Some post-work theorists imagine the complete automation of all jobs, or at least the takeover of
all monotonous, rule-based, predictable and repetitive (and thus
unworthy of humans) tasks in the future by ultimately cheaper, faster,
more efficient, more reliable and more accurate intelligent machines.Additionally, these machines can work in harsher conditions and for longer periods of time without stopping than humans, which is expected to lead to a transition period of rapid economic growth, despite high rates of ever-increasing human unemployment. Overall, this development is expected to lead to an enormous increase in prosperity, provided that the wealth is redistributed.
Future directions
Future directions include the reshaping of the role of humans in the
workplace and stressing the relative strengths of humans capable of
adapting and integrating technology into their work and interaction. In addition to these capabilities, scholars emphasize the importance of
humans taking advantage of these relative strengths, offering several
areas which humans can remain competent in a rapidly developing
workplace, such as emotional intelligence, service orientation, resource management skills, communication skills, and entrepreneurship skills.
Scholarly literature defines such areas where machines may surpass humans as "task encroachment", which presents an issue of growing encroachment of AI and automation
into human work, especially in manual and cognitive tasks. It is
estimated that approximately 40% of all working hours will be affected
by AI models. It has been proposed for humanity to pivot towards roles that require emotional intelligence and interpersonal skills, assumed to be more uniquely human. However, studies show that in some contexts, modern chatbots generate answers that are rated as more empathetic and qualitative than human ones.
Some theories of a post-work society focus on challenging the priority of the work ethic and on the celebration of non-work activities.
Near-term practical proposals closely associated with post-work theory include the implementation of a universal basic incomeand the reduction of the length of a working day and the number of days of a working week.
Increased focus on what post-work society would look like has been
driven by reports such as one in 2018 that states 47% of jobs in the
United States could be automated. Because of increasing automation and the low price of maintaining an
automated workforce compared to one dependent on human labor, it has
been suggested that post-work societies would also be ones of post-scarcity.
According to Nick Bostrom, advanced artificial intelligence has the potential to automate jobs, create abundance, and undermine the purpose of leisure activities such as shopping, gardening, or parenting.
A NASA poster about a fictional Mars tour. Technological advances in space travel is often a theme in utopias.
Technological utopianism, often called techno-utopianism or technoutopianism, is any ideology based on the premise that advances in science and technology could and should bring about a utopia, or at least help to fulfill one or another utopian ideal. A techno-utopia is therefore an ideal society,
in which laws, government, and social conditions are solely operating
for the benefit and well-being of all its citizens, set in the near- or
far-future, as advanced science and technology will allow these ideal living standards to exist; for example, post-scarcity, transformations in human nature, the avoidance or prevention of suffering and even the end of death.
Technological utopianism is often connected with other discourses
presenting technologies as agents of social and cultural change, such as
technological determinism or media imaginaries.
A tech-utopia does not disregard any problems that technology may cause, but strongly believes that technology allows mankind to make social, economic, political, and cultural advancements. Overall, Technological Utopianism views technology's impacts as
extremely positive. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, several
ideologies and movements, such as the cyberdelic counterculture, the Californian Ideology, cyber-utopianism, transhumanism, and singularitarianism, have emerged promoting a form of techno-utopia as a reachable goal. The movement known as effective accelerationism (e/acc) even advocates for "progress at all costs". Cultural critic Imre Szeman argues technological utopianism is an irrational social narrative because there is no evidence to support it. He concludes that it shows the extent to which modern societies place faith in narratives of progress and technology overcoming things, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Marx and Friedrich Engels saw more pain and conflict involved, but agreed about the inevitable end. Marxists argued that the advance of technology laid the groundwork not only for the creation of a new society, with different property relations, but also for the emergence of new human beings reconnected to nature and themselves. At the top of the agenda for empoweredproletarians was "to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible". The 19th and early 20th century Left, from social democrats to communists, were focused on industrialization, economic development and the promotion of reason, science, and the idea of progress.
According to historian Asif Siddiqi, technological utopianism was a "millenarian mantra" in the Soviet Union from its inception. The Bolsheviks
imagined "a world of magnificent factories and mechanized agriculture
that produced all of society's necessities," a new socialist machine
age. Siddiqi writes that "this obsession with the power of science and
technology to remake society was partly rooted in crude Marxism, but
much of it derived from the Bolsheviks' own vision to remake Russia into
a modern state, one which would compare and compete with the leading
capitalist nations in forging a new path to the future." From the 1930s onwards, Soviet technological utopianism embraced a
populist view of technological achievements, which Siddiqi summarizes as
"technology for the masses." Soviet science fiction was heavily focused on future technology, and
often depicted a convergence between technological utopia and socialist
utopia.
Sovietologist Paul Josephson argued that most strains of Soviet
technological utopianism emphasized technology was apolitical, "serving
the profit motive and the industrialist under capitalism, but benefiting
all humanity under socialism." To avoid technological dependence on capitalist states, the Soviet
Union and other socialist governments influenced by its narratives
sought to create domestic technological innovations, supported by
autarkic engineering communities and supply chains.
