Abstract
Starting from common-sense notions of ‘furniture of the world’ a process ontology is developed in which prospective is an integral part. Technology as configurations that work (precariously) embodies expectations which structure further development. Examples (a cloned puppy, hotel keys, DC airplanes, stem cells, and overpasses on Long Island) are used to develop the notion of material narratives that are “written”, not just by engineers and designers/producers, but also by users: “reading” implies some further “writing”. In contrast to prevailing notions of technological control (through manipulation of building blocks), the “writing” of nanotechnology is modulation of the invisible and impredictable - an extreme example of unruly technology and repair work after the fact, where in practice control is a gesture not so different from magic. Because ontology cannot be other than prospective, it is political throughout. Thus, prospective technology highlights ontological politics.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Akrich M. (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker W., Law J. (eds) Shaping technology/building society. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp 205–223
Akrich M. (1995) User representations: Practices, methods and sociology. In: Rip A., Misa T.J., Schot J.W. (eds) Managing technology in society. The approach of constructive technology assessment. Pinter Publishers St. Martin’s Press, London, pp 167–184
Appadurai, A. (ed) (1986) The social life of things. Commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Appadurai A. (1990) Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture & Society 7(2–3): 295–310. doi:10.1177/026327690007002017
Baird, D., Nordmann, A., Schummer, J. (eds) (2004) Discovering the nanoscale. IOS Press, Amsterdam
Barry A. (2001) Political machines. Governing a technological society. The Athlone Press, London
Bensaude-Vincent B. (2006) Two cultures of nanotechnology?. In: Schummer J., Baird D. (eds) Nanotechnology challenges. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, pp 7–28
Bergson, H. (1911/1983). Creative evolution (A. Mitchell, Trans.). Lanham: University Press of America.
Bijker, W.E., Law, J. (eds) (1992) Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Callon M., Law J., Rip A. (1986) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Macmillan, Basingstoke and London
Callon M. (1999) Whose imposture? physicists at war with the third person. Social Studies of Science 29: 261–286
Cohen, C., Walsh, V., & Richards, A. (2002). Learning by designer-user interaction: An analysis of usability activities as coordination mechanisms in the product development process. In C. E. Garcia & L. Sanz-Menendez (Eds.), Management and Technology (Vol. 5, pp. 61–78). Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General Science, Research and Development, 1998. COST A3.
De Laat, B. Scripts for the future. Technology foresight, strategic evaluation and socio-technical networks: the confrontation of script-based scenarios. PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam, 18 December 1996.
De Laat B. (2000) Future scripts. In: Brown N., Rappert B., Webster A. (eds) Contested futures. A sociology of prospective techno-science. Ashgate, Aldershot
Dupuy J.-P., Grinbaum A. (2006) Living with uncertainty: Toward the ongoing normative assessment of nanotechnology. In: Schummer J., Baird D. (eds) Nanotechnology challenges. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, pp 287–314
Feynman R. (1960) There’s plenty of room at the bottom. Engineering and Science 23: 22–36
Grint K., Woolgar S. (1997) The machine at work: Technology, work and organization. Polity Press, Cambridge
Hay, C. (forthcoming). Political ontology. In R. E. Goodin & C. Tilly (Eds.), The oxford handbook of contextual political analysis.
Heidegger M. (1977) The question concerning technology, and other essays. Harper and Row, New York
Hla S.-H., Bartels L., Meyer G., Rieder K.-H. (2000) Inducing all steps of a chemical reaction with the scanning tunneling microscope tip: Towards single molecule engineering. Physical Review Letters 85(13): 2777–2780. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2777
Hughes T.P. (1983) Networks of power. Electrification in western society 1880–1930. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD
Hughes T.P. (1986) The seamless web: technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science 16: 281–292. doi:10.1177/0306312786016002004
Hutchby I. (2001) Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology 35: 441–456
Irwin A., Michael M. (2003) Science, social theory and public knowledge. Open University Press, Maidenhead and Philadelphia
IWGN (Interagency Working Group on Nanoscience.Engineering and Technology). (1999). Nanotechnology–shaping the world atom by atom. Washington: National Science and Technology Council.
