Technological capability, consequentiality and participation: issues about nanotechnology

Authors

  • Fernando Tula Molina Profesor asociado de la Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, Investigador del CONICET.
  • Sergio Barberis Becario doctoral CONICET/UBA
  • Federico Vasen Becario doctoral UBA-UNQ-CONICET
  • Gustavo Giuliano Profesor titular de la Universidad Católica

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48160/18517072re29.249

Keywords:

nanotechnology, consequential context, technological policy, democratic participation

Abstract

This paper has a twofold objetive: a) Related to advances in nanotechnology, to draw attention to the urgency of considering the development and consequences of new technologies. b) To propose the consequential context and its categories to contribute to the common debate framework on this issues.
In general the work reflects and proposes on how to think and act collectively on the direction of technological innovation and its associated practices.

References

Agazzi, E. (1996), El bien el mal y la ciencia: las dimensiones éticas de la empresa científico-tecnológica, Madrid, Tecnos.

Apel, K. O. (1979), “Types of rationality today: the continuum of reason between science and ethics, en Rationality Today”, Ottawa Press.

Callon, M. (2001), Desafíos y tensiones actuales en ciencia, tecnología y sociedad, Madrid, Biblioteca Nueva, “Cuatro modelos de dinámica de la ciencia”, pp. 27-70.

Castoriadis, C. (2005), Figuras de lo pensable: Las encrucijadas del laberinto, VI, México, fce, “¿Qué democracia?”.

Cohen, R. S. (1983), “Social implications of recent technological innovations”, en Durban P. T. y F. Rapp (eds.), Philosophy and Technology, Dordrecht, Reidel, pp. 35-47.

Drexler, E. (1993), La nanotecnología: el surgimiento de las maquinas de creación, Barcelona, Gedisa.

Escalante, José M. (2003), “Nanotecnologías: promesas dudosas y control social”, Revista cts+i, Nº 6.

Feenberg, A. (1999), Questioning Technology, Routledge.

Lacey, H. (1999), Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding, Londres-Nueva York, Routledge.

Lacey, H. (2005), Values and objectivity in science: the current controversy about transgenic crops, Nueva York, Lexington Books.

Lewenstein, Bruce V. (2005), “What counts as a ‘social and ethical issue’ in nanotechnology?”, Hyle: International Journal for the Philosophy of Chemistry, vol. 11, Nº 1, pp. 5-18.

Quintanilla, M. A. y D. Lawler (2000), “El concepto de eficiencia técnica”, Tópicos actuales en Filosofía de la Ciencia, Mar del Plata, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, pp. 203- 224.

Regis, E. (1995), Nano: The Emerging Science of Nanotechnology, Little, Brown and Company.

Tula Molina, F. (1995), “Del empirismo al humanismo: clave de lectura y crítica de la obra de P. K. Feyerabend”, Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofía, vol. 1, Nº xxi, pp. 85-104.

Tula Molina, F. (2006), “Ideales de conocimiento y problemas epistemológicos”, en Di Gregori, M. C. y M. A. Di Berardino (comps.), Conocimiento, realidad y relativismo, México, unam, pp. 177-191.

Vanderburg, W. H. (2000), The laberinth of technology, Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

Published

2022-09-12

How to Cite

Tula Molina, F., Barberis, S., Vasen, F., & Giuliano, G. (2022). Technological capability, consequentiality and participation: issues about nanotechnology. Redes. Journal of Social Studies of Science and Technology, 15(29), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.48160/18517072re29.249