Some technological utopians promoted eugenics. Holding that in studies of families, such as the Jukes and Kallikaks,
science had proven that many traits such as criminality and alcoholism
were hereditary, many advocated the sterilization of those displaying
negative traits. Forcible sterilization programs were implemented in
several states in the United States. H. G. Wells in works such as The Shape of Things to Come promoted technological utopianism. To many philosophers, the horrors of World War II and the Holocaust, as Theodor Adorno underlined, seemed to shatter the ideal of Condorcet and other thinkers of the Enlightenment, which commonly equated scientific progress with social progress.
From late 20th and early 21st centuries
The Goliath of totalitarianism will be brought down by the David of the microchip.
A movement of techno-utopianism began to flourish again in the dot-com culture of the 1990s, particularly in the West Coast of the United States, especially based around Silicon Valley. The Californian Ideology was a set of beliefs combining bohemian and anti-authoritarian attitudes from the counterculture of the 1960s with techno-utopianism and support for libertarian economic policies. It was reflected in, reported on, and even actively promoted in the pages of Wired magazine, which was founded in San Francisco in 1993 and served for a number years as the "bible" of its adherents.
This form of techno-utopianism reflected a belief that
technological change revolutionizes human affairs, and that digital
technology in particular – of which the Internet
was but a modest harbinger – would increase personal freedom by freeing
the individual from the rigid embrace of bureaucratic big government.
"Self-empowered knowledge workers" would render traditional hierarchies
redundant; digital communications would allow them to escape the modern
city, an "obsolete remnant of the industrial age".
Similar forms of "digital utopianism" has often entered in the
political messages of party and social movements that point to the Web or more broadly to new media as harbingers of political and social change. Its adherents claim it transcended conventional "right/left" distinctions in politics by rendering politics obsolete. However, Western techno-utopianism disproportionately attracted adherents from the libertarian right end of the political spectrum. Western techno-utopians often have a hostility toward government regulation and a belief in the superiority of the free market system. Prominent "oracles" of techno-utopianism included George Gilder and Kevin Kelly, an editor of Wired who also published several books.
During the late 1990s dot-com boom, when the speculative bubble
gave rise to claims that an era of "permanent prosperity" had arrived,
techno-utopianism flourished, typically among the small percentage of
the population who were employees of Internet startups and/or owned large quantities of high-tech stocks. With the subsequent crash,
many of these dot-com techno-utopians had to rein in some of their
beliefs in the face of the clear return of traditional economic reality. According to The Economist, Wikipedia "has its roots in the techno-optimism
that characterised the internet at the end of the 20th century. It held
that ordinary people could use their computers as tools for liberation,
education, and enlightenment."
Nick Bostrom contends that the rise of machine superintelligence carries both existential risks and an extreme potential to improve the future, which might be realized quickly in the event of an intelligence explosion. In Deep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World,
he further explored ideal scenarios where human civilization reaches
technological maturity and solves its diverse coordination problems. He
listed some technologies that are theoretically achievable, such as cognitive enhancement, reversal of aging, self-replicating spacecrafts, arbitrary sensory inputs (taste, sound...), or the precise control of motivation, mood, well-being and personality.
In North Korea, technological utopianism remains one of the key themes of the state's Juche ideology.[9] The pursuit of advanced strategic technologies is promoted as an integral part of autarkic economic development.[9]
North Korean technological utopianism essentially rests on three
narratives: the rejection of consumer society and culture, an emphasis
on heavy industry, and a belief in the ability of the masses of workers
to make great technological achievements under the Workers' Party of Korea. In practice, this has resulted in most of North Korea's technological
resources being utilized for large scale, resource intensive,
infrastructure and military projects, many of which have primarily
symbolic importance.[9]
Domestic innovations in nuclear and space sciences continue to play a
major role in the state's propaganda narratives, which seek to portray
North Korea as a modern regional power.
Principles
Bernard Gendron, a professor of philosophy at the University of
Wisconsin–Milwaukee, defines the four principles of modern technological
utopians in the late 20th and early 21st centuries as follows:
We are presently undergoing a (post-industrial) revolution in technology;
The elimination of economic scarcity will lead to the elimination of every major social evil.
Rushkoff presents us with multiple claims that surround the basic principles of Technological Utopianism:
Technology reflects and encourages the best aspects of human
nature, fostering "communication, collaboration, sharing, helpfulness,
and community".
Technology improves our interpersonal communication, relationships,
and communities. Early Internet users shared their knowledge of the
Internet with others around them.
Technology democratizes society. The expansion of access to
knowledge and skills led to the connection of people and information.
The broadening of freedom of expression created "the online world...in
which we are allowed to voice our own opinions". The reduction of the inequalities of power and wealth meant that
everyone has an equal status on the internet and is allowed to do as
much as the next person.
Unforeseen impacts of technology are positive. As more people
discovered the Internet, they took advantage of being linked to millions
of people, and turned the Internet into a social revolution. The
government released it to the public, and its "social side effect…
[became] its main feature".
Technology increases efficiency and consumer choice.
The creation of the TV remote, video game joystick, and computer mouse
liberated these technologies and allowed users to manipulate and control
them, giving them many more choices.
New technology can solve the problems created by old technology. Social networks and blogs were created out of the collapse of dot.com bubble businesses' attempts to run pyramid schemes on users.
