Technoscience in a Risk Society. A Workshop 2400-OG-EN-TSR

1) Introductory class: the subject and the didactic aim of the workshop, organizational arrangements, explanation of the conditions of credit for students. Introduction of the teacher and students.
2) Ecological risks of the 21st century. Tedx: Stoknes, Per Espen. 2017. How to Transform Apocalypse Fatigue into Action on Global Warming, https://www.ted.com/talks/per_espen_stoknes_how_to_transform_apocalypse_fatigue_into_action_on_global_warming, 14 min. (access 13.02.2025). Discussion.
3) The current condition of the epoch of man (Anthropocene). A screening of the movies: Baichwal, J., N. de Pencier, E. Burtynsky (dir.). 2018. Anthropocene: The Human Epoch. Canada, 87 min., Man and The Turing Point (both directed by Steve Cutts, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGMYdalClU, 3,36 min., 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7LDk4D3Q3U, 3,27 min.). Discussion.
4) Scientists’ warnings – why they have to be formulated? A screening of the movie „World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency” documentary of The Alliance of World Scientists (AWS), 2022, https://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/, 35min. (access 13.02.2025). Discussion.
5) Science, evidence and truth. Tedx: Oreskes, Naomi. 2014. Why We Should Trust Scientists?, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxyQNEVOElU, 19 min. (access 13.02.2025). Tedx: Collins, Harry M. 2017. Gravity’s Kiss, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nObM-BvvJIs, 57 min. (access 13.02.2025). Discussion.
6) Stereotypes concerning the idea of civilizational progress. Tedx: Tegmark, Max. 2023. How to kepp AI under control?, https://www.ted.com/talks/max_tegmark_how_to_keep_ai_under_control?referrer=playlist-the_must_watch_ted_talks_on_ai_from_2023&autoplay=true, 14 min. (dostęp 13.02.2025). Discussion.
7) Technoutopian futures: solarpunk. An analysis of A Solarpunkt Manifesto, http://www.re-des.org/a-solarpunk-manifesto/ (access 17.03.2023). A discussion of the movie Andrewism, How to Build A Solarpunk Future Right Now?, 13,28 min., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twGcjDnOb_U (access 17.03.2023). Discussion.
8) Risky values delegated to non-human order of business as usual. A screening of the movie Fairytales of Growth (dir. Khanna, Pierre Smith, 2020), https://www.fairytalesofgrowth.com/watch, 47,27 min. (access 17.03.2023). Discussion.
9) Technological fixes. Case study of climate engineering. A screening of David Keith’s TED lecture A Surprising Idea for “Solving” Climate Change, 16 min., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkEys3PeseA (access 13.02.2025). Discussion.
10) Summary of the class: concluding discussion.

W cyklu 2022/23L:

Timetable:
1) Introductory class: the subject and the didactic aim of the workshop, organizational arrangements, explanation of the conditions of credit for students. Introduction of the teacher and students.
2) The current condition of the risk society. A screening of the movie Man (directed by Steve Cutts, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfGMYdalClU, 3,36 min.). Discussion.
3) Society of risk. A screening of the movie The Story of Stuff (directed by Louis Fox, 2007, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GorqroigqM, 20 min.). Discussion.
4) Ecological risks of the 21st century. A screening of Naomi Klein’s TEDx lecture Addicted to Risk. Perception of risk in Your state. Discussion.
5) Science, evidence and truth. Scientific controversies. A screening of Naomi Oreskes’ TEDx lecture Why We Should Trust Scientists? Discussion.
6) Stereotypes concerning the idea of civilizational progress. A confrontation with scienctific data. A screening of Hans Rosling’s lecture Don’t Panic. Hans Rosling Showing the Facts about Population, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FACK2knC08E, 58 min.
7) Morality, social divides and values delegated to non-human order. A screening of the movie Fairytales of Growth (dir. Khanna, Pierre Simth, 2020), https://www.fairytalesofgrowth.com/watch, 47,27 min.
8) Can we shape our common future? Case study of climate engineering. A screening of David Keith’s TED lecture A Surprising Idea for “Solving” Climate Change. Discussion.
9) Unintended consequences of technological innovations – current debates. A screening of the movie Electronic Waste in Ghana, 2008, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr1zQrXM_7s, 6 min and Conflicted: The Fight Over Congo’s Minerals, 2019, Al Jazeera, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27BZgQ5ln0w, 24 min. Discussion.
10) Summary of the class: concluding discussion.

