covertly ballyhooing a sense of wonderment accompanying the promises of new technologies. We offer current and recent examples of the TEC process before discussing some of the implications it holds for our wider understanding of technology, consumption, and greater consumer culture. Keywords: Technology adoptation, enchantment, conceptual paper, process theories. 2 A wealth of prior research has theorized technology consumption, for instance, has consumer adoptation of new technologies. The largely been ignored in prior research, despite fields of marketing and consumer research have this orientation otherwise featuring pervasively been dominated by perspectives on technology in studies of the cultivation of anticipation and use drawing from diffusion of innovations desire (e.g., Belk 2001; Belk, Ger, and theory
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Politics of Technology Discuss The
    Amsterdam University Press hans harbers The old saying that ‘man is the measure of all things’ presupposes free and autonomous human beings on the one hand, and neutral instruments on the other. Humanism plus instrumentalism, however, is a double illusion, this volume argues. Science and technology are not simply the means to reach human ends. On the contrary, they also actively shape human beings, their goals, their meanings, and their mutual relations. By means of case studies of technological innovations as diverse as video- cameras, electric cars, electronic notebooks, pregnancy tests, and genetic ( ed. screening devices the authors of Inside the Politics of Technology discuss the implications of this so-called ‘co-production’ of science, technology, and ) society for our philosophical and political ideas about humanity and techno- Technology of Politics the Inside logy. Are human beings the only ones endowed with agency, or do technolo- gical artifacts act as well? And if they do, then how should we understand or practice a politics of technology? Hans Harbers was trained as an historical sociologist and is currently Associate Professor at the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Groningen. His research and publications focus on the roles of nonhuman actors in the co-production of knowledge, power, and morality. With contributions by: Cornelis Disco, Philip Brey, Nelly Oudshoorn, Margo hans harbers (ed.) Brouns, Ellen van Oost, Dirk Stemerding, Annemiek Nelis, Peter-Paul Verbeek, Petran Kockelkoren, Boelie Elzen, Tsjalling
    [Show full text]