Hearts and minds: The technopolitical role of affect in sociotechnical imaginaries.

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1177/03063127241257489
Stephen Hughes
{"title":"Hearts and minds: The technopolitical role of affect in sociotechnical imaginaries.","authors":"Stephen Hughes","doi":"10.1177/03063127241257489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sociotechnical imaginaries (SIs) have emerged as a popular and generative concept within Science and Technology Studies (STS). This article draws out the affective component of SIs, combining a review of relevant literatures with an empirical case study of an anti-fracking imaginary in Ireland to suggest how we might theorize an affective technopolitics of SIs. The literature review identifies three key aspects of SIs that would benefit from a more coherent conceptualization of affect: the utopian, productive, and collectivizing dimensions of imaginaries. Emotions such as desire and fear appear prominently in the SI literature, but in ways that require development. Using empirical examples from my research, I outline what this developed understanding of emotions in imaginaries might look like. I examine the role that emotions played in the development and settlement of an anti-fracking imaginary in Ireland, highlighting how the intensive, multimodal, and dynamic nature of affect underpinned the productive, collective, and utopian dimensions of the SI. I conclude with some remarks about how this developed theory of emotion positions STS researchers to address issues of humanity, representation, and the building of better worlds.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":" ","pages":"907-930"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11590381/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241257489","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sociotechnical imaginaries (SIs) have emerged as a popular and generative concept within Science and Technology Studies (STS). This article draws out the affective component of SIs, combining a review of relevant literatures with an empirical case study of an anti-fracking imaginary in Ireland to suggest how we might theorize an affective technopolitics of SIs. The literature review identifies three key aspects of SIs that would benefit from a more coherent conceptualization of affect: the utopian, productive, and collectivizing dimensions of imaginaries. Emotions such as desire and fear appear prominently in the SI literature, but in ways that require development. Using empirical examples from my research, I outline what this developed understanding of emotions in imaginaries might look like. I examine the role that emotions played in the development and settlement of an anti-fracking imaginary in Ireland, highlighting how the intensive, multimodal, and dynamic nature of affect underpinned the productive, collective, and utopian dimensions of the SI. I conclude with some remarks about how this developed theory of emotion positions STS researchers to address issues of humanity, representation, and the building of better worlds.

心与心:情感在社会技术想象中的技术政治作用。
社会技术想象(SIs)已成为科技研究(STS)中一个流行且具有创造性的概念。本文通过对相关文献的回顾,结合对爱尔兰反压裂想象的实证案例研究,引出了社会技术想象的情感成分,并就如何将社会技术想象的情感技术政治学理论化提出了建议。文献综述指出了可持续生产的三个关键方面,即想象的乌托邦性、生产性和集体化维度,这些方面将受益于更加连贯的情感概念化。欲望和恐惧等情感在有关社会性融合的文献中占有重要地位,但其方式需要发展。我利用自己研究中的实证例子,概述了对想象中情绪的发展理解可能是什么样子的。我研究了情感在爱尔兰反压裂想象的发展和沉淀中所扮演的角色,强调了情感的密集性、多模态性和动态性如何支撑了爱尔兰社会融合的生产性、集体性和乌托邦层面。最后,我想谈谈这一发展起来的情感理论是如何定位 STS 研究人员以解决人性、代表性和建设更美好世界等问题的。
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
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
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