Joerges B. (1999a) Do politics have artefacts?. Social Studies of Science 29(3): 411–431. doi:10.1177/030631299029003004
Joerges B. (1999b) Scams cannot be busted. Reply to Woolgar and Cooper. Social Studies of Science 29(3): 450–457. doi:10.1177/030631299029003006
Latour B. (1991) Technology is society made durable. In: Law J. (eds) A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination. Routledge, London, pp 103–131
Latour B. (1999) Pandora’s hope. Essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Latour B. (2004) Politics of nature. How to bring the sciences into democracy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Lianos M. (2003) Social control after Foucault. Surveillance & Society 1(3): 412–430
Lombardi O., Labarca M. (2005) The ontological autonomy of the chemical world. Foundations of Chemistry 7: 125–148. doi:10.1007/s10698-004-0980-6
Miller, D. (ed) (1998) Material cultures. Why some things matter. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Miller, P., Wilsdon, J. (eds) (2006) Better humans? The politics of human enhancement and life extension. DEMOS, London
Mokyr J. (1990) The lever of riches. Oxford University Press, New York
Mol A. (1999) Ontological politics: A word and some questions. In: Law J., Hassard J. (eds) Actor- network theory and after. Blackwell’s, Oxford, pp 74–89
Nelson R.R., Winter S.G. (1977) In search of a useful theory of innovation. Research Policy 6: 47–76. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(77)90029-4
Nersessian N.J. (2006) The cognitive-cultural systems of the research laboratory. Organization Studies 27(1): 125–145. doi:10.1177/0170840606061842
Nordmann A. (2006) Noumenal technology: Reflections on the incredible tininess of nano. In: Schummer J., Baird D. (eds) Nanotechnology Challenges. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, pp 49–72
Norman D.A. (1990) The design of everyday things. Doubleday, New York
Oransky, I. (2006), All Hwang human cloning work fraudulent, The Scientist, published 10 January 2006 on the website http://www.the-scientist.com.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1962). Man the technician, In History as a system and other essays toward a philosophy of history (pp. 87–164). New York: Norton (Originally published in 1940).
Rip A. (2000) There’s no turn like the empirical turn. In: Kroes P., Meijers A. (eds) The empirical turn in the philosophy of technology. JAI an imprint of Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 3–17
Rip A. (2006) A co-evolutionary approach to reflexive governance—and its ironies. In: Voß J.-P., Bauknecht D., Kemp R. (eds) Reflexive governance for sustainable development. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 82–100
Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In S. Rayner & E.L. Malone (Eds.), Human choice and climate change, Vol. 2, Ch. 6, pp. 327–399. Columbus: Battelle Press.
Schön D. (1983) The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. Basic Books, New York
Schummer, J., Baird, D. (eds) (2006) Nanotechnology challenges. Implications for philosophy, ethics and society. World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore
Stein R.L. (2004) Towards a process philosophy of chemistry. Hyle–International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry 10((1): 1–17
Stoelhorst, J.-W. (1997). In search of a dynamic theory of the Firm. An evolutionary perspective on competition under conditions of technological change, with an application to the semi-conductor industry. University of Twente, 03-12-1997.
Tsoukas H. (2005) Complex knowledge: Studies in organizational epistemology. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Van den Belt H., Rip A. (1987) The Nelson-Winter/Dosi model and synthetic dye chemistry. In: Bijker W.E., Hughes T.P., Pinch T.J. (eds) The social construction of technological systems. New directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 135–158
Van der Vleuten, E.B.A. (2003). De materiële eenwording van Nederland. In J.W. Schot, H.W. Lintsen, A. Rip & A.A. Albert de la Bruhèze (Eds.), Techniek in Nederland in de Twintigste Eeuw. VII. Techniek en Modernisering. Balans van de Twintigste Eeuw (pp. 43–73). Zuthphen: Walburg Pers.
Van de Ven A.H., Poole M.S. (2005) Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies 26(5): 1377–1404. doi:10.1177/0170840605056907
Van Lente, H. (1993). Promising technology–the dynamics of expectations in technological developments, PhD Thesis. Enschede: University of Twente.
Van Lente H., Rip A. (1998) Expectations in technological developments: An example of prospective structures to be filled in by agency. In: Disco C., Meulen B.J.R. (eds) Getting New Technologies Together. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 195–220
Verbeek P.-P. (2005) What things do. Philosophcal reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park, Pennsylvania State University Press
Verbeek P.-P. (2006) Materializing Morality—design ethics and technological mediation. Science, Technology & Human Values 31(3): 361–380. doi:10.1177/0162243905285847
Whitehead A.N. (1929) Process and reality. Macmillan, London
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? reprinted in D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman (eds.), The social shaping of technology (Second Edition), pp. 28–40. Buckingham & Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Wood M. (2002) Mind the gap? A processual reconsideration of organizational knowledge. Organization 9(1): 151–171. doi:10.1177/1350508402009001354
Woolgar S. (1991) The turn to technology in social studies of science. Science, Technology & Human Values 16(1): 20–50. doi:10.1177/016224399101600102
Woolgar S., Cooper G. (1999) Do artefacts have ambivalence? Moses’ Bridges, Winner’s Bridges and other urban legends in S&TS. Social Studies of Science 29(3): 433–449. doi:10.1177/030631299029003005
Woolgar S. (2002) After word?–on some dynamics of duality interrogation. Or: Why bonfires are not enough. Theory, Culture & Society 19(5–6): 261–270. doi:10.1177/026327602761899255
Wynne B. (1988) Unruly technology: practical rules, impractical discourses and public understanding. Social Studies of Science 18: 147–167. doi:10.1177/030631288018001006
Open Access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Rip, A. Technology as prospective ontology. Synthese 168, 405–422 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9449-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9449-9