Title

對技術的社會建構論之挑戰:建構東亞技術研究主體性的一個契機

Translated Titles

Challenges to Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) Theory: Considering a Methodological Subjectivity for East Asian Technology Studies

DOI

10.6464/TJSSTM.201110.0171

Authors

張國暉(Kuo-Hui Chang)

Key Words

技術的社會建構論(SCOT) ; 科技與社會 ; 技術研究 ; 技術社會學 ; 東亞 ; social construction of technology (SCOT) ; science and technology studies (STS) ; technology studies ; sociology of technology ; East Asia

PublicationName

科技醫療與社會

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

13期(2011 / 10 / 01)

Page #

171 - 222

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本文評述技術的社會建構論(social construction of technology; SCOT)自1980年代中期發表之後,歷年來STS(science and technology studies)學界對其所做的重要檢討。這些檢討主要是質疑許多應用SCOT所做的技術研究成果,不但欠缺社會結構面的考量,還忽略對技術價值與性質的省思,而這主要是因為SCOT過於關注到技術創新的微觀要素及過程。本文也藉對SCOT的檢討,來對東亞及台灣技術研究能走多遠這樣的問題,提供一個方法上的看法。除對技術價值及性質的哲學性探究之外,本文建議在中觀、甚至是巨觀的結構設定及微觀的議題選擇等面向上,基於東亞社會的特殊結構所發展出來的論點及理論應具有主體性,而有機會足以與西方相提並論。當國家(state)作為一種相關社會團體時,探索其與其他國家對某個技術的共識及衝突,還有理解其本身內在的社會結構性特色,或許是一種適合東亞的SCOT取徑,特別是在指涉國際技術移轉的系絡時,這樣的SCOT亞型應更有助於研究非歐美先進國家的技術史及技術社會學。本文也建議SCOT並不是被西方學者所認為是西方的,卻更是一種理解技術的科學或是技術的技術,而在提問東亞技術研究能走多遠時,也必須審視它與西方STS分享了多少的路。

English Abstract

This article reviews some critical challenges to the social construction of technology (SCOT) theory, which has been an effective and useful theoretical approach to study technology innovation since the middle 1980s. These challenges question whether the theory of SCOT might be limited in its analysis of some deeper and broader relations between technology and society due to SCOT's lack of some considerations in terms of social structure. They also indicate that the theory confines itself to exploring some philosophical relations between modernity and technology. By reviewing SCOT's theoretical development, this article offers a methodological response to Daiwie Fu's question of how far East Asian technology studies (EATS) can go. It suggests that EATS might be able to develop its academic and methodological subjectivity by integrating its specific social structures, such as colonial and historical backgrounds, into the theory of SCOT. Therefore, the theory of SCOT should not be exclusively categorized as a research model for the West only. As long as SCOT incorporates the considerations of social structure, it helps explore the technology stories in East Asia. The question of how far EATS can go, thus, points out another important question of how much it shares with the scholarship in western technology studies.

