“What Are We Busy Doing?”
“What Are We Busy Doing?”
复制标题
“我们在忙什么？”
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Michael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Michael
参与事件无论是访谈，装置，或参与式摄影师，都可能涉及一系列的事件，这些事件以这样或那样的方式“溢出”这些参与事件的经验，分析或政治框架。这篇文章着眼于我们如何处理这些溢出例如，外行参与者的“不当行为”形式不仅提供了他们的帐户，而且还探索了创造性地部署他们的方法。特别是，Stengers的“白痴”的数字被提出作为一种设备，部署这些溢出，以询问“我们正在忙碌做什么”作为社会科学研究人员在参与事件。这种审问是进一步考虑积极的白痴“投机设计”版本的公众参与科学，似乎直接产生“溢出”。本文提供了投机性设计原型和实践的例子，并在公众参与的社会科学和设计师视角之间形成了一个理想的典型对比。有人建议，投机设计可以作为一种资源，补充“科学和技术研究”（STS）的概念化，并向公众，参与和科学的做法。
Engagement events—whether interviews, installations, or participatory encounters—can entail a range of happenings which, in one way or another, “overspill” the empirical, analytic, or political framing of those engagement events. This article looks at how we might attend to these overspills—for instance, forms of “misbehavior” on the part of lay participants—not only to provide accounts of them but also to explore ways of deploying them creatively. In particular, Stengers’ figure of the “idiot” is proposed as a device for deploying those overspills to interrogate “what we are busy doing” as social science researchers in engagement events. This interrogation is furthered by considering the proactive idiocy of “Speculative Design’s” version of the public engagement with science which seems directly to engender “overspilling.” Providing examples of speculative design prototypes and practices, the article develops an ideal typical contrast between social scientific and designerly perspectives on public engagement. It is suggested that speculative design can serve as a resource for supplementing “science and technology studies” (STS) conceptualizations of, and practices toward, public, engagement, and science.