Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
Sally Wyatt
(Maastricht University)
Send message to Convenor
- Format:
- Plenaries
- Location:
- Economy, Main Auditory (Aula) (and overflow room Economy IV)
- Sessions:
- Friday 19 September, -
Time zone: Europe/Warsaw
Long Abstract:
In the final plenary session, two distinguished social theorists will reflect on the sociology of contemporary knowledge practices and their relationship with local and global asymmetries and solidarities. In what way can the insights of science and technology studies help to challenge as well as explain the dynamics of technoscientific success and global standardisation in domains from science to economics? Can sovereignty over measurement and accountability be contested at the same time as expressing universal, intellectual and moral solidarity? How has the engagement of intellectuals with their publics changed in the modern era? What kinds of social and cultural capital do public intellectuals need in order to act authoritatively? The discussion will focus on possible answers to these questions, with particular reference to Europe and its diverse/shared geographies and histories.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Friday 19 September, 2014, -Paper long abstract:
The aim of the lecture is to show asymmetries and dependencies within science and technology. I would like to achieve this by merging a world-system theory, social studies of science and metrology. The ambition of such proposition is to show how economic dependency is transformed into more subtle forms of dependency and structural violence. I will demonstrate how the accumulation of capital (Wallerstein) is connected in result with the founding of centres of calculation. The latter - according to Latour - are necessary for practicing science and technology (technoscience). We see clearly how the success of modern societies, it's position within modern world-system (global center - periphery relations) is linked with technoscientific success. Capital accumulation is coupled with the accumulation of knowledge and with possibility of creation of stabile and long metrological networks of control. Peripheral and semi-peripheral countries are not only economically depended, but also are unable to create, and stabilize their own metrological networks. The question of economic sovereignty must therefore be complemented by the question of the metrological sovereignty. This task, on the other hand, is in the tension with universal, intellectual and moral solidarity. Due to the fact that metrology, capital and knowledge are intertwined universality is ambiguous:
In lecture I would like to consider the answer to the following questions:
1. Is intellectual and moral solidarity and metrological sovereignty possible?
2. How to be technoscientifically effective and metrologically independent?
3. How to disconnect manufacture of knowledge and capital accumulation and its asymmetries
Paper long abstract:
Drawing on positioning theory, this paper presents a historical sketch of changes in how intellectuals engage with their publics. It starts with the simple observation that in the first half of the twentieth century public intellectuals tended to be philosophers, but their public engagement has steadily declined since then. Increasingly, social and natural scientists have taken a more prominent role. The paper attempts to explain this change, showing how it reflects a more substantial shift away from the authoritative public intellectual. Epitomised by Sartre and Russell, authoritative public intellectuals are generalists whose cultural capital enables them to speak out with moral vigour about a wide range of social and political issues without ever exhibiting expertise in any of them. The paper identifies the major sociological factors which have made it increasingly difficult to act as authoritative public intellectuals without losing credibility.