Criticisms
Critics claim that techno-utopianism's identification of social progress with scientific progress is a form of positivism and scientism.
Critics of modern libertarian techno-utopianism point out that it tends
to focus on "government interference" while dismissing the positive
effects of the regulation of business. They also point out that it has little to say about the environmental impact of technology and that its ideas have little relevance for much of the rest of the world that are still relatively quite poor (see global digital divide). In his 2010 study System Failure: Oil, Futurity, and the Anticipation of Disaster, Canada Research Chairholder in cultural studies Imre Szeman
argues that technological utopianism is one of the social narratives
that prevent people from acting on the knowledge they have concerning
the effects of oil on the environment.
Another concern is the amount of reliance society may place on their technologies in these techno-utopia settings. For example, In a controversial 2011 article "Techno-Utopians are Mugged by Reality", L. Gordon Crovitz of The Wall Street Journal explored the concept of the violation of free speech by shutting down social media to stop violence. As a result of a wave of British cities being looted, former British Prime Minister David Cameron
argued that the government should have the ability to shut down social
media during crime sprees so that the situation could be contained. A
poll was conducted to see if Twitter users would prefer to let the
service be closed temporarily or keep it open so they could chat about
the famous television show The X-Factor. The end report showed that every respondent opted for The X-Factor
discussion. Clovitz contends that the negative social effect of
technological utopia is that society is so addicted to technology that
humanity simply cannot be parted from it even for the greater good.
While many techno-utopians would like to believe that digital technology
is for the greater good, he says it can also be used negatively to
bring harm to the public. These two criticisms are sometimes referred to as a technological anti-utopian view or a techno-dystopia.
According to Ronald Adler and Russell Proctor, mediated
communication such as phone calls, instant messaging and text messaging
are steps towards a utopian world in which one can easily contact
another regardless of time or location. However, mediated communication
removes many aspects that are helpful in transferring messages. As it
stands as of 2022, most text, email, and instant messages offer fewer
nonverbal cues about the speaker's feelings than do face-to-face
encounters. This makes it so that mediated communication can easily be misconstrued
and the intended message is not properly conveyed. With the absence of
tone, body language, and environmental context, the chance of a
misunderstanding is much higher, rendering the communication
ineffective. In fact, mediated technology can be seen from a dystopian
view because it can be detrimental to effective interpersonal
communication. These criticisms would only apply to messages that are
prone to misinterpretation as not every text based communication
requires contextual cues. The limitations of lacking tone and body
language in text-based communication could potentially be mitigated by video and augmented reality versions of digital communication technologies.
In 2019, philosopher Nick Bostrom introduced the notion of a vulnerable world,
"one in which there is some level of technological development at which
civilization almost certainly gets devastated by default", citing the
risks of a pandemic caused by a DIY biohacker, or an arms race triggered by the development of novel armaments. He writes that "Technology policy should not unquestioningly assume
that all technological progress is beneficial, or that complete
scientific openness is always best, or that the world has the capacity
to manage any potential downside of a technology after it is invented."
A communications artifact (Rugby Aerial Tuning Inductor) at the Science Museum, London, UK
Science and technology studies (STS) or science, technology, and society is an interdisciplinary field that examines the creation, development, and consequences of science and technology in their historical, cultural, and social contexts.
History
Like most interdisciplinary
fields of study, STS emerged from the confluence of disciplines and
disciplinary subfields, all of which had developed an
interest—typically, during the 1960s or 1970s—in viewing science and
technology as socially embedded enterprises. The key disciplinary components of STS took shape independently,
beginning in the 1960s, and developed in isolation from each other well
into the 1980s, although Ludwik Fleck's (1935) monograph Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact anticipated many of STS's key themes. In the 1970s Elting E. Morison founded the STS program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which served as a model. By 2011, 111 STS research centers and academic programs were counted worldwide.
Important key points
History of technology, that examines technology in its social and historical context. Starting in the 1960s, some historians questioned technological determinism,
a doctrine that can induce public passivity to technologic and
scientific "natural" development. At the same time, some historians
began to develop similarly contextual approaches to the history of medicine. Notable historians of medicine who approach the field from a science and technology studies perspective include Robert N. Proctor.
Science, technology, and society.
In the mid-to-late-1960s, student and faculty social movements in the
U.S., UK, and European universities helped to launch a range of new
interdisciplinary fields (such as women's studies)
that were seen to address relevant topics that the traditional
curriculum ignored. One such development was the rise of "science,
technology, and society" programs, which are also—confusingly—known by
the STS acronym. Drawn from a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, history, political science, and sociology, scholars in these programs created undergraduate curricula devoted to exploring the issues raised by science and technology. Feminist scholars in this and other emerging STS areas addressed themselves to the exclusion of women from science and engineering, focusing instead on critiquing gendered power dynamics in prior STS research.
Science, engineering, and public policy studies
emerged in the 1970s from the same concerns that motivated the founders
of the science, technology, and society movement: A sense that science
and technology were developing in ways that were increasingly at odds
with the public's best interests. The science, technology, and society movement tried to humanize those
who would make tomorrow's science and technology, but this discipline
took a different approach: It would train students with the professional
skills needed to become players in science and technology policy. Some
programs came to emphasize quantitative methodologies, and most of these
were eventually absorbed into systems engineering.
