Comments on: Socially Construct This http://www.localoaf.org/2007/01/24/socially-construct-this/ Information: It's the Magic Sat, 02 Jan 2010 19:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 By: Ryan Shaw http://www.localoaf.org/2007/01/24/socially-construct-this/comment-page-1/#comment-251 Ryan Shaw Thu, 25 Jan 2007 15:57:30 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/01/24/socially-construct-this/#comment-251 You'd be hard-pressed to find a "pure" social constructionist or technological determinist anywhere in social science these days. Most people have reached similar conclusions as you--the material artifacts like technology and social discourses both influence one another and together co-construct social reality. The differences in various positions are more ones of degree, related to underlying philosophies about the nature of reality. The kinds of questions most social scientists are focusing on now are not determinism vs. constructionism, but how both of these processes interact in specific situations. As for the SCOT notion of "closure," that too has been heavily critiqued. Again, there seems to be a consensus that technological systems do become relatively more or less stable at different times, but of course there is debate over how that stability is achieved and how resistant it is to further change. Anyway, though you may find this stuff silly (your tone suggests you do), at least the "bored sociologists" are attempting to explicitly articulate their theories about how socio-technical systems operate--unlike many businesspeople and technologists who make decisions guided by implicit theories that they never attempt to articulate or justify. You’d be hard-pressed to find a “pure” social constructionist or technological determinist anywhere in social science these days. Most people have reached similar conclusions as you–the material artifacts like technology and social discourses both influence one another and together co-construct social reality. The differences in various positions are more ones of degree, related to underlying philosophies about the nature of reality. The kinds of questions most social scientists are focusing on now are not determinism vs. constructionism, but how both of these processes interact in specific situations.

As for the SCOT notion of “closure,” that too has been heavily critiqued. Again, there seems to be a consensus that technological systems do become relatively more or less stable at different times, but of course there is debate over how that stability is achieved and how resistant it is to further change.

Anyway, though you may find this stuff silly (your tone suggests you do), at least the “bored sociologists” are attempting to explicitly articulate their theories about how socio-technical systems operate–unlike many businesspeople and technologists who make decisions guided by implicit theories that they never attempt to articulate or justify.

]]>