• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Philosophy & technology >On the Peculiarity of Standards: A Reply to Thompson
【24h】

On the Peculiarity of Standards: A Reply to Thompson

机译：关于标准的特殊性：汤普森的答复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

As Paul B. Thompson suggests in his recent seminal paper, "There's an App for That': Technical Standards and Commodification by Technological Means," technical standards restructure property (and other social) relations. He concludes with the claim that the development of technical standards of commodification can serve purposes with bad effects such as "the rise of the factory system and the deskilling of work" or progressive effects such as how "technical standards for animal welfare... discipline the unwanted consequences of market forces." In this reply, we want to append several points to his argument and suggest that he rightly points out that standards can promote various goods; however, there are peculiar powers wielded by standardization processes that might profitably be unpacked more systematically than Thompson's article seems to suggest. First, the concealment of the technopolitics around standards is largely due to their peculiar ontological status as recipes for reality. Second, technical standards can and do commit violence against persons, but such violence is often suffered not in the formation of class consciousness, as Marx might have put it, but as a failure to conform to the laws of nature.
机译：正如保罗·汤普森（Paul B. Thompson）在他最近的开创性论文中所建议的那样：“这有一个应用程序：技术标准和通过技术手段进行商品化”，技术标准重构了财产（和其他社会）关系。他的结论是，商品技术标准的制定可以达到诸如“工厂制度的兴起和工作的繁琐”之类的不良影响，或诸如“动物福利的技术标准...市场力量的不良后果。”在这个答复中，我们想在他的论点上补充几点，并建议他正确地指出标准可以促进各种商品的发展。但是，标准化过程所具有的特殊功能可能比汤普森的文章所暗示的更为系统地分解。首先，围绕标准隐藏技术政治主要是由于它们作为现实的配方而具有特殊的本体论地位。其次，技术标准可以而且确实会对人施加暴力，但是这种暴力通常不是像马克思所说的那样以阶级意识的形成而遭受，而是由于未能遵守自然法则。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号