Others emphasized sociological and qualitative approaches, and found
that their closest kin could be found among scholars in science,
technology, and society departments.
During the 1970s and 1980s, universities in the US, UK, and Europe
began drawing these various components together in new,
interdisciplinary programs. For example, in the 1970s, Cornell University developed a new program that united science studies
and policy-oriented scholars with historians and philosophers of
science and technology. Each of these programs developed unique
identities due to variations in the components that were drawn together,
as well as their location within the various universities. For example,
the University of Virginia's STS program united scholars drawn from a
variety of fields (with particular strength in the history of
technology); however, the program's teaching responsibilities—it is
located within an engineering school and teaches ethics to undergraduate
engineering students—means that all of its faculty share a strong
interest in engineering ethics.
A decisive moment in the development of STS was the mid-1980s
addition of technology studies to the range of interests reflected in
science. During that decade, two works appeared en seriatim that signaled what Steve Woolgar was to call the "turn to technology". In a seminal 1984 article, Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker
showed how the sociology of technology could proceed along the
theoretical and methodological lines established by the sociology of
scientific knowledge. This was the intellectual foundation of the field they called the social construction of technology. Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman primed the pump by publishing a collection of articles attesting to the influence of society on technological design (Social Shaping of Technology, 1985). Social science research continued to interrogate STS research from this
point onward as researchers moved from post-modern to post-structural
frameworks of thought, Bijker and Pinch contributing to SCOT knowledge
and Wajcman providing boundary work through a feminist lens.
The "turn to technology" helped to cement an already growing
awareness of underlying unity among the various emerging STS programs.
More recently, there has been an associated turn to ecology, nature, and
materiality in general, whereby the socio-technical and
natural/material co-produce each other. This is especially evident in
work in STS analyses of biomedicine (such as Carl May and Annemarie Mol) and ecological interventions (such as Bruno Latour, Sheila Jasanoff, Matthias Gross, Sara B. Pritchard, and S. Lochlann Jain). Ruth Schwartz Cowan has studied how gender and technology co-produce each other.
Social constructions are human-created ideas, objects, or events created by a series of choices and interactions. These interactions have consequences that change the perception that
different groups of people have on these constructs. Some examples of
social construction include class, race, money, and citizenship.
The following also alludes to the notion that not everything is
set, a circumstance or result could potentially be one way or the other.
According to the article "What is Social Construction?" by Ian Hacking,
"Social construction work is critical of the status quo. Social
constructionists about X tend to hold that:
X need not have existed, or need not be at all as it is. X, or X
as it is at present, is not determined by the nature of things; it is
not inevitable
Very often they go further, and urge that:
X is quite as bad as it is.
We would be much better off if X were done away with, or at least radically transformed."
In the past, there have been viewpoints that were widely regarded as
fact until being called to question due to the introduction of new
knowledge. Such viewpoints include the past concept of a correlation
between intelligence and the nature of a human's ethnicity or race (X
may not be at all as it is).
An example of the evolution and interaction of various social
constructions within science and technology can be found in the
development of both the high-wheel bicycle, or velocipede, and then of the bicycle.
The velocipede was widely used in the latter half of the 19th century.
In the latter half of the 19th century, a social need was first
recognized for a more efficient and rapid means of transportation.
Consequently, the velocipede was first developed, which was able to
reach higher translational velocities than the smaller non-geared
bicycles of the day, by replacing the front wheel with a larger radius
wheel. One notable trade-off was a certain decreased stability leading
to a greater risk of falling. This trade-off resulted in many riders
getting into accidents by losing balance while riding the bicycle or
being thrown over the handlebars.
The first "social construction" or progress of the velocipede
caused the need for a newer "social construction" to be recognized and
developed into a safer bicycle design. Consequently, the velocipede was
then developed into what is now commonly known as the "bicycle"
to fit within society's newer "social construction," the newer
standards of higher vehicle safety. Thus the popularity of the modern
geared bicycle design came as a response to the first social
construction, the original need for greater speed, which had caused the
high-wheel bicycle to be designed in the first place. The popularity of
the modern geared bicycle design ultimately ended the widespread use of
the velocipede itself, as eventually it was found to best accomplish
the social needs/social constructions of both greater speed and of
greater safety.
With methodology from actor-network theory (ANT),
feminist STS theorists built upon SCOT's theory of co-construction to
explore the relationship between gender and technology, proposing one
cannot exist separately from the other. This approach suggests the material and social are not separate,
reality being produced through interactions and studied through
representations of those realities. Building on Steve Woolgar's boundary work on user configuration, feminist critiques shifted the focus away from users of technology and
science towards whether technology and science represent a fixed,
unified reality. According to this approach, identity could no longer be treated as
causal in human interactions with technology as it cannot exist prior to
that interaction, feminist STS researchers proposing a
"double-constructivist" approach to account for this contradiction. John Law
credits feminist STS scholars for contributing material-semiotic
approaches to the broader discipline of STS, stating that research not
only attempts to describe reality, but enacts it through the research
process.
