מדע טכנולוגיה וחברה

שם: מדע טכנולוגיה וחברה
שם המרצה: דר' עידו הרטוגזון

 

 

1 STS - מהפכה הטורפת את בניה?  

 

2 מדע בחברה 

  1. Winston Churchill, “Fifty Years Hence,” Macleans, Nov, 1931
  2. “Futurama at the 1939 NY Worlds Fair” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sClZqfnWqmc)
  3. Vaneever Bush, “Science: The Endless Frontier,” July, 1945
  4. Humanist Manifestos
  5. CP Snow, “The Two Cultures,” October, 1956
  6. Norman Borlaug, “The Green Revolution, Peace and Humanity” (Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech), December, 1970

 

  1. Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, June, 1962
  2. Lynn White, “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis”
  3. Neil Postman, “Scientism”, in Technopoly
  4. Theodore Kaczynski, Unabomber Manifesto, June, 1995
  5. Robert Rennebohm, MD, “An Open Letter to Parents and Pediatricians Regarding COVID Vaccination”

 

3 חברה במדע: למדע יש סוציולוגיה? 

Robert Merton, “The Protestant Spur to Science,” from  Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth-Century England, New York, Howard Fertig, 1970. (Reprinted in Robert K. Merton, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago, University of 

Chicago Press, 1973, pp. 228-253.)

 

Robert K. Merton (1973) ‘The Normative Structure of Science’, in Merton, The Sociology of Science  (Chicago:  University of Chicago Press), pp. 267-78.  

 

**Boris Hessen, "The Social and Economic Roots of Newton's Principia," in N. Bukharin et al (eds) Science a the Cross Roads: Papers presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology held in London from Jun 19th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the USSR, Kniga, London, pp. 1-62.


 

4 חברה במדע: המדע בפועל 

Bruno Latour & Steve Woolgar (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, 2nd edition (Princeton University Press [Sage, 1979]). Chapters 1 & 6, pp. 15-41 & 235-257.

 

**Karin Knorr-Cetina (2011), “Laboratory Studies: The Cultural Approach to the Study of Science,” in Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Peterson & Trevor Pinch (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Sage.

 

**Karin Knorr-Cetina (1983) 'The ethnographic study of scientific work:  Towards a constructivist sociology of science', in K. Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay (ed.), Science Observed (London: Sage), 115-40.

 

**Pierre Boudieu, “The Specificity of the Scientific Field,” in Mario Biagioli, The Science Studies Reader, New York, Routledge, 1999, pp. 31-50.
 

5 חברה במדע: ביקורות פמיניסטיות של המדע 

 

Evelyn Fox Keller, “The Gender/Science System:  Or, Is Sex to Gender as Nature is to Science?” (orig. 1987), in Biagioli, The Science Studies Reader, pp. 234-242.

 

Sandra Harding (2001)  “Feminist Standpoint Epistemology” (orig. 1991), in Muriel Lederman and Ingrid Bartsch (eds.), The Gender and Science Reader, pp.145-68. 

 

Evelyn Fox Keller, “Feminism, Science & Democracy,” Democracy, February, 1983, pp. 50-58. 

 

Donna Haraway (1988), “Situated Knowledges:  The Science Question in 

Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective,” Feminist Studies 14(3): 575-99. reprinted in Haraway (1991), Simians, Cyborgs, and Women, pp.183-203; and in Biagioli (1999), The Science Studies Reader, pp. 172-88.

 

Sergio Sismondo, ‘The Scientific Domains of Feminist Standpoints’, Perspectives on Science 3 (1995), pp. 49-65.

 

Keller, Evelyn Fox. “The Origin, History, and Politics of the Subject Called ‘Gender and Science’: A First Person Account.” In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies Vol. II, 80–94. Sage Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995. 

 

Judy Wajcman (1995) ‘Feminist Theories of Technology’, in Sheila

 Jasanoff et.al., (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies

 (Sage, 1995): 189-204. (Blackboard) [read]


 

Evelyn Fox Keller, “Gender and Science: Origin, History, and Politics,” Osiris 10, no. 1 (January 1995): 26–38, https://doi.org/10.1086/368741. 

 

Harding, Sandra. 1991. What is feminist epistemology. In Whose Knowledge?

Whose Science? Thinking from Women’s Lives. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

 

Haraway, Donna. 1991. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge. pp. 183-202.

 

Sismondo, Sergio. 1995. The scientific domains of feminist standpoints.

Perspectives on Science 3: 49-65.

