{"title":"Actores, objetos, figuras: el giro sociomaterial en la teoría de la acción","authors":"Felipe Raglianti","doi":"10.4067/S0717-554X2018000300343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"espanolAlgo particular de los estudios de la ciencia, tecnologia y sociedad (CTS) son sus formas de relacionar objetos y practicas. La relacion difiere del papel que tiene en la sociologia de la ciencia y en la construccion social de la tecnologia. Suele afirmarse en CTS, contradiciendo conocimientos humanistas, que la naturaleza de los actores sociales no estaria definida por adelantado. Asumir lo semiotico como algo excepcional del sujeto humano, donde los objetos solo acreditan sus agencias a traves de procesos simbolicos, seria perder de vista la riqueza empirica de las practicas colectivas que articulan lo humano y lo no-humano. En cambio, sujetos y objetos suelen pensarse en CTS como efectos sociomateriales reconfigurables de relaciones in situ. La figura del actor-red, la lectura situada de actores material-semioticos, el estudio de objetos frontera y el uso de metodos de ensamblaje son algunas de los virajes en este giro de la teoria de la accion. Aqui voy a delinear un recorrido parcial a traves de sus argumentos, introduciendo el debate sobre las divisiones entre naturaleza y cultura, para examinar la nocion de agencia con los conceptos de traduccion, configuracion, multiplicidad y no-coherencia. A modo de ejemplo, termino con una lectura sobre la socialidad y espacialidad de los cajeros automaticos. EnglishStudies of science, technology and society (STS) are characteristics in relating objects and practices. The relationship differs from the role it has in the sociology of science and in the social construction of technology. It is usually affirmed in STS, contradicting humanities, that the nature of the social actors would not be defined in advance. Considering that the semiotic is something exceptional of the human subject, where objects only accredit their agencies through symbolic processes, would be to lose sight of the empirical richness of collective practices that articulate the human and the non-human. Instead, subjects and objects are often thought of in STS as reconfigurable sociomaterial effects of in situ relationships. The figure of the actor-network, the situated reading of material-semiotic actors, the study of boundary objects and the use of assembly methods are some of the conceptual turns in this variation of action theory. Here I will delineate a partial route to travel through its arguments, introducing the debate on the divisions of nature and culture, to examine the notion of agency with the concepts of translation, configuration, multiplicity and non-coherence. As an example, I finish with a reading on the sociality and spatiality of ATMs.","PeriodicalId":54112,"journal":{"name":"Cinta de Moebio","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cinta de Moebio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-554X2018000300343","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
espanolAlgo particular de los estudios de la ciencia, tecnologia y sociedad (CTS) son sus formas de relacionar objetos y practicas. La relacion difiere del papel que tiene en la sociologia de la ciencia y en la construccion social de la tecnologia. Suele afirmarse en CTS, contradiciendo conocimientos humanistas, que la naturaleza de los actores sociales no estaria definida por adelantado. Asumir lo semiotico como algo excepcional del sujeto humano, donde los objetos solo acreditan sus agencias a traves de procesos simbolicos, seria perder de vista la riqueza empirica de las practicas colectivas que articulan lo humano y lo no-humano. En cambio, sujetos y objetos suelen pensarse en CTS como efectos sociomateriales reconfigurables de relaciones in situ. La figura del actor-red, la lectura situada de actores material-semioticos, el estudio de objetos frontera y el uso de metodos de ensamblaje son algunas de los virajes en este giro de la teoria de la accion. Aqui voy a delinear un recorrido parcial a traves de sus argumentos, introduciendo el debate sobre las divisiones entre naturaleza y cultura, para examinar la nocion de agencia con los conceptos de traduccion, configuracion, multiplicidad y no-coherencia. A modo de ejemplo, termino con una lectura sobre la socialidad y espacialidad de los cajeros automaticos. EnglishStudies of science, technology and society (STS) are characteristics in relating objects and practices. The relationship differs from the role it has in the sociology of science and in the social construction of technology. It is usually affirmed in STS, contradicting humanities, that the nature of the social actors would not be defined in advance. Considering that the semiotic is something exceptional of the human subject, where objects only accredit their agencies through symbolic processes, would be to lose sight of the empirical richness of collective practices that articulate the human and the non-human. Instead, subjects and objects are often thought of in STS as reconfigurable sociomaterial effects of in situ relationships. The figure of the actor-network, the situated reading of material-semiotic actors, the study of boundary objects and the use of assembly methods are some of the conceptual turns in this variation of action theory. Here I will delineate a partial route to travel through its arguments, introducing the debate on the divisions of nature and culture, to examine the notion of agency with the concepts of translation, configuration, multiplicity and non-coherence. As an example, I finish with a reading on the sociality and spatiality of ATMs.
科学、技术和社会(sts)研究的一个特别之处在于它们将对象和实践联系起来的方式。这种关系不同于它在科学社会学和技术的社会建构中的作用。CTS经常声称,与人文主义知识相矛盾的是,社会行动者的性质不会预先确定。符号学是一种特殊的人类主体,在这种主体中,物体只能通过象征过程来证明它们的代理,这将忽视集体实践的丰富经验,这些实践阐明了人类和非人类。在sts中,主体和客体通常被认为是原位关系的可重构的社会物质效应。行为者网络的形象、对物质符号学行为者的定位阅读、对边界对象的研究和组装方法的使用,都是行为理论这一转变的一些转折点。在这里,我将通过他的论点概述一个部分的旅程,介绍关于自然和文化之间的划分的辩论,用翻译、配置、多样性和非一致性的概念来检验代理的有害。作为一个例子,我将以一篇关于自动取款机的社会性和空间性的文章作为结尾。科学、技术和社会英语研究是相关对象和实践的特点。= =地理= =根据美国人口普查,这个县的面积为。它通常在STS中断言,与人文学科相矛盾的是,社会行动者的性质不能预先确定。考虑到符号学是人类主体的一种特殊的东西,在这种东西中,对象只能通过符号学过程来证明它们的作用,我们就会失去对阐明人类和非人类的集体实践的丰富经验的认识。Instead, publication and objects往往thought of在STS配置就地sociomaterial effects of关系。The of The actor-network, The situated reading of material-semiotic行为,The study of划定objects and The use of汇编方法are some of The概念转动。in this variation of action theory。在这里,我将通过它的论点概述一个部分的旅行路线,介绍关于自然和文化划分的辩论,从翻译、配置、多样性和非一致性的概念来考察代理的概念。例如,我最后读了一篇关于atm的社会性和空间性的文章。
期刊介绍:
Cinta de Moebio publishes scientific articles and essays on epistemology of social science. The editorial experience of the magazine indicates that some academics send articles of philosophy, but of issues that are not related to the social sciences, as well as academics who sent the results of their research or projects in the social sciences, but its focus is not epistemology, which also are geared out to the purpose of the journal. The journal, put it in some way, it is in the dialogue of philosophy with social science and, therefore, both domains must be present in the articles.