Sociotechnical imaginaries (STIs)
Sociotechnical imaginaries are what certain communities, societies,
and nations envision as achievable through the combination of scientific
innovation and social changes. These visions can be based on what is
possible to achieve for a certain society, and can also show what a
certain state or nation desires. STIs are often bound with ideologies and ambitions of those who create
and circulate them. Sociotechnical imaginaries can be created by states
and policymakers, smaller groups within society, or can be a result of
the interaction of both.
The term was coined in 2009 by Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Hyun Kim who compared and contrasted sociotechnical imaginaries of nuclear energy in the USA with those of South Korea over the second half of the 20th century. Jasanoff and Kim analyzed the discourse of government representatives,
national policies, and civil society organizations, looked at the
technological and infrastructural developments, and social protests, and
conducted interviews with experts. They concluded that in South Korea
nuclear energy was imagined mostly as the means of national development,
while in the US the dominant sociotechnical imaginary framed nuclear
energy as risky and in need of containment.
The concept has been applied to several objects of study including biomedical research,nanotechnology development and energy systems and climate change. Within energy systems, research has focused on nuclear energy, fossil fuels, renewables as well as broader topics of energy transitions, and the development of new technologies to address climate change.
Social technical systems are an interplay between technologies and humans, this is clearly expressed in the sociotechnical systems theory.
To expound on this interplay, humans fulfill and define tasks, then
humans in companies use IT and IT supports people, and finally, IT
processes tasks and new IT generates new tasks. This IT redefines work
practices. This is what we call the sociotechnical systems. In socio-technical systems, there are two principles to internalize,
that is joint optimization and complementarity. Joint optimization puts
an emphasis on developing both systems in parallel and it is only in the
interaction of both systems that the success of an organization arises. The principle of complementarity means that both systems have to be optimized. If you focus on one system and have bias over the other it will likely
lead to the failure of the organization or jeopardize the success of a
system. Although the above socio-technical system theory is focused on
an organization, it is undoubtedly imperative to correlate this theory
and its principles to society today and in science and technology
studies. Understanding technology in the context of national development: critical reflections
discusses how governance frameworks, digital infrastructure, and
institutional capacity influence the societal outcomes of technology
adoption.
According to Barley and Bailey, there is a tendency for AI
designers and scholars of design studies to privilege the technical over
the social, focusing more on taking "humans out of the loop" paradigm
than the "augmented intelligence" paradigm.
Recent work on artificial intelligence considers large sociotechnical systems, such as social networks and online marketplaces, as agents whose behavior can be purposeful and adaptive. The behavior of recommender systems
can therefore be analyzed in the language and framework of
sociotechnical systems, leading also to a new perspective for their
legal regulation.
Technoscience is a subset of Science, Technology, and Society studies
that focuses on the inseparable connection between science and
technology. It states that fields are linked and grow together, and
scientific knowledge requires an infrastructure of technology in order
to remain stationary or move forward. Both technological development and
scientific discovery drive one another towards more advancement.
Technoscience excels at shaping human thoughts and behavior by opening
up new possibilities that gradually or quickly come to be perceived as
necessities.
Technosocial
"Technological action is a social process." Social factors and technology are intertwined so that they are
dependent upon each other. This includes the aspect that social,
political, and economic factors are inherent in technology and that
social structure influences what technologies are pursued. In other
words, "technoscientific phenomena combined inextricably with
social/political/economic/psychological phenomena, so 'technology'
includes a spectrum of artifacts, techniques, organizations, and
systems." Winner expands on this idea by saying "in the late twentieth-century
technology and society, technology and culture, technology and politics
are by no means separate."
Examples
Ford Pinto – Ford Motor Company
sold and produced the Pinto during the 1970s. A flaw in the automobile
design of the rear gas tank caused a fiery explosion upon impact. The
exploding fuel tank killed and injured hundreds of people. Internal
documents of test results proved Ford CEO Lee Iacocca
and engineers were aware of the flaw. The company decided to ignore
improving its technology because of profit-driven motives, strict
internal control, and competition from foreign competitors such as Volkswagen.
Ford Motor Company conducted a cost-benefit analysis to determine if
altering the Ford Pinto model was feasible. An analysis conducted by
Ford employees argued against a new design because of increased cost.
Employees were also under tight control by the CEO who rushed the Pinto
through production lines to increase profits. Ford finally changed after
public scrutiny. Safety organizations later influenced this technology
by requiring stricter safety standards for motor vehicles.
DDT/toxins – DDT was a common and highly effective insecticide used during the
1940s until its ban in the early 1970s. It was utilized during World War
2 to combat insect-borne human diseases that plagued military members
and civilian populations. People and companies soon realized other
benefits of DDT for agricultural purposes. Rachel Carson became worried about widespread use on public health and the environment. Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring
left an imprint on the industry by claiming the linkage of DDT to many
serious illnesses such as cancer. Carson's book drew criticism from
chemical companies who felt their reputation and business threatened by
such claims. DDT was eventually banned by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after a long and arduous process
of research on the chemical substance. The main cause for the removal of
DDT was the public deciding that any benefits were outweighed by the
potential health risk.
