• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science, Technology and Human Values >Science Policy and STS from Other Epistemic Places
【24h】

Science Policy and STS from Other Epistemic Places

机译：其他认知场所的科学政策和STS

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

Recently there have been pleas for STS to make a difference in how science policies are constructed and enacted. Much less remarked upon is the possibility that there may be troubling alignments between science studies and research policies in the form of shared conceptual, epistemological and methodological assumptions. Both have come to emphasise material outputs and visible activity, obscuring other processes, relationships and orderings involved in science work. This collection of papers focuses on these connections between STS and contemporary research policies. They explore empirical material from 'other epistemic places' (disciplinary, geo-political and spatial) to foreground and critique what is privileged and rewarded by science policies. But they also seek to make a theoretical contribution to STS itself, showing how its early focus on the hard centres of global technoscience have been constitutive of its characteristic concerns, epistemologies -and blind spots. As science studies moves out of the lab andbeyond the heartlands of the political West and global North, we argue that acknowledging some problematic affinities between science studies and science policy is both a critical necessity and an opportunity for new insights.
机译：最近，STS呼吁在科学政策的构造和实施方面做出改变。几乎没有提到的是，科学研究和研究政策之间可能存在令人困扰的统一概念，认识论和方法论假设形式的一致性。两者都强调物质输出和可见活动，从而掩盖了科学工作中涉及的其他过程，关系和顺序。这些论文集中于STS与当代研究政策之间的这些联系。他们从“其他认知场所”（学科，地缘政治和空间）探索前景材料，并批评和批评科学政策赋予的特权和奖励。但是他们也试图为STS本身做出理论上的贡献，表明STS早期对全球技术科学的硬性关注是如何构成其特有的关注点，认识论和盲点的。随着科学研究离开实验室并超出政治西部和全球北部的心脏地带，我们认为，承认科学研究与科学政策之间存在某些有问题的联系既是关键的必要，也是获得新见解的机会。

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