byminseok.com

Sociotechnical Imaginaries by Sheila Jasanoff

Translated from Korean
Philosophy of Technology
  • Original Source: Dreamscapes of Modernity
    ==Future Imperfect: Science, Technology, and the Imaginations of Modernity - SHEILA JASANOFF== —

The Socio-Technical Imagination of Science Fiction

The mention of science fiction early in the text serves to illustrate how technological innovation often follows fictional imagination. The opening section presents several examples where science fiction imagined and foresaw future technologies decades ahead of actual technological development:

  1. The 150-year gap between Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' (1818) and the production of life forms in 20th-century biology laboratories
  2. Jules Verne's 'Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea' being far ahead of actual submarine technology
  3. Edward Bellamy's (1889) envisioning of credit cards and rapid communication, which became reality a century later
  4. Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World' (1932) imagining state-sponsored artificial life production two decades before DNA sequencing
  5. Arthur C. Clarke envisioned interactive computers 30 years before IBM's Deep Blue defeated the chess champion.

But the more crucial point here is that Zernoff doesn't view science fiction as merely predicting technology. She emphasizes that science fiction contains not only visions of technology but also visions of the social world. For example:

  • Shelley's monster embodies social criticism, showing how alienation leads to murder
  • Captain Nemo expresses resistance against colonial domination
  • Huxley's world depicts biological power infringing on human dignity
  • Bellamy presents a vision for a better social order

Jezernik argues that such socio-technical imaginings in SF novels influence the direction of actual technological development and how that technology integrates into society. Ultimately, SF novels function not merely as fantasy, but as part of a "socio-technical imaginary" that expresses what future society desires and fears.

In this sense, science fiction novels are used as evidence supporting the book's core theme: the perspective that "science and technology are not separate from society but are jointly constituted."

The Sociotechnical Imaginary and Social Constructivism

The "sociotechnical imaginary" Zieserof discusses is grounded in social constructivist theory, yet it transcends the simple notion that "technology is socially constructed." She emphasizes the following points:

  1. Coproduction of Technology and Society: Technology does not unilaterally influence society, nor does society unilaterally construct technology; rather, the two mutually shape each other and develop together.

  2. The Role of Imaginary Realms: She emphasizes that collective visions of a desirable future, beyond mere technical feasibility, significantly influence technological development.

  3. The Convergence of Materiality and Imagination: Material technological development and social imagination are intertwined; for example, cultural expressions like science fiction novels can influence the direction of actual technological development.

  4. Implications of Power and Politics: Moving beyond social constructivism, it underscores that which imaginary becomes dominant, which technological visions are realized and which are ignored, is fundamentally a matter of power and politics.

Thus, while "social constructivism of technology" is accurate, Jaysonov expands this further. He analyzes not only how technology and society mutually constitute each other, but also how collective imagination, cultural expressions, and power relations operate within this process. This represents an attempt to capture the complex dynamics and diverse dimensions of this constitutive process, moving beyond the simple proposition that "technology is socially constructed."

Conclusion

In the conclusion, Jaesunov summarizes several key points:

  1. The Role of the Socio-Technical Imaginary: This concept demonstrates that science and technology are not merely influenced by society but are "coproduced" with it. That is, the collective vision of the future we seek to achieve through science and technology influences actual technological development and social structures.

  2. Overcoming Limitations of Existing Approaches: While pointing out the limitations of Actor-Network Theory (ANT), commonly seen in Science and Technology Studies (STS), he argues that the socio-technical imaginary better addresses dimensions of power, normativity, and values.

  3. Importance of Comparative Methodology: It suggests that comparative analysis across different societies, cultures, and nations can reveal how socio-technical imaginaries are formed and operate differently.

  4. Practical Implications: This concept can help explain why the same science and technology are adopted and developed differently in different societies, or why certain technological visions become dominant over others.

Ultimately, the concept of the technosystemic imaginary centers on the role of "collective imaginations of the future" in understanding the relationship between science/technology and society, providing a framework to analyze how this influences current technological development and social structures. Its significance lies in enabling a richer understanding that transcends simple technological determinism or social constructivism.

Let's Think About It More Simply

The core idea of this book is this:

  1. Technology isn't just objects or tools; it's connected to the future our society dreams of. Shared dreams like "I wish the world were like this" influence what technologies get developed and how they're used.
  2. Take smartphones, for example. They weren't created simply because they were "technically possible." Technology evolved in that direction because there was a social imagination of "a world connected anytime, anywhere."
  3. The reason things like science fiction novels are important is that they influence the creation of these shared imaginings of the future. Just as the communicator from 'Star Trek' later inspired the development of the mobile phone.
  4. But this "socio-technical imaginary" isn't just about dreams; it also involves value judgments about what is actually good or bad, and what our society should look like. That's why it becomes a matter of power and politics.

The key point is that technology and society aren't separate; they develop together and influence each other. It's a cyclical relationship: the future society dreams of determines the direction of technological development, and that technology then transforms society.