Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
dc.contributor.author
Kreimer, Pablo Rafael
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.date.available
2023-06-23T18:47:28Z
dc.date.issued
2022-12
dc.identifier.citation
Kreimer, Pablo Rafael; Constructivist Paradoxes Part 2: Latin American STS, between Centers and Peripheries; Society for Social Studies of Science; Engaging Science, Technology and Society; 8; 3; 12-2022; 87-106
dc.identifier.issn
2413-8053
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/201365
dc.description.abstract
There is a certain ‘failure’ in what we could call the modern development of the STS field over the past decade, i.e. a large number of studies—particularly empirical—that were deployed from the 1970s onwards. Indeed, one of their original and crucial objectives was to emphasize the local, situated, contingent character of the processes of production and negotiation of knowledge. However, these studies mostly concentrate on one part of the world, i.e. the most developed countries, precisely where modern science, commonly referred to as “Western Science,” developed. This limitation—surely intuitive or “natural”—has several consequences analyzed in this article. In summary, these limitations can be analyzed in terms of the objects of research (the various forms of knowledge) but also in terms of the theories and methods used to account for them. The aim is to discuss the construction of a double (or even triple) peripheral situation, which calls into question the old principles of symmetry and impartiality (Bloor 1976; Collins 1981): on the one hand, the peripheral character of the objects analyzed (i.e. science and scientific development outside Euro-America) and, in parallel, the peripheral situation of the communities of specialists who dedicate themselves to studying them. Connected to this, an additional question emerges: What are the theoretical frameworks and methodologies best suited to account for these objects in their respective contexts? Is it suitable to simply apply to these objects of study the same theoretical frameworks and methods commonly used to analyze hegemonic science? And last but not least, how to approach the (scientific, cultural, political) relationships between different contexts in a highly globalized world? This is the second of two parts: while in the first one I discuss the “failures” of the hegemonic paradigm in STS and its consequences in relation to nonhegemonic contexts, in this second part I focus on the problems raised by post-colonial approaches, on the “peripheral techno-science” as an object for STS scholars and, as a specific case, the development of STS research in Latin America and the dynamics of its specific agendas.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language.iso
eng
dc.publisher
Society for Social Studies of Science
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
dc.subject
SITUATED KNOWLEDGE
dc.subject
CENTERS AND PERIPHERIES
dc.subject
GLOBAL SCIENCE
dc.subject
LATIN AMERICA
dc.subject.classification
Ciencias Sociales Interdisciplinarias
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
Otras Ciencias Sociales
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
CIENCIAS SOCIALES
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.title
Constructivist Paradoxes Part 2: Latin American STS, between Centers and Peripheries
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.date.updated
2023-06-21T10:56:49Z
dc.identifier.eissn
2413-8053
dc.journal.volume
8
dc.journal.number
3
dc.journal.pagination
87-106
dc.journal.pais
Estados Unidos
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.journal.ciudad
Evansville
dc.description.fil
Fil: Kreimer, Pablo Rafael. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes. Departamento de Ciencias Sociales; Argentina. Universidad Maimonides. Centro de Ciencia, Tecniologia y Sociedad.; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
dc.journal.title
Engaging Science, Technology and Society
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/1893
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.17351/ests2022.1893
Archivos asociados