 

Barad, Karen. 1999. Agential realism: Feminist interventions in understanding

scientific practices. In The Science Studies Reader, ed. M. Biagioli. London:

Routledge, 1999. pp. 1-11.


 

(6) טכנולוגיה בחברה: האם לארטיפקטים יש פוליטיקה? 

Langdon Winner, “Do Artifacts Have Politics,” in The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1986, pp. 19-39.

 

Donald MacKenzie, "Marx and the Machine" in Knowing Machines: Essays on Technical Change, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1998, pp. 23-48.

 

Wiebe E. Bijker, “Dikes and Dams, Thick with Politics,” Isis, Vol. 98, No. 1 (March 2007), pp. 109-123.

 

Sally Wyatt, “Technological Determinism is Dead; Long Live Technological Determinism,” in Hackett, Amsterdamska, Lynch and Wajcman, Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, MIT Press, 2008, pp. 165-180.

 

**“Langdon Winner, “Technologies as  a Form of Life” Reprinted in David M. Kaplan, Readings in Philosophy of Technology, Rowman and Littlefield, 2004, pp. 103-114.

 

**“Joerges, Bernward, "Do Poltics Have Artifacts?" Social Studies of Science, Vol. 23, Number 3, June, 1999, pp. 411-431.

 

**“Woolgar, Steve & Cooper, Geoff,  "Do Artifacts Have Ambivalence: Moses' Bridges, Winner's Bridges & Urban Myths in ST&S",  Social Studies of Science, Vol. 23, Number 3, June 1999, pp. 433-449.

 

**Barry Schwartz, Richard Schuldenfrei & Hugh Lacey, “Operant Psychology as Factory Psychology", Behaviorism 6 (1979): 229-254


 

7 טכנולוגיה בחברה: המדיום הוא המסר?

מרשל מקלואן, להבין את המדיה: שלוחות האדם, בבל, תל אביב, 2005, חלק א' 

 

Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society (New York: Vintage Books, 1967).


 

8  טכנולוגיה בחברה: ההבניה החברתית של הטכנולוגיה? (11 דצמבר)

Trevor J. Pinch, Wiebe E. Bijker, “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other,”  Social Studies of Science, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Aug., 1984), pp. 399-441

 

Wiebe E.Bijker,  “Safety Bicycle,” in On Bikes, Bakelites and Bulbs: Towards a Theory of Socio-Technical Change, Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press., 1995, pp. 19-100.

 

Michel Callon, “Society in the Making: The Study of Technology as a Tool for Sociological Analysis,” in Bijker, Hughes and Pinch, The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, MIT Press, 2012, pp. 77-98.

 

9 תאוריית השחקן-רשת 

Michel Callon, "Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation - Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St-Brieuc Bay," Sociological Review Monograph, 1986, 196-233.

Bruno Latour, Reassembling the Social   (Excerpts) 

Latour, Bruno. 1983. Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world. In Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, ed. K.D. Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay. London: Sage. pp.141-170.

John Law. 1986. On the methods of long-distance control: Vessels, navigation and the Portuguese route to India. In Power, Action and Belief. pp. 234-263 

 

Pickering, Andrew. 1993. The mangle of practice: Agency and emergence in the sociology of science. American Journal of Sociology 99: 559-589.

 

Michel Callon and Bruno Latour (1992) ‘Don't throw the baby out with the

 Bath school!  A reply to Collins and Yearley', in A. Pickering (ed.), Science

 as Practice and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 343

-68.

 

David Bloor (1999) ‘Anti-Latour’; Bruno Latour (1999) ‘For David Bloor… 

and Beyond’; Bloor, ‘Reply to Bruno Latour,’ Studies in History and

Philosophy of Science 30A: 81-136. (Blackboard)


 

10 קופרודוקציה ואימג'ינרים סוציוטכניים

Sheila Jasanoff, “Ordering Knowledge, Ordering Society,” in States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and the Social Order, Routledge, 2004

 

Sheila Jasanoff, Sang-Hyun Kim, Stefan Sperling, “Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Science and Technology Policy: A Cross-National Comparison”, Proposal to the National Science Foundation. https://stsprogram.org/admin/files/imaginaries/NSF-imaginaries-proposal.pdf

 

Sheila Jasanoff, “A New Climate for Society,” Theory, Culture & Society 2010 (SAGE, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore), Vol. 27(2–3): 233–253.