W cyklu 2024/25L:

Całkowity nakład pracy studenta

- Classes requiring direct participation of the teacher: 20 h - Self-study: reading, watching video materials, class preparation: 80 h Total: 100 h (3 ECTS)

Efekty uczenia się - wiedza

Student knows and understands the given basic trends and positions of the contemporary reflection on science-technology-society relations, knows how to use it while interpreting the texts of the subject matter. He/She knows the scope of his/her knowledge and skills, understands the need of constant learning and professional development.

Efekty uczenia się - umiejętności

Student reconstructs and constructs arguments from the perspectives of different theoretical positions which he/she can detect from various lectures and video materials devoted to the problem of the conditions of the contemporary world and contemporary knowledge. Theoretical background of the class is constituted by: Anthropocene studies, Science and Technology Studies (STS), scientific controversies studies, Public Understanding of Science (PUS), Actor-Network Theory (ANT), sociology of technology, philosophy of technology, sociology of risk. Student takes into account specific different modes of making arguments and notice the differences and similarities among them. Students carry out simple research tasks – interpretative and heuristic assignments.

Efekty uczenia się - kompetencje społeczne

Student is deeply aware that humanistic reflection is extremely important for social bonds building.

Metody dydaktyczne

Students carry out simple research tasks – interpretative and heuristic assignments (preparing summaries of a given movie or a Tedx lecture). They are required to attend and participate actively in the classes. Unexplained poor attendance and failure to participate actively in classes will affect the overall grade on the course.

Metody dydaktyczne eksponujące

- pokaz

Metody dydaktyczne podające

- wykład konwersatoryjny
- wykład problemowy
- wykład informacyjny (konwencjonalny)

Metody dydaktyczne poszukujące

- referatu
- laboratoryjna
- ćwiczeniowa
- giełda pomysłów
- seminaryjna

Wymagania wstępne

Classes will be conducted online, through the Microsoft Teams program. Additional teaching material is already available in the Internet (movies, Tedx lectures). Credits will be assigned during our last meeting, taking into consideration the participation in the class. Contact with the lecturer will be possible via consultations on Skype or via e-mails.

Koordynatorzy przedmiotu

Ewa Bińczyk

Kryteria oceniania

Grades on the course will be based on the following marking scheme:
• Attendance at and active participation in classes 60%
• Assessed speaking assignments (based on materials and notes prepared by students before the class) 40%

Praktyki zawodowe

None

Literatura

Additional video materials:
1. Arthus-Bertrand, Y., L. Besson (dir). 2012. Home. Francja, 90 min.
2. Baichwal, J., N. de Pencier, E. Burtynsky (dir.). 2018. Anthropocene: The Human Epoch. Canada, 87 min.
3. Clay, J. (dir.). 2021. Breaking Boundaries. The Science of Our Planet. USA: Silverback Films.
4. Ellesöe, M. (reż). 2020. The Campaign Against the Climate. Produkcja międzynarodowa, 52 min.
5. How Degrowth Can Save the World?, 36,54 min.
6. Jackson, T. 2010. An Economic Reality Check. TED. Ideas Worth Spreading, 20 min.
7. Our Changing Climate. 2023. How to End Consumerism?, 11,45 min.
8. Raworth, K. 2018. A Healthy Economy Should Be Designed to Thrive, not Grow. TED. Ideas Worth Spreading, 15 min.

