Published 2013-11-28
Keywords
How to Cite
Martínez, S. F. (2013). Ciencia, Tecnología y Democracia. Tópicos, Revista De Filosofía, 32(1), 53–76. https://doi.org/10.21555/top.v32i1.171
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Altmetrics
Citas
Abstract
I claim that Dewey’s concept of public provides a way of reconciling two intuitions inconflict. On theone hand theidea that thereliance on expertsconflicts with the development of democracy and on the other the idea that the development of democracy in the complex societies of the present requires of science and technology. The construction of the public in the sense of Dewey leads us to overcome the traditional opposition between substantivists and constructionists in the philosophy of technology (and in most empirical studies of technology) and thus allows for a way of reconciling the two intuitions.
References
- Broncano, F. (2000). Mundos artificiales. Filosofía del cambio tecnológico. México: Paidós-UNAM.
- Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and Its Problems. Ohio: Swallow Press.
- Freenberg, A. (1999). Questioning Technology. London: Routledge.
- Hull, D., Ruse, M. (1998). The Philosophy of Biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Latour, B. (1992). Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane objects. En Shaping Technology/Building Society. W. E. Bijker y J. Law (eds.) Cambridge: MIT Press.
- ____ (2004). Politics of Nature, How to bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Laird, F. (1993). Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision Making. En Sciences, Technology and Human Values, 18 (7): 341-361.
- López, C., Velasco, A. (en prensa). La filosofía política de la ciencia. México: UNAM.
- Martínez, S. (2003). Geografía de las prácticas científicas. México: UNAM.
- Pateman, C. (1976). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Radder, H. (1996). Philosophical Studies of Sciences and Technology. Albany: SUNY Press.
- Rip, A., Misa, T., Schot, J. (1995). Managing Technology in Society. London: Pinter.
- Schot, J., Rip, A. (1996). The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment. En Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 44 (18): 251-268.
- Schwartz, M., Thompson, M. (1990). Divided We Stand. Redefining Politics, Technology and Social Choice. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
- Turner, S. (2003). Liberal Democracy 3.0. London y New Delhi: Thousand Oaks y Sage publications.
- Velasco, A. (en prensa). Una visión republican de la ciencia. En La filosofía política de la ciencia. C. López y A. Velasco (eds.)