Topic Category 人文學 > 人文學綜合
醫藥衛生 > 醫藥衛生綜合
醫藥衛生 > 醫藥總論
醫藥衛生 > 基礎醫學
醫藥衛生 > 預防保健與衛生學
醫藥衛生 > 社會醫學
社會科學 > 社會科學綜合
Reference
  1. 林文源(2007)。論行動者網絡的行動本體論。科技、醫療與社會,4,65-108。
    連結:
  2. 林崇熙(2001)。沈默的技術:嘉南平原上的拼裝車。科技、醫療與社會,1,1-42。
    連結:
  3. 雷祥麟(2010)。「我們不曾現代過」的三個意義。科技、醫療與社會,10,221-236。
    連結:
  4. 戴東源(2006)。克普勒之前的天文思想演變:哥白尼及第古。科技、醫療與社會,5,111-182。
    連結:
  5. Alder, Ken(2010).Engineering the Revolution: Arms and Enlightenment in France, 1763-1815.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
  6. Anderson, Warwick(2007).How Far Can East Asian STS Go? A Commentary.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,1(2),249-250.
  7. Anderson, Warwick(2009).Re-orienting STS: Emergent Studies of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Southeast Asia.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,3(2-3),163-171.
  8. Bijker, Wiebe E.(1995).Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
  9. Bijker, Wiebe E.(1999).The Social Construction of Bakelite: Toward a Theory of Invention.The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  10. Bijker, Wiebe E.(1993).Do Not Despair: There is Life after Constructivism.Science, Technology & Human Values,18(1),113-138.
  11. Bijker, Wiebe E.(ed.),Hughes, Thomas P.(ed.),Pinch, Trevor J.(ed.)(1999).The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  12. Bijker, Wiebe E.(ed.),Law, John(ed.)(2000).Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change.MA:The MIT Press.
  13. Bray, Francesca(2011).A Response to "The STS Challenge to Philosophy of Science in Taiwan".East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,5(1),49-51.
  14. Buchanan, Angus(1991).Theory and Narrative in the History of Technology.Technology and Culture,32(2),365-376.
  15. Chen, Dung-Sheng(2008).STS and Area Studies: A Social Network Perspective.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,2(3),439-444.
  16. Chen, Ruey-Lin(2011).The STS Challenge to Philosophy of Science in Taiwan.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,5(1),27-48.
  17. Chen, Ruey-Lin(2000).Theory Version Instead of Articulations of a Paradigm.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,31(A),449-471.
  18. Clancey, Gregory(2009).The History of Technology in Japan and East Asia.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,3(4),525-530.
  19. Fan, Fa-ti(2007).East Asian STS: Fox or Hedgehog?.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,1(2),243-247.
  20. Faulkner, Wendy(2009).Doing Gender in Engineering Workplace Cultures. I. Observations from the Field.Engineering Studies,1(1),3-18.
  21. Faulkner, Wendy(2009).Doing Gender in Engineering Workplace Cultures. II. Gender In/authenticity and the In/visibility Paradox.Engineering Studies,1(3),169-189.
  22. Feenberg, Andrew(1999).Questioning Technology.NY:Routledge.
  23. Fu, Daiwie(2007).How Far Can East Asian STS Go? A Position Paper.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,1(1),1-14.
  24. Hajer, Maarten A.(1995).The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  25. Hamlin, Christopher(1992).Reflexivity in Technology Studies: Toward a Technolgoy of Technology (and Science)?.Social Studies of Science,22,511-544.
  26. Hård, Mikael(1993).Beyond Harmony and Consensus: A Social Conflict Approach to Technology.Science, Technology & Human Values,18(4),408-432.
  27. Hård, Mikael(1994).Technology as Practice: Local and Global Closure Processes in Diesel-Engine Design.Social Studies of Science,24,549-585.
  28. Hess, Davis(1997).Science Studies: an Advanced Introduction.NY:New York University Press.
  29. Hughes, Thomas P.(1989).Machines, Megamechines, and Systems.In Context: History and the History of Technology, Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, Research in Technology Studies,Bethlehem, PA:
  30. Hughes, Thomas P.(1995).Technological Momentum.Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism,MA:
  31. Hughes, Thomas P.(1999).The Evolutions of Large Technological Systems.The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  32. Hull, Richard(1994).The (Re)Turn to History: A Comment on Wiebe E. Bijker, "Do Not Despair: There Is Life After Constructivism".Science, Technology & Human Values,19(2),242-244.
  33. Jasanoff, Shelia(ed.),Markle, Gerald E.(ed.),Petersen, James C.(ed.),Pinch, Trevor(ed.)(1995).Handbook of Science and Technology Studies.London:Sage.
  34. Kim, Yung Sik(2010).Specialized Knowledge in Traditional East Asian Contexts: STS and the History of East Asian Science.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,4(2),179-183.
  35. Klein, Hans K.,Kleinman, Daniel Lee(2002).The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations.Science, Technology & Human Values,27(1),28-52.
  36. Kleinman, Daniel Lee(1995).Politics on the Endless Fronter: Postwar Research Policy in the United States.NC:Duke University Press.
  37. Kleinman, Daniel Lee(1998).Untangling Context: Understanding a University Laboratory in the Commercial World.Science, Technology & Human Values,23(3),285-314.
  38. Kline, Ronald,Pinch, Trevor(1996).Users as Agents of Technological Change: The Social Construction of the Automobile in the Rural United States.Technology and Culture,37(4),763-795.
