Sci&Tech History

Borrowing the phrase from Winner (1985)–Do Artifacts Have Politics, this article try to investigate relation between artifact and nationality. If we see nationality as social construction, we can examine artifact nationality by seeing its construction. But if we see nationalism as something elementary, we have to find another entry point. One of my favorite case of study is story of bush pump in Zimbabwe. In the research conducted by Morgan, Akrich, Mol & de Laet, acceptance of the bush pump doesn’t rely only on its performance, yet also how the artifact was being translated using traditional/religious ceremonial event.

In other words, artifacts have nationality since without the ceremonial event an artifact wouldn’t have been accepted by the community. In a modern country, this ‘nationality’ can also been seen in dominant-marginal paradigm. Liberal market versus the Keynesian for example, show how modern calculation using mathematics as it tool have a different acceptability by the community. The economic crisis started in the US has shown us how this different approach on economy has caused a financial chaos. Error accumulation can give a big impact of the whole virtual market. Should the government help the free-market?

If we try to go deeper in the field of hard science, can culture affect the invention of science? Or before answer that question, we have to de-contruct the terminology of science itself? Rather use the scientific method so things can labeled as science, can we choose another method?

Post to: delicious, Digg, ma.gnolia, Stumbleupon