 

11 אובייקטיביות, רפרזנטציה ואובייקטים מגשרים

Science as Practice: Objectivity, Visualization, Representation

S. Shapin and S. Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air-Pump (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), Ch. 8 (“The Polity of Science: Conclusions”), pp. 332-344

Theodore M. Porter, Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 

[from spp] T. Porter, Trust in Numbers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University 

Press, 1995), Ch. 7 (“U.S. Army Engineers and the Rise of Cost-Benefit

 Analysis”), pp. 148-189.

 

M. Power, The Audit Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), Ch. 5

 (“Audit Knowledge and the Construction of Auditees”), pp. 91-121.

 

Daston, Lorraine, and Peter Galison. 2007. Objectivity. Cambridge: Zone Books. pp. 9-53, 371.

 

Galison, Peter. 1997. Trading zone: Coordinating action and belief. In The

Science Studies Reader, ed. M. Biagioli. London: Routledge, 1999. pp. 137-160.

 

Mol, Anne-Marie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice.

Durham: Duke University Press. pp. 1-86, 151-184.

 

Law, John, and Lynch, Michael. 1988. Lists, field guides, and the descriptive

organization of seeing: Birdwatching as an exemplary observational activity.

Human Studies 11: 271-303



 

12 מומחיות

Wynne, Brian. “Public Understanding of Science.” In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies Vol. II, 361–88. SAGE Publications, 1995. [read]

 

Wynne, Brian. 1996. May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert- lay knowledge divide. In Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, ed. S. Lash, B. Szerzynski, and B. Wynne. London: Sage. pp. 45-83.

 

Collins, H.M., and Robert Evans. 2002. The Third Wave of science studies:

Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science 32: 235-296.

Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. Breaking the waves in science studies: Comment on H.M.

 

Wynne, Brian. 2003. Seasick on the Third Wave? Subverting the hegemony of propositionalism. Social Studies of Science 33: 401-417.

 

Rip, Arie. 2003. Constructing expertise: In a Third Wave of science studies?

Social Studies of Science 33: 419-434.

 

Collins, Harry, and Robert Evans. 2003. King Canute meets the Beach Boys:

Responses to the Third Wave. Social Studies of Science 33: 435-452


 

13 קטגוריות וקלסיפיקציות
 

Ian Hacking, Social Construction of What, (Ch. 5 “Kind-Making: The Case of

 Child Abuse”): 125-162 

 

M. Foucault, “Preface” in The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human

 Sciences, (Routledge 2002) xv-xx. 

 

 G.C. Bowker and S.L. Star, Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences (MIT 2000), Ch. 6 (“The Case of Race Classification and Reclassification Under Apartheid”) 195-225. 

James C. Scott, Seeing like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (Yale university Press, 2020), 

Susan Leigh Star and James R. Griesemer, “Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39,” Social Studies of Science, Vol. 19, No. 3 (Aug., 1989), pp. 387-420

 

Susan Leigh Star, “This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept,” Science, Technology, & Human Values 35(5), 2010, pp. 601-617


 

14 חברת הסיכון

Beck, Ulrich. 1986. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, trans. M. Ritter.

London: Sage, 1992. pp. 9-16.

 

Beck, Ulrich. 1999. Risk Society revisited: Theory, politics, critiques, and research programmes. In World Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity Press. pp. 133-152.

Giddens, Anthony. 1991. Fate, risk and security. In Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press. pp. 109-142.

Jasanoff, Sheila. 1994. Introduction. In Learning from Disaster: Risk Management After Bhopal, ed. S. Jasanoff. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 1-21. 

Jasanoff, Sheila. 1999. The songlines of risk. Environmental Values 8: 135-152.

Lakoff, Andrew. 2007. Preparing for the next emergency. Public Culture (Special Issue: The Social Life of Risk) 19: 247-271.

[FROM Berkeley - Cass Sunstein, Risk and Reason: Safety, Law and the Environment (Cambridge 2002) (Ch. 5 “Reducing Risks Rationally”): 99-132]


 

15 היברידיות טבע וטכנולוגיה

Donna Harraway, “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century,” in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (Routledge 1991): 149-181. 

Bruno Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Harvard University 1993), Chs. 1-2, 1-45. [Google online] 

Sheila Jasanoff, “Ordering Knowledge, Ordering Society, in Jasanoff ed., States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order (Routledge 2005): 13-45.

 

15 מחלוקות וסימטריה

Oreskes, Naomi, 2007, “The scientific consensus on climate change: How do we know we’re not wrong?”  pp. 65-99.

