Revisiting the Human–Society–Technology Nexus: Intercultural Communication Studies as a Looking Glass for Scientific Self-Scrutiny in the Digital Human Sciences

J. Stier
{"title":"Revisiting the Human–Society–Technology Nexus: Intercultural Communication Studies as a Looking Glass for Scientific Self-Scrutiny in the Digital Human Sciences","authors":"J. Stier","doi":"10.16993/BBK.C","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter starts from three assumptions: (1) that digital technologies (DTs) are products of humans, and reversibly that such technologies have effects on and consequences for humans; (2) that DTs have profound, long-term effects on culture and social interaction; and (3) that research on such effects often disregards inherent social and cultural biases in DTs and discourses on digitalization and innovation. DTs tend to be depicted as “objective” and void of cultural contents and underpinnings. Therefore, and with an emphasis on the usefulness of combining different research methodologies, this chapter sheds light upon a number of discursive blind spots in these domains: technocentrism and normativism, homo- and heterocentrism, ego- and ethnocentrism, and what I call the reversed problem imperative. Drawing upon intercultural communication studies (ICCS), these blind spots are discussed in the light of DTs, scientific theories, and research methodologies. Moreover, the case is made that digital human sciences (DHV) offers a valuable contribution to the scientific understanding of the manifestations and consequences of digitalization. In particular, this chapter argues for the usefulness of “intermethodological,” interdisciplinary, intercultural, and integrative approaches in DHV.","PeriodicalId":332163,"journal":{"name":"Digital Human Sciences: New Objects – New Approaches","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital Human Sciences: New Objects – New Approaches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16993/BBK.C","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter starts from three assumptions: (1) that digital technologies (DTs) are products of humans, and reversibly that such technologies have effects on and consequences for humans; (2) that DTs have profound, long-term effects on culture and social interaction; and (3) that research on such effects often disregards inherent social and cultural biases in DTs and discourses on digitalization and innovation. DTs tend to be depicted as “objective” and void of cultural contents and underpinnings. Therefore, and with an emphasis on the usefulness of combining different research methodologies, this chapter sheds light upon a number of discursive blind spots in these domains: technocentrism and normativism, homo- and heterocentrism, ego- and ethnocentrism, and what I call the reversed problem imperative. Drawing upon intercultural communication studies (ICCS), these blind spots are discussed in the light of DTs, scientific theories, and research methodologies. Moreover, the case is made that digital human sciences (DHV) offers a valuable contribution to the scientific understanding of the manifestations and consequences of digitalization. In particular, this chapter argues for the usefulness of “intermethodological,” interdisciplinary, intercultural, and integrative approaches in DHV.
重新审视人类-社会-技术关系:跨文化交际研究作为数字人文科学科学自我审视的一面镜子
本章从三个假设开始:(1)数字技术(DTs)是人类的产品,并且这些技术可逆地对人类产生影响和后果;(2) DTs对文化和社会互动具有深远的、长期的影响;(3)对这种影响的研究往往忽视了数字化和创新话语中固有的社会和文化偏见。DTs往往被描述为“客观的”,缺乏文化内容和基础。因此,本章强调结合不同研究方法的有用性,阐明了这些领域中的一些话语盲点:技术中心主义和规范主义,同性恋和异性中心主义,自我中心主义和种族中心主义,以及我所说的颠倒问题的必要性。在跨文化交际研究(ICCS)的基础上,本文从传播理论、科学理论和研究方法的角度对这些盲点进行了讨论。此外,数字人文科学(DHV)为科学理解数字化的表现形式和后果提供了宝贵的贡献。特别地,本章论证了“跨方法”、跨学科、跨文化和综合方法在DHV中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信