Basic Literature:
Beck, Ulrich. 1995. Ecological Politics in the Age of Risk. Cambridge: Polity.
Bijker, Wiebe E., Thomas P. Hughes, Trevor J. Pinch (eds.). 1997. The Social Construction of Technological Systems. New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press, sixth edition.
Bińczyk, Ewa. 2013. Posthumanist Tendencies in Science and Technology Studies. „Political Dialogues. Journal of Biopolitics and Contemporary Political Theories”, Vol. 15, No 1: 8-17.
Bińczyk, Ewa. 2014. Caring about the Future of the Collective: Monitoring Technoscience in the Sociology of Risk and Science and Technology Studies. In: Bińczyk, Ewa, Tomasz Stepień. Modeling Technoscience and Nanotechnology Assessment. Perspectives and Dilemmas. Frankfurt am Mein, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien: Peter Lang, 1-75.
Bińczyk, Ewa. 2016. Monitoring of Technology and the Inevitable Limits of Controllability (as Illustrated by the Criticism of Climate Engineering). In: Social Science and Energy Issues. Sylwia Mrozowska (ed.). Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Libron, 45-68.
Collins, Harry M., Trevor Pinch. 1998. The Golem at Large. What You Should Know about Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hulme, Mike. 2014. Can Science Fix Climate Change? A Case Against Climate Engineering. Cambridge, Malden, MA: Polity Press.
Irwin, Alan, Brian Wynne. 1996. Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Jasanoff, Sheila, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, Trevor Pinch (eds.). 1995. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Latour, Bruno. 1991. Technology is Society Made Durable. In: John Law (ed.). A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, 103-131.
Oreskes, Naomi, Eric M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, Bloomsbury Press, New York.
Proctor, Robert N. 1995. Cancer Wars: How Politics Shapes What We Know and Don’t Know about Cancer. New York: Basic Books.
Tiles, Mary. 2001. Philosophy of Technology. In: William H. Newton-Smith (ed.). A Companion to the Philosophy of Science. Malden, Massachusetts, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 483-491.
Auxiliary Literature:
Barnes, Barry, David Bloor, John Henry. 1996. Scientific Knowledge. A Sociological Analysis. London: Athlone.
Beck, Ulrich. 2000. Risk Society Revisited: Theory, Politics and Research Programmes. In: Barbara Adam, Ulrich Beck, Joost van Loon. The Risk Society and Beyond. Critical Issues for Social Theory. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE Publications, 211-229.
Bijker, Wiebe E., John Law (eds.). 1997. Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press, second edition.
Bińczyk, Ewa. 2013a. (Post)constructivism on Technoscience. „Avant”, Vol. IV, No 1: 317-338.
Bloor, David. 1991. Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, second edition.
Bunge, Mario. 1991. Basic Science is Innocent; Applied Science and Technology Can Be Guilty. In: Daniel O. Dahlston (ed.). Nature and Scientific Method. Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 95-105.
Cockburn, Cyntia, Susan Ormrod. 1993. Gender and Technology in the Making. London: SAGE.
Collingridge, David. 1980. The Social Control of Technology. London: Printer.
Collins, Harry M., Trevor Pinch. 2005. Dr. Golem. How to Think about Medicine. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Ellul, Jacques. 1964. The Technological Society. New York: A.A. Knopf-Random House.
Hacking, Ian. 1992a. The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences. In: Andrew Pickering (ed.). Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 29-64.
Hacking, Ian. 2000. The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Hughes, Thomas P. 2005. Human-Built World. How to Think about Technology and Culture. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
Ihde, Don, Evan Selinger (red.). 2003. Chasing Technoscience. Matrix for Materiality. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Jasanoff, Sheila. 1995. Science at the Bar: Law, Science, and Technology in America. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard University Press.
Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science. “Minerwa”, Vol. 41, 3: 223-244.
Jaspers, Karl. 1961. The Atom Bomb and the Future of Mankind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, trans. E.B. Ashton.
Karin Knorr-Cetina, Michael Mulkay (eds.). 1983. Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science. London: SAGE Publications.
Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krimsky, Sheldon. 2000. Risk Assessment and Regulation of Bioengineered Food Products. „International Journal of Biotechnology”, Vol. 2, Nos 1/2/3, s. 231-238.
Krohn, Wolfgang, Johannes Weyer. 1994. Society as a Laboratory: The Social Risk of Experimental Research. “Science and Public Policy” 21: 173-183.
Kusch, Martin. 2007. Towards a Political Philosophy of Risk: Experts and Publics in Deliberative Democracy. In: Tim Lewens (ed.). Risk: Philosophical Perspectives. London, New York: Routledge, 131-155.
Laird, Frank N. 1993. Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision Making. “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, Vol. 18, 3: 341-361.
Latour, Bruno, Steve Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills, CA, London: Sage.
Latour, Bruno. 1986. Visualization and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands. “Knowledge and Society” 6: 1-40.
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 1999. Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 2004. Politics of Nature. How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: Harvard University Press, trans. Catherine Porter.
Lave, Rebecca, Philip Mirowski, Samuel Randalls. 2010. Introduction: STS and Neoliberal Science. “Social Studies of Science”, Vol. 40, 5: 659-675.
Law, John, Annemarie Mol. 2001. Situating Technoscience: An Inquiry into Spatialities. “Society and Space”, vol. 19: 609-621.
Lengwiler, Martin. 2008. Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology. Historical Origins and Current Practices in Critical Perspective. “Science, Technology, & Human Values”, Vol. 33, 2: 186-200.
Levy, David J. 2002. Hans Jonas. The Integrity of Thinking. Columbia, London: University of Missouri Press.
Lewens, Tim (ed.). 2007. Risk: Philosophical Perspectives. London, New York: Routledge.
MacKenzie, Donald, Judy Wajcman (eds.). 1985. The Social Shaping of Technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Mumford, Lewis. 1967. The Myth of the Machine. Technics and Human Development, vol. 1. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Mumford, Lewis. 1970. The Myth of the Machine. Pentagon of Power, vol. 2. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Oudshoorn, Nelly, Trevor Pinch (eds.). 2005. How the Users Matter. The Co-Construction of Users and Technology. The MIT Press.
Perrow, Charles. 1984. Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
Philip Mirowski, Esther-Mirjam Sent (eds.). 2002. Science Bought and Sold. Essays in the Economics of Science. Chicago, London: Chicago University Press.
Pickering, Andrew (ed.). 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pickering, Andrew. 1995. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency and Science. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
Sismondo, Sergio. 2010. An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Malden, MA, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, second edition.
Strydom, Piet. 2002. Risk, Environment and Society. Ongoing Debates, Current Issues and Future Prospects. Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Turner, Stephen. 2001. What is the Problem with Experts? “Social Studies of Science”, Vol. 31, No 1: 123-149.
Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2005. What Things Do. Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania University Press, trans. Robert B. Crease.
Wehling, Peter. 2006. The Situated Materiality of Scientific Practices: Postconstructivism – a New Theoretical Perspective in Science Studies? „Science Technology & Innovation Studies” 1: 81-100.
Winner, Langdon. 1986. Do Artifacts Have Politics? In: The Whale and the Reactor: a Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago, London: Chicago University Press, 19-39.
Winston, Morton E., Ralph D. Edelbach. 2006. Society, Ethics, and Technology. Toronto: Thomson Wadworth.
Wynne, Brian. 1995. Public Understanding of Science. In: Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen, Trevor Pinch (eds.). Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 361-388.
Yearley, Steven. 2005. Making Sense of Science. Understanding the Social Study of Science. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Ziman, John. 2000. Real Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

W cyklu 2022/23L:

All information in the section: "Podstawowe informacje o przedmiocie".

W cyklu 2024/25L:

All information in the section: "Podstawowe informacje o przedmiocie".

Więcej informacji

Dodatkowe informacje (np. o kalendarzu rejestracji, prowadzących zajęcia, lokalizacji i terminach zajęć) mogą być dostępne w serwisie USOSweb:

Strona przedmiotu 2400-OG-EN-TSR w USOSweb