| 词条 | Langdon Winner |
| 释义 |
| name = Langdon Winner | image = LangdonWinner.jpg | caption = Langdon Winner at Madrid on July 1, 2010 | birth_date = {{Birth date and age|1944|8|7|mf=y}} | birth_place = San Luis Obispo, California | occupation = Thomas Phelan Chair, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute | spouse = Gail P. Stuart | children = 3 | website = [https://www.langdonwinner.com/] | footnotes = }} Langdon Winner (born August 7, 1944) is Thomas Phelan Chair of Humanities and Social Sciences in the Department of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York. Langdon Winner was born in San Luis Obispo, California on August 7, 1944. He received his B.A. in 1966, M.A. in 1967 and Ph.D. in 1973, all in political science at the University of California, Berkeley. His primary focus was political theory. He has been a professor at Leiden, MIT, University of California, Los Angeles and at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Since 1985 he has been at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; he was a visiting professor at Harvey Mudd College (2000) and Colgate University (2001). In 2010 he was a Fulbright Fellow visiting the Universidad Complutense in Madrid. Winner lives in upstate New York. He is married to Gail P. Stuart and has three children. His interests include science, technology, American popular culture, and theories of sustainability. Winner is known for his articles and books on science, technology, and society. He also spent several years as a reporter, rock music critic, and contributing editor for Rolling Stone magazine.[1] Technology and politicsIn 1980 Winner proposed that technologies embody social relations, i.e. power.[2] To the question he poses "Do Artifacts Have Politics?", Winner identifies two ways in which artifacts can have politics. The first, involving technical arrangements and social order, concerns how the invention, design, or arrangement of artifacts or the larger system becomes a mechanism for settling the affairs of a community. This way "transcends the simple categories of 'intended' and 'unintended' altogether", representing "instances in which the very process of technical development is so thoroughly biased in a particular direction that it regularly produces results heralded as wonderful breakthroughs by some social interests and crushing setbacks by others" (Winner, p. 25-6, 1999). It implies that the process of technological development is critical in determining the politics of an artifact; hence the importance of incorporating all stakeholders in it. (Determining who the stakeholders are and how to incorporate them are other questions entirely.) The second way in which artifacts can have politics refers to artifacts that correlate with particular kinds of political relationships, which Winner refers to as inherently political artifacts (Winner, p. 22, 1999). He distinguishes between two types of inherently political artifacts: those that require a particular sociological system and those that are strongly compatible with a particular sociological system (Winner, p. 29, 1999). A further distinction is made between conditions internal to the workings of a given technical system and those that are external to it (Winner, p. 33, 1999). This second way in which artifacts can have politics can be further articulated as consisting of four 'types' of artifacts: those requiring a particular internal sociological system, those compatible with a particular internal sociological system, those requiring a particular external sociological system, and those compatible with a particular external sociological system. Certain features of Winner's thesis have been criticized by other scholars, including Bernward Joerges.[3] Such criticisms are often narrowly focused upon particular cases in Winner's essays, the height of the bridges built by Robert Moses on the Long Island Parkway, for example, and tend to overlook his general arguments about the interweaving of political institutions and technological devices. MusicWinner contributed piano and backing vocals to the hoax album The Masked Marauders created by Rolling Stone.[4] Critique of educational technologiesOver the years one focus of Winner's criticism has been the excessive use of technologies in the classroom, both in K-12 schools and higher education. Winner's critique is well explained in his article "Information Technology and Educational Amnesia,"[5] and expressed in his satirical lecture, "The Automatic Professor Machine."[6] Selected articles
Selected books
References1. ^{{Cite web|url=https://www.langdonwinner.com/about/|title=About: Brief Biography|website=Langdon Winner (personal website)|language=en-US|access-date=2018-04-04}} 2. ^"Do Artifacts Have Politics?" in Daedalus, Vol. 109, No. 1, Winter 1980. Reprinted in The Social Shaping of Technology, edited by Donald A. MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (London: Open University Press, 1985; second edition 1999) 3. ^[https://www.academia.edu/2628379/Do_Politics_Have_Artefacts_1999_ An attempted rebuttal to Winner’s argument is Bernward Joerges’ “Do Politics have Artefacts?” (Requires sign-in)] 4. ^{{citation | title = The Masked Marauders - The Complete Deity Recordings | publisher = Rhino Records | accessdate = 2008-04-13}} 5. ^{{Cite journal|last=Winner|first=Langdon|date=2009-12-01|title=Information Technology and Educational Amnesia|url=https://www.langdonwinner.com/other-writings/2017/6/13/information-technology-and-educational-amnesia|journal=Policy Futures in Education|volume=7|issue=6|pages=587–591|doi=10.2304/pfie.2009.7.6.587|via=}} 6. ^{{Cite web|url=https://www.langdonwinner.com/videos-and-music/|title=Videos and Music|website=Langdon Winner (personal website)|language=en-US|access-date=2018-04-04}} External links
6 : Living people|Science and technology studies scholars|Neo-Luddites|University of California, Berkeley alumni|Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute faculty|1944 births |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。