Autopilots/computer-aided tasks (CATs) – From a security point of view the effects of making a task more
computer-driven is in the favor of technological advance because there
is less reaction time required and computational error than a human
pilot. Due to reduced error and reaction times flights on average, using
autopilot, have been shown to be safer. Thus technology has a direct
impact on people by increasing their safety, and society affects
technology because people want to be safer so they are constantly trying
to improve the autopilot systems.
Cell phones – Cell phone technology emerged in the early 1920s after advancements
were made in radio technology. Engineers at Bell Laboratories, the
research, and development division of AT&T discovered that cell
towers can transmit and receive signals to and from many directions. The
discovery by Bell Labs revolutionized the capabilities and outcomes of
cellular technology. Technology only improved once mobile phone users
could communicate outside of a designated area. First-generation mobile
phones were first created and sold by Motorola.
Their phone was only intended for use in cars. Second-generation mobile
phone capabilities continued to improve because of the switch to
digital. Phones were faster which enhanced the communication
capabilities of customers. They were also sleeker and weighed less than
bulky first-generation technology. Technological advances boosted
customer satisfaction and broadened cell phone companies' customer base.
Third-generation technology changed the way people interact with
others. Now customers had access to Wi-Fi, texting and other
applications. Mobile phones are now entering into the fourth generation.
Cellular and mobile phones revolutionized the way people socialize and
communicate in order to establish a modern social structure. People have
affected the development of this technology by demanding features such
as larger screens, touch capabilities, and internet accessibility.
Internet – The internet arose because of extensive research on ARPANET between
various universities, corporations, and ARPA (Advanced Research Project
Agency), an agency of the Department of Defense. Scientists theorized a
network of computers connected to each other. Computing capabilities
contributed to developments and the creation of the modern-day computer
or laptop. The internet has become a normal part of life and business,
to such a degree that the United Nations views it as a basic human
right. The internet is becoming larger, one way is that more things are
being moved into the digital world due to demand, for example, online
banking. It has drastically changed the way most people go about daily
habits.
Deliberative democracy
Deliberative democracy is a reform of representative or direct
democracies which mandates discussion and debate of popular topics
which affect society. Deliberative democracy is a tool for making
decisions. Deliberative democracy can be traced back all the way to Aristotle's writings. More recently, the term was coined by Joseph Bessette in his 1980 work Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government, where he uses the idea in opposition to the elitist interpretations of the United States Constitution with emphasis on public discussion.
Deliberative democracy can lead to more legitimate, credible, and
trustworthy outcomes. Deliberative democracy allows for "a wider range
of public knowledge", and it has been argued that this can lead to "more
socially intelligent and robust" science. One major shortcoming of
deliberative democracy is that many models insufficiently ensure
critical interaction.
According to Ryfe, there are five mechanisms that stand out as critical to the successful design of deliberative democracy:
Rules of equality, civility, and inclusivity may prompt deliberation even when our first impulse is to avoid it.
Stories anchor reality by organizing experience and instilling a
normative commitment to civic identities and values, and function as a
medium for framing discussions.
Leadership provides important cues to individuals in deliberative
settings and can keep groups on a deliberative track when their members
slip into routine and habit.
Individuals are more likely to sustain deliberative reasoning when they have a stake in the outcomes.
Apprenticeship teaches citizens to deliberate well. We might do well
to imagine education as a form of apprenticeship learning, in which
individuals learn to deliberate by doing it in concert with others more
skilled in the activity.
Importance
Recently, there has been a movement towards greater transparency in the fields of
policy and technology. Jasanoff comes to the conclusion that there is
no longer a question of if there needs to be increased public
participation in making decisions about science and technology, but now
there need to be ways to make a more meaningful conversation between the
public and those developing the technology.
In practice
Bruce Ackerman and James S. Fishkin
offered an example of a reform in their paper "Deliberation Day." The
deliberation is to enhance public understanding of popular, complex and
controversial issues through devices such as Fishkin's deliberative polling, though implementation of these reforms is unlikely in a large
government such as that of the United States. However, things similar to
this have been implemented in small, local governments like New England towns and villages. New England town hall meetings are a good example of deliberative democracy in a realistic setting.
An ideal deliberative democracy balances the voice and influence
of all participants. While the main aim is to reach consensus,
deliberative democracy should encourage the voices of those with
opposing viewpoints, concerns due to uncertainties, and questions about
assumptions made by other participants. It should take its time and ensure that those participating understand
the topics on which they debate. Independent managers of debates should
also have a substantial grasp of the concepts discussed, but must
"[remain] independent and impartial as to the outcomes of the process."
In 1968, Garrett Hardin
popularised the phrase "tragedy of the commons." It is an economic
theory where rational people act against the best interest of the group
by consuming a common resource. Since then, the tragedy of the commons
has been used to symbolize the degradation of the environment whenever
many individuals use a common resource. Although Garrett Hardin was not
an STS scholar, the concept of the tragedy of the commons still applies
to science, technology, and society.
In a contemporary setting, the Internet acts as an example of the
tragedy of the commons through the exploitation of digital resources
and private information. Data and internet passwords can be stolen much
more easily than physical documents. Virtual spying is almost free
compared to the costs of physical spying. Additionally, net neutrality
can be seen as an example of tragedy of the commons in an STS context.
