LLAMADO ESPECIAL A PARTICIPAR EN PANELES ORGANIZADOS POR PARTICIPANTES DE CTS-CHILE<\/p>\n
PANEL 88:\u00a0\u201cIn the making, on the move\u201d: perspectivas globales sobre la apropiaci\u00f3n tecnol\u00f3gica.<\/strong><\/p>\n PANEL 50. Can the Subaltern Research?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Panel: \u201cIn the making, on the move\u201d: perspectivas globales sobre la apropiaci\u00f3n tecnol\u00f3gica.<\/strong><\/p>\n Organizado por: Mart\u00edn P\u00e9rez Comisso, Universidad de Chile; Justin F. Pickard, Universidad de Sussex<\/p>\n Las historias sobre la tecnolog\u00eda a menudo se narran desde el mito del h\u00e9roe: hombres geniales que, en momentos espec\u00edficos de lucidez, reflejan el sentimiento de una \u00e9poca, rescatan una invenci\u00f3n, una innovaci\u00f3n, para sus profesiones y pa\u00edses. Se han propuesto diferentes modelos para superar esta narrativa de h\u00e9roe: por ejemplo, cambiar el punto de observaci\u00f3n de la historia o centrarse en controversias, trayectorias u organismos que explican el momento, el impacto o la evoluci\u00f3n de un artefacto o sistema.<\/em><\/p>\n Este panel propone que las historias de artefactos y sistemas sean (re)sensibilizadas a trav\u00e9s del estudio de apropiaci\u00f3n tecnol\u00f3gica, proceso que nos permite observar estas trayectorias desde una perspectiva anti heroica, con \u00e9nfasis en la diversidad global de grupos de usuarios, sitios, contextos, plataformas, infraestructuras involucradas en su acceso, aprendizaje, incorporaci\u00f3n y transformaci\u00f3n de tecnolog\u00edas en uso. La reescritura y reestructuraci\u00f3n de una determinada tecnolog\u00eda se puede ver desde un paradigma de movilidades (Urry et al.), Que nos permite abrir nuestros relatos a enfoques heterodoxos en las historias de las tecnolog\u00edas (postcolonial, colectivista, feminista, entre otras). Este panel espera ser un espacio de di\u00e1logo y debate sobre historias de apropiaci\u00f3n tecnol\u00f3gica. Estamos buscando trabajos comparativos, expl\u00edcitamente globales, ya sea en procesos din\u00e1micos o casos extendidos sobre los cambios culturales de una tecnolog\u00eda en una comunidad particular – por ejemplo, Estudios de capacidades compartidas, sobre la apropiaci\u00f3n en m\u00faltiples locaciones que representan las diferentes etapas de la evoluci\u00f3n de una determinada tecnolog\u00eda.<\/em><\/p>\n Proceso:<\/strong><\/p>\n La fecha l\u00edmite para enviar un resumen es el 1 de marzo de 2017. Si desea participar en este panel abierto, deber\u00e1 seleccionarlo cuando env\u00ede su resumen a trav\u00e9s del sitio web de la conferencia 4S:\u00a0http:\/\/www.4sonline.org\/meeting<\/a>. Si desea discutir la relevancia de su trabajo en este panel, no dude en ponerse en contacto con nosotros:\u00a0mperezco@fen.uchile.cl<\/a>\u00a0o\u00a0J.F.Pickard@sussex.ac.uk<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n PANEL 50. Can the Subaltern Research?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Organized by:\u00a0Ivan da Costa Marques, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Anita Say Chan University of Illinois; David Nemer, University of Kentucky; Lars Bo Andersen, Aarhus University<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n This panel questions research on \u2018the subaltern\u2019 by focusing on processes whereby established theory can reinscribe acts of domination and erasure of options, in a variation on Spivak\u2019s query,\u00a0 \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d (1988) We point out three possible entry points: 1) The subaltern researcher.\u00a0 Xavier Polanco (1985) used the expression \u201cdomestic brain drain\u201d to identify \u201ca cognitive position assumed by Third World and Latin American scientists, who without emigrating from their countries guide their scientific work in terms of research fronts, reward systems and publication of developed countries.\u201d The ambivalences between simultaneously copying and rejecting the models of European civilization often lead subaltern colonized-colonizers who are approaching modernity to a hindrance. 2) Dialogue with the subaltern. A second entry point comes at the intersection of two seemingly accepted claims within the STS community: \u201cscience is capable of dialogue only on its own terms,\u201d and \u201ca respectful enough story is all one needs to go to trial with.\u201d\u00a0 The first will require that subaltern claims to knowledge be expressed and subjected to evaluation following scientific practices. On the second, \u201crespectful enough\u201d means producing a set of inscriptions which, by means of their juxtaposition, stabilize the story as an entity, that is, as something formed by a detachment from of the flux of (an ever moving) reality. 3) Conflicts and limits of authority. A third entry point would be any situation where there is a conflict between the authority of scientific knowledge or fact and the authority of a local popular non-expert knowledge that scientists classify as \u201cmere belief.\u201d On the one hand, the (colonizer) scientist, engineer or project manager is clearly privileged in determining the scientific or technological reality of what is at stake. On the other hand, subalterns may resist and evade the definition of their reality by others in numerous and sometimes quite effective ways. The panel thus welcomes any research that investigates the stakes and dynamics in such encounters between expert and subaltern knowledges and realities.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n