Science, Technology and Society: A Sociological Approach is a comprehensive guide to the emergent field of science, technology, and society (STS) studies and its implications for today’s culture and society. Discusses current STS topics, research tools, and theories Tackles some of the most urgent issues in current STS studies, including power and culture, race, gender, colonialism, the Internet, cyborgs and robots, and biotechnology Includes case studies, a glossary, and further reading lists.

On a stroll down a neighbourhood street in Togo, one is likely to see: little boys playing with homemade toys that roll and can be pushed with a stick or pulled on a string; girls helping their mother around the house and tending younger siblings; men sitting chatting with friends, smoking and playing dice games or zipping by on a variety of two-wheelers; women waiting at the pump for their turn to fill their basins before 2 p.m. when the pump (...) is locked for the day and girls doing errands or selling small items. (shrink)

This paper explores the role of speculative anticipation in ethics during the COVID-19 pandemic and provides a structure to think about ethical decision-making in times of extreme uncertainty. We identify three different but interwoven domains within which speculative anticipation can be found: global, local, and projective anticipation. Our analysis aims to open possibilities of seeing the situatedness of others both locally and globally in order to address larger social issues that have been laid bare by the presence of SARS-CoV-2. Our (...) account of speculative anticipation builds on the analyses of the gendered impact of anticipation in technoscience by Vincanne Adams, Michelle Murphy and Adele Clarke; studies in cultural anthropology by Ann Laura Stoler; and the recent research on speculative fiction by Esther Jones. Like theirs, ours is intended to be useful. We offer it as a tool to recast questions and revisit assumptions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is hoped that by using the frame of the ethics of speculative anticipation, one might be able to consider how to avoid those futures that reproduce inequity, and instead actively and responsibly envision those futures that are informed by equity and sustainability. (shrink)

**No longer the current version available on SEP; see revised version by Sharon Crasnow** -/- Feminists have a number of distinct interests in, and perspectives on, science. The tools of science have been a crucial resource for understanding the nature, impact, and prospects for changing gender-based forms of oppression; in this spirit, feminists actively draw on, and contribute to, the research programs of a wide range of sciences. At the same time, feminists have identified the sciences as a source as (...) well as a locus of gender inequalities: the institutions of science have a long tradition of excluding women as practitioners; feminist critics of science find that women and gender (or, more broadly, issues of concern to women and sex/gender minorities) are routinely marginalized as subjects of scientific inquiry, or are treated in ways that reproduce gender-normative stereotypes; and, closing the circle, scientific authority has frequently served to rationalize the kinds of social roles and institutions that feminists call into question. -/- Feminist perspectives on science therefore reflect a broad spectrum of epistemic attitudes toward and appraisals of science. Some urge the reform of gender inequities in the institutions of science and call for attention to neglected questions with the aim of improving the sciences in their own terms; they do not challenge the standards and practices of the sciences they engage. Others pursue jointly critical and constructive programs of research that, to varying degrees, aim at transforming the methodologies, substantive content, framework assumptions, and epistemic ideals that animate the sciences. The content of these perspectives, and the degree to which they generate transformative critique, depends not only on the types of philosophical and political commitments that inform them but also on the nature of the sciences and subject domains on which they bear. Feminist perspectives have had greatest impact on sciences that deal with inherently gendered subjects—the social and human sciences—and, secondarily, on sciences that study subjects characterized in gendered terms, metaphorically or by analogy (projectively gendered subjects), chiefly the biological and life sciences. Feminist perspectives are relevant to sciences that deal with non-gendered subject matters, but perspectives vary substantially in content and in critical import depending on the sciences and the particular research programs they engage. (shrink)

Whether it pertains to what is not considered, what cannot be determined, what is not allowed to be known, or what is deliberately concealed, absences figure as the constant shadows of what is made present by social research. This article explores the relation between what is presented and what is not by treating it first as a vexing conundrum for representation and then as a vehicle for understanding. The matters under examination include what is written about the social world as (...) well as the methods of writing employed. This article seeks an orientation toward both aspects that attends to the binds, contradictions, and possibilities of depicting what is missing. That involves addressing how authors labor to render absences present, the criteria for assessment, as well as the metaphors that guide activities. (shrink)

The 1990s could be called The Decade of Sociology in mathematics education. It was during those years that the sociology of mathematics became a core ingredient of discourse in mathematics education and the philosophy of mathematics and mathematics education. Unresolved questions and uncertainties have emerged out of this discourse that hinge on the key concept of social construction. More generally, what is at issue is the very idea of “the social”. Within the framework of the general problem of “the social”, (...) we want to open a discussion of boundaries and margins in mathematics and mathematics education. By theorizing the divisions of purity and danger, we will be able to better understand the intersection of logic, mathematics, and thinking with gender, race, and class, and morals, ethics, and values in the classroom. The process of transforming the sociology of mathematics and the sociology of mind into pedagogical tools for mathematics educators and philosophers of education has already begun. One of the tasks before us is the development of a more profound and at the same time more practical grasp of “the social”. Our objective in this paper is to move ourselves and our readers in the direction of just such a grasp of the social. (shrink)

Consideration of the evolutionary and cross-cultural history of childbirth reveals many differences between the ways in which most human females have experienced childbirth and the ways in which most women in contemporary industrialized obstetric settings experience the event. In this paper I review two of these differences: the pain and anxiety of labor and delivery and the discontinuity of care provided for the mother and infant. I argue that much of the dissatisfaction with birth practices in the United States results (...) from the failure of modern obstetric practice to meet the evolved needs of mothers and infants. (shrink)