The movement for net neutrality argues that the Internet should not be a
resource that is dominated by one particular group, specifically those
with more money to spend on Internet access.
A counterexample to the tragedy of the commons is offered by
Andrew Kahrl. Privatization can be a way to deal with the tragedy of the
commons. However, Kahrl suggests that the privatization of beaches on Long Island,
in an attempt to combat the overuse of Long Island beaches, made the
residents of Long Island more susceptible to flood damage from Hurricane Sandy.
The privatization of these beaches took away from the protection
offered by the natural landscape. Tidal lands that offer natural
protection were drained and developed. This attempt to combat the
tragedy of the commons by privatization was counter-productive.
Privatization actually destroyed the public good of natural protection
from the landscape.
Alternative modernity
Alternative modernityis a conceptual tool conventionally used to represent the state of
present western society. Modernity represents the political and social
structures of society, the sum of interpersonal discourse, and
ultimately a snapshot of society's direction at a point in time.
Unfortunately, conventional modernity is incapable of modeling
alternative directions for further growth within our society. Also, this
concept is ineffective at analyzing similar but unique modern societies
such as those found in the diverse cultures of the developing world.
Problems can be summarized into two elements: inward failure to analyze
the growth potentials of a given society, and outward failure to model
different cultures and social structures and predict their growth
potentials.
Previously, modernity carried a connotation of the current state
of being modern, and its evolution through European colonialism. The
process of becoming "modern" is believed to occur in a linear,
pre-determined way, and is seen by Philip Brey as a way to interpret and
evaluate social and cultural formations. This thought ties in with modernization theory, the thought that societies progress from "pre-modern" to "modern" societies.
Within the field of science and technology, there are two main
lenses with which to view modernity. The first is as a way for society
to quantify what it wants to move towards. In effect, we can discuss the
notion of "alternative modernity" (as described by Andrew Feenberg) and
which of these we would like to move towards. Alternatively, modernity
can be used to analyze the differences in interactions between cultures
and individuals. From this perspective, alternative modernities exist
simultaneously, based on differing cultural and societal expectations of
how a society (or an individual within society) should function.
Because of different types of interactions across different cultures,
each culture will have a different modernity.
The pace of innovation is the speed at which technological innovation
or advancement is occurring, with the most apparent instances being too
slow or too rapid. Both these rates of innovation are extreme and
therefore have effects on the people that get to use this technology.
"No innovation without representation" is a democratic ideal of
ensuring that everyone involved gets a chance to be represented fairly
in technological developments.
Langdon Winner
states that groups and social interests likely to be affected by a
particular kind of technological change ought to be represented at an
early stage in defining exactly what that technology will be. It is the
idea that relevant parties have a say in technological developments and
are not left in the dark.
This ideal does not require the public to become experts on the
topics of science and engineering, it only asks that the opinions and
ideas be heard before making drastic decisions, as talked about by Steven L. Goldman.
Legacy thinking
Legacy thinking is defined as an inherited method of thinking imposed
from an external source without objection by the individual because it
is already widely accepted by society.
Legacy thinking can impair the ability to drive technology for
the betterment of society by blinding people to innovations that do not
fit into their accepted model of how society works. By accepting ideas
without questioning them, people often see all solutions that contradict
these accepted ideas as impossible or impractical. Legacy thinking
tends to advantage the wealthy, who have the means to project their
ideas on the public. It may be used by the wealthy as a vehicle to
drive technology in their favor rather than for the greater good.
Examining the role of citizen participation and representation in
politics provides an excellent example of legacy thinking in society.
The belief that one can spend money freely to gain influence has been
popularized, leading to public acceptance of corporate lobbying.
As a result, a self-established role in politics has been cemented
where the public does not exercise the power ensured to them by the
Constitution to the fullest extent. This can become a barrier to
political progress as corporations who have the capital to spend have
the potential to wield great influence over policy. Legacy thinking, however, keeps the population from acting to change
this, despite polls from Harris Interactive that report over 80% of
Americans to feel that big business holds too much power in government. Therefore, Americans are beginning to try to steer away from this line
of thought, rejecting legacy thinking, and demanding less corporate, and
more public, participation in political decision-making.
Additionally, an examination of net neutrality functions as a separate example of legacy thinking. Starting with dial-up, the internet has always been viewed as a private luxury good.Internet today is a vital part of modern-day society members. They use it in and out of life every day. Corporations are able to mislabel and greatly overcharge for their
internet resources. Since the American public is so dependent upon the
internet there is little for them to do. Legacy thinking has kept this
pattern on track despite growing movements arguing that the internet
should be considered a utility. Legacy thinking prevents progress
because it was widely accepted by others before us through advertising
that the internet is a luxury and not a utility. Due to pressure from
grassroots movements the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has redefined the requirements for broadband and internet in general as a utility. Now AT&T and other major internet providers are lobbying against
this action and are in large able to delay the onset of this movement
due to legacy thinking's grip on American culture and politics.