Dorothy Nelkin, “Science Controversies: The Dynamics of Public Disputes in the United States,” Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (Sage 1995), 444-456 

 

Michel Callon, “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay,” in J. Law, ed., Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? (Routledge 1986) 196-233 

 

Ted Porter, Trust in Numbers (Princeton 1995), Ch. 7 (“U.S. Army Engineers and the Rise of Cost-Benefit Analysis”), 148-189 

 

Sheila Jasanoff, Science at the Bar (Harvard 1996), (Ch. 6 “Toxic Torts and the Politics of Causation”): 114-137



 

16 STS, תיאוריה ביקורתית ולימודי מדיה

Andrew Feenberg, “A Critical Theory of Technology,” in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies Vol. 4 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016), 635–64.

Pablo Boczkowski and Leah A. Lievrouw, “Bridging STS and Communication Studies: Scholarship on Media and Information Technologies,” in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies Vol. 3 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008), 949–77.


 

17 טכנולוגיה בחברה: הטכנולוגיה בחברה צרכנית-קפטליסטית? (1 ינואר)

Ruth Schwartz Cowan, “How the Refrigerator Got its Hum,” in Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (eds.) The Social Shaping of Technology, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1996, pp. 202-218.

***David Noble, “Present Tense Technology,” Democracy, Feb/May/August, 1983.

 

Ruth Schwartz Cowan, “The Industrial Revolution in the Home,” in Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (eds.) The Social Shaping of Technology, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1996, pp. 181-201.

Kate Boyer and Maia Boswell-Penc, “Breast Pumps: A Feminist Technology, or (yet) ‘More Work for Mother’, in Linda Layne & Sharra Vostral, Feminist Technologies, University of Illinois Press, 2010, pp. 119-135.

Sharra Vostral, “Tampons: Re-Scripting Technologies as Feminist, in Linda Layne & Sharra Vostral, Feminist Technologies, University of Illinois Press, 2010, pp. 136-153.

Ellen van Oost, “Materialized Gender: How Shavers Configure the Users’ Femininity and Masculinity,” in Nancy Oudhoorn and Trever Pinch (eds.) 

Aengst, Jennifer and Linda Layne, “The Need to Bleed? A Feminist Technology Assessment of Menstrual-Suppressing Birth Control Pills,” in Linda Layne & Sharra Vostral, Feminist Technologies, University of Illinois Press, 2010, pp. 55-88

Layne, Linda, “Why the Home Pregnancy Test Isn’t the Feminist Technology It’s Cracked Up to Be and How to Make it Better,” in Linda Layne & Sharra Vostral, Feminist Technologies, University of Illinois Press, 2010, pp. 89-118.

**“Ruth Schwartz Cowan, “Gender & Technological Change,” in Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (eds.) The Social Shaping of Technology, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1996, pp. 53-54.

C. Cockburn, "The Material of Male Power." In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The Social Shaping of Technology (pp. 125-146).

How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology, MIT Press, 2005, pp. 193-208.

Maria Lohan, “Constructive Tensions in Feminist Technology Studies,”Social Studies of Science,Vol. 30, No. 6 (Dec., 2000), pp. 895-916

 

שיעורים 18-23 מצגות סטודנטים ודיונים בכיתה

 

24 שיעור מסכם

Sheila Jasanoff, “Science and Democracy,” in Felt, Fouche, Miller and Smith-Doerr, “Handbook of Science and Technology Studies,” MIT Press, 2016, pp. 259-288.

 

Richard Sclove, Democracy and Technology: An Interview with Richard Sclove from Beth Simone Noveck, Digital Government: Research and Practice, Vol. 1, No. 1, Article 5, January 2020 

 

Yuval Noah Harari, “Why Technology Favors Tyranny,” The Atlantic, October 2018.

 

Sergio Sismondo, “Science and Technology Studies and an Engaged Program,” in Hacket, Amsterdamsk, Lyny & Wacjman, “Handbook of Science and Technology Studies,” Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 2008, pp. 13-32. 

 

Bruno Latour, “Why has Critique Run Out of Steam,” Critical Inquiry, 30, Winter, 2004, 225-248.

 

Clark Miller, “Engaging with Societal Challenges,” ,” in Felt, Fouche, Miller and Smith-Doerr, “Handbook of Science and Technology Studies,” MIT Press, 2016, pp. 909-914. 

 

Sheila Jasanoff, “Imagined and Invented Worlds," in Jasanoff (ed), Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, Chicago, 2015.

 

Ezrahi, Yaron. 2004. “Science and the Political Imagination in Contemporary Democracies.” Pp. 254-273 in S. Jasanoff, ed. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order.