  39. Latour, Bruno(2005).Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.NY:Oxford University Press.
  40. Latour, Bruno,Porter, Catherine(trans.)(1987).Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society.MA:Harvard University Press.
  41. Latour, Bruno,Porter, Catherine(trans.)(1993).We Have Never Been Modern.MA:Harvard University Press.
  42. Law, John(1999).Technology and Heterogeneous Engineering: The Case of Portuguese Expansion.The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  43. Lie, John(2008).Social Theory, East Asia, Science Studies.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,2(3),445-448.
  44. MacKay, Hughie,Gillespie, Gareth(1992).Extending the Social Shaping of Technology: Ideology and Appropriation.Social Studies of Science,22,685-716.
  45. MacKenzie, Donald(1993).Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance.MA:The MIT Press.
  46. MacKenzie, Donald(1996).How Do We Know the Properties of Artefacts? Applying the Sociology of Knowledge to Technology.Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology,Amsterdam:
  47. MacKenzie, Donald(1999).Missile Accuracy: A Case Study in the Social Processes of Technological Change.The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  48. MacKenzie, Donald(ed.),Wajcman, Judy(ed.)(1985).The Social Shaping of Technology: How the Refrigerator Got Its Hum.Philadelphia:Open University Press.
  49. Misa, Thomas J.(1995).Retrieving Sociotechnical Change from Technological Determinism.Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism,MA:
  50. Misa, Thomas J.(1988).How Machines Make History, and How Historians (and Others) Help Them to Do So.Science, Technology & Human Values,13(3,4),308-331.
  51. Misa, Thomas J.(ed.),Brey, Philip(ed.),Feenberg, Andrew(ed.)(2003).Modernity and Technology.MA:The MIT Press.
  52. Nahuis, Roel,van Lente, Harro(2008).Where Are Polities? Perspectives on Democracy and Technology.Science, Technology & Human Values,33(5),559-581.
  53. Nakajima, Hideto(2007).Differences in East Asian STS: European Origin or American Origin?.East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal,1(2),237-241.
  54. Nieusma, Dean,Riley, Donna(2010).Design on Development: Engineering, Globalization, and Social Justice.Engineering Studies,2(1),29-60.
  55. Olsen, Jan K. B.(ed.)(2009).A Companion to the Philosophy of Technology.MA:Wiley-Blackwell.
  56. Pfaffenberger, Bryan(1992).Technological Dramas.Science, Technology & Human Values,17(3),282-312.
  57. Pinch, Trevor(1996).The Social Construction of Technology: A Review.Technological Change: Methods and Themes in the History of Technology,Amsterdam:
  58. Pinch, Trevor,Bijker, Wiebe E.(1999).The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit from Each Other.The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,MA:
  59. Riley, Donna(2008).Engineering and Social Justice.CA:Morgan and Claypool.
  60. Russell, Stewart(1986).The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker.Social Studies of Science,16,331-346.
  61. Sato, Yasushi(2007).Systems Engineering and Contractual Individualism: Linking Engineering Processes to Macro Social Values.Social Studies of Science,37(6),909-934.
  62. Sismondo, Sergio(1993).Some Social Constructions.Social Studies of Science,23,515-553.
  63. Slayton, Amy E.(2010).Ambiguous Reform: Technical Workforce Planning and Ideologies of Class and Race in 1960s Chicago.Engineering Studies,2(1),5-28.
  64. Smith, Merritt Roe(1995).Technological Determinism in American Culture.Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism,MA:
  65. Staudenmaier, John M.(1989).The Politics of Successful Technologies.In Context: History and the History of Technology, Essays in Honor of Melvin Kranzberg, Research in Technology Studies,Bethlehem, PA:
  66. Straker, James D.(2010).Engineering and Social Inequality in Modern World Literature: of Disembodied Forces and Provocative Intrusions.Engineering Studies,2(1),61-83.
  67. Wajcman, Judy(2000).Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies: In What State is the Art?.Social Studies of Science,30,447-464.
  68. Williams, Robin,Edge, David(1996).The Social Shaping of Technology.Research Policy,25,865-899.
  69. Winner, Langdon(1993).Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding It Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology.Science, Technology & Human Values,18(3),362-378.
  70. Woolgar, Steve(1991).The Turn to Technology in Social Studies of Science.Science, Technology & Human Values,16(1),20-50.
  71. 吳泉源(2002)。技術與技術研究在台灣:艾傑頓(David Edgerton)教授來訪的一些省思。當代,176,64-73。
  72. 陳瑞麟(2004)。科學理論版本的結構與發展。台北:台大出版中心。
  73. 楊國樞編、李亦園編、文崇一編(1985)。現代化與中國化論集,台北:
  74. 葉啟政(2001)。社會學和本土化。台北:遠流。
  75. 葉啟政(2004)。進出「結構─行動」的困境。台北:三民。
  76. 蕭新煌(1995)。轉型的台灣社會學與轉型的台灣社會。中國社會學刊,18,1-15。
  77. 謝國雄編(2008)。群學爭鳴:台灣社會學發展史,1945-2005。台北:群學。
Times Cited
  1. 洪俊智(2017)。綠色「騎」蹟? 臺灣電動機車發展困境背後之政策結構與脈絡分析。臺灣大學國家發展研究所學位論文。2017。1-100。 
  2. 蘇映塵(2014)。風貌式老街再造的技術政治:以三峽和深坑老街為例。臺灣大學建築與城鄉研究所學位論文。2014。1-134。 
  3. 陳惠萍(2015)。綠能科技與在地使用:台灣太陽光電的社會技術網絡分析。臺灣大學社會學研究所學位論文。2015。1-166。
  4. 黃昱翔(2016)。維護之重要:住宅綠建築的社會與技術特性。臺灣大學地理環境資源學研究所學位論文。2016。1-95。