For example, those who cannot overcome the barrier of legacy thinking may not consider the privatization of clean drinking water as an issue. This is partial because access to water has become such a given fact of
the matter to them. For a person living in such circumstances, it may
be widely accepted to not concern themselves with drinking water because
they have not needed to be concerned with it in the past. Additionally,
a person living within an area that does not need to worry about their
water supply or the sanitation of their water supply is less likely to
be concerned with the privatization of water.
This notion can be examined through the thought experiment of "veil of ignorance". Legacy thinking causes people to be particularly ignorant about the
implications behind the "you get what you pay for" mentality applied to a
life necessity. By utilizing the "veil of ignorance", one can overcome
the barrier of legacy thinking as it requires a person to imagine that
they are unaware of their own circumstances, allowing them to free
themselves from externally imposed thoughts or widely accepted ideas.
Related concepts
Technoscience – The perception that science and technology are intertwined and depend on each other.
Technosociety – An industrially developed society with a reliance on technology.
Technological utopianism – A positive outlook on the effect
technology has on social welfare. Includes the perception that
technology will one day enable society to reach a utopian state.
Technosocial systems – people and technologies that combine to work as heterogeneous but functional wholes.
Critical Technical Practice – the practice of technological creation while simultaneously
critiquing and maintaining awareness of the inherent biases and value
systems which become embedded in those technologies.
Classifications
Technological optimism – The opinion that technology has positive effects on society and should be used in order to improve the welfare of people.
Technological pessimism – The opinion that technology has negative effects on society and should be discouraged from use.
Technological neutrality – "maintains that a given technology has no systematic effects on
society: individuals are perceived as ultimately responsible, for better
or worse, because technologies are merely tools people use for their
own ends."
Technological determinism – "maintains that technologies are understood as simply and directly causing particular societal outcomes."
Scientism – The belief in the total separation of facts and values.
Technological progressivism – technology is a means to an end itself and an inherently positive pursuit.
Academic programs
STS is taught in several countries. According to the STS wiki, STS
programs can be found in twenty countries, including 45 programs in the
United States, three programs in India, and eleven programs in the UK. STS programs can be found in Canada, Germany, Israel, Malaysia, and Taiwan. Some examples of institutions offering STS programs are Stanford University, University College London, Harvard University, the University of Oxford, Mines ParisTech, Bar-Ilan University, and York University. In Europe the European Inter-University Association on Society, Science and Technology (ESST) offers an MA degree in STS through study programs and student exchanges with over a dozen specializations.
Professional associations
The field has professional associations in regions and countries around the world.
In Europe
In Europe, the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology
(EASST) was founded in 1981 to "improve scholarly communication and
exchange in the field", "increase the visibility of the subject to
policy-makers and to the general public", and "stimulate and support
teaching on the subject at all levels". Similarly, the European Inter-University Association on Society, Science and Technology (ESST) researches and studies science and technology in society, in both historical and contemporary perspectives.
In European nation states and language communities, a range of STS
associations exist, including in the UK, Spain, Germany, Austria,
Turkey. In some states, several formal associations exist.
For instance, in 2015, the UK-based Association for Studies in
Innovation, Science and Technology (AsSIST-UK) was established, chaired
by Andrew Webster (York) and Robin Williams (Edinburgh) principally to
foster stronger integration between the innovation studies and STS
fields. In 2021 it had a membership of 380. It holds annual conferences and has built strong links to policy practitioners in Westminster.
In Italy, STS Italia – The Italian Society for Social Studies of
Science and Technology was founded in 2005. Its mission is "to build up
an Italian network of researchers oriented to study Science and
Technology starting from the social dynamics which characterize and
interweave science and technology themselves".
In Sweden, the Swedish Network for Science and Technology Studies
was founded in 2006, at the first national Swedish Conference for STS, STS Dagarna.
In Germany several STS associations exist, including the Gesellschaft für Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung, founded in 1987 or the stsing network, labelled "Doing Science and Technology Studies in and through Germany", founded 2020, an early career research network called INSIST and various STS-related
sub-groups of the larger disciplinary associations (like sociology).
In Asia
The Asia Pacific Science Technology & Society Network
(APSTSN) primarily had members from Australasia, Southeast and East Asia
and Oceania. APSTSN is not currently active.
In Japan, the Japanese Society for Science and Technology Studies (JSSTS) was founded in 2001.
The Australasian Science and Technology Studies Network (AusSTS) was founded in 2017 based at Deakin University. AusSTS now has several nodes in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand and holds an annual workshop.
Founded in 1975, the Society for Social Studies of Science initially provided scholarly communication facilities, including a journal (Science, Technology, and Human Values)
and annual meetings that were mainly attended by science studies
scholars. The society has since grown into the most important
professional association of science and technology studies scholars
worldwide. The Society for Social Studies of Science members also
include government and industry officials concerned with research and
development as well as science and technology policy; scientists and
engineers who wish to better understand the social embeddedness of their
professional practice; and citizens concerned about the impact of
science and technology in their lives.
Founded in 1958, the Society for the History of Technology
initially attracted members from the history profession who had
interests in the contextual history of technology. After the "turn to
technology" in the mid-1980s, the society's well-regarded journal (Technology and Culture) and its annual meetings began to attract considerable interest from non-historians with technology studies interests.
.jpg)
