IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2022 - 44

Feature
as one of the main factors leading to the emergence
of the sociology of science.
Following the course of the sociology of science,
a program was proposed; the empirical program of
relativism (EPOR). Its advocates sought to find the
role of social elements in the superiority of scientific
theories, especially regarding scientific controversies.
In explaining the EPOR, Harry Collins, the
main figure of this program, introduced three significant
steps or missions. First, the researcher has to
show the " interpretative flexibility " of the empirical
results. In other words, he should demonstrate that
the empirical data can justifiably be interpreted in
more than one way. Second, he should show the
mechanism of " closure " of a scientific controversy
(i.e., putting an end to the controversy and reaching
an agreement about an issue). And finally, the
researcher should be able to find an appropriate relevance
between this closure and the social structure
which were formed by the controversies among the
scientists [3], [16].
The social construction of technology (SCOT),
an approach describing the relationship between
society and technology development, is Pinch and
Bijker's attempt at utilizing the three EPOR missions
in the development of a technology. SCOT considers
the interest of the relevant social groups to be the
main factor influencing the development of a specific
technology [18]. Hughes [13] criticizes SCOT;
in his new approach, called the systems approach,
he claims that there are various factors in addition
to social interests, such as economic, technological,
and political factors that construct a technology by
influencing the builder. Inspired by the " systems "
approach and the " actor-network theory (ANT), "
Law [15] proposes a more comprehensive approach
toward the relationship between society and technology
called heterogeneous engineering. In his
approach, all of the above-mentioned factors are
posited to affect technology development directly
and are not thought to be mediated by the builder.
Indeed, Law [15] considers the builder as an important
factor alongside the other factors. Based on
his knowledge that was gained from more than 30
years of experience of the real world of technology,
Andrew Feenberg proposes ten paradoxes of technology
that enable us to achieve a more profound
perspective on the relationship between society
and technology. He describes a co-construction
between the two, positing a two-sided interaction
44
[9]. However, even this approach can be extended
in some ways.
Today, the increase in worldwide access to the
internet and smart phone penetration have caused
the growth of the global co-construction of technologies
and societies, inaugurating a new era.
In this era, some new phenomena occur which
can be better understood using a more comprehensive
model. This is what this essay attempts to
investigate.
We shall first provide a description and short
critique of the SCOT approach of Pinch and Bijker.
Then, Law's " heterogeneous engineering " will be
discussed as an alternative to SCOT. In our attempts
to investigate the relationship between modern
technologies and societies, Feenberg's famous paradoxes
of technology have been adopted to improve
the heterogeneous engineering approach. Finally, a
global networked heterogeneous co-construction of
technologies and engineers is suggested for studying
several cases that arise in this field.
Social construction of technology
approach
The core of the idea of the " SCOT " can be found
in the research of Wiebe E. Bijker and his colleagues,
including Trevor Pinch, Thomas Hughes, Michel Callon,
John Law, Bruno Latour,1 and Steve Woolgar.
One of the important works of this group is the promotion
of their own view through publication of a
book titled The Social Construction of Technological
Systems, which includes some articles written by the
group members.
In the first article of this book, " The Social Construction
of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology
of Science and Sociology of Technology Might
Benefit Each Other? " Pinch and Bijker have sought
to explain the SCOT approach and its applied concepts
through a case study of the history of the bicycle.
They tried to reproduce three main ideas of the
EPOR, " interpretative flexibility, " " relevant social
groups, " and " closure, " in the sociology of technology
[18].
The concept of " interpretative flexibility " is perhaps
the most fundamental concept which can
convey the intention of the SCOT approach. SCOT
1It is worth mentioning that Latour was a member of this group but later left the
group to develop the " ANT. "
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2022
