ARTICLE
The Dialectics of Engagement: Some Critical Remarks on Contemporary Participatory Research Program in STS
Kulyash Zhumadilova
Pages 1-12| Published online: 05 Nov 2023
Zhumadilova, Kulyash. 2023. “The Dialectics of Engagement: Some Critical Remarks on Contemporary Participatory Research Program in STS.” Marxism & Sciences 2(2): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.56063/MS.2310.02201
ABSTRACT
This paper will offer a Marxist critique of a recent turn in participatory research within STS tradition. Although in this work, I will focus on examples from the STS community, it is worth mentioning that such a vision of engagement is prevalent in social sciences. STS scholars have been involved in various theoretical and practical attempts which challenge the traditional boundary between academia and the rest of society since the field’s inception in the second part of the twentieth century. At first, such practices were informal, but soon became a scholarly topic on their own and gave rise to various participatory, action-based methodologies. Some of them involve activism and search for alternatives, while others call for reflexivity or increased ethical deliberations. Theory and political commitments of these approaches differ greatly. For example, the theory behind contemporary interventions is intentionally apolitical and focuses on processes and accounts of action rather than a certain goal. In this paper I will look closely at the origin of the participatory research program in the North American context and will analyze from a Marxist perspective its recent move towards rejecting normativity and objectivism. I will highlight friction points and possible additions of new methodologies to Marxist scholarship.
KEYWORDS: History of STS, science studies, Marxism, Situated Interventions, Engagement, Participatory research, Engaged STS, dialectics, emancipatory approach.
REFERENCES
Action-Based Research Methods. 2016. “Action-Based Research Methods. A Bibliography.”
https://activistresearchmethods.wordpress.com/about/. April 30, 2016.
Anderson, Perry. 1976. Considerations on Western Marxism. London: Verso.
———. 1983. In the Tracks of Historical Materialism. London: Verso.
Bellacasa, Maria Puig de la. 2011. “Matters of Care in Technoscience: Assembling Neglected-Things.” Social Studies of Science 41 (1): 85–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710380301.
Bloch, Ernst. 1971. “Changing the World. Marx’s Theses on Feuerbach.” In On Marx. New York: Herder and Herder.
Burawoy, Michael. 2021. Public Sociology: Between Utopia and Anti-Utopia. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Downey, Gary Lee and Teun Zuiderent-Jerak. 2021. “Making and Doing: Engagement and Reflexive Learning in Science and Technology Studies.” In Making and Doing: Activating STS through Knowledge Expression and Travel, edited by Downey, Gary Lee and Teun ZuiderentJerak, 1–36. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Eagleton, Terry. 1996. Literary Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Eubanks, Virginia. 2009. “Double-Bound: Putting the Power Back into Participatory Research.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 30 (1): 107–37.
Hall, Stuart. 1997. “The work of representation.” In Representation. Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, edited by Stuart Hall. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Haraway, Donna. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge.
Hartmann, Douglas. 2017. “Sociology and Its Publics: Reframing Engagement and Revitalizing the Field: 2016 Midwest Sociological Society Presidential Address.” The Sociological Quarterly 58 (1): 3–18.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2016.1248132.
———. 2022. “Community-Engaged Research: What It Is and Why It Matters.” Footnotes. A Magazine of the American Sociological Association 50 (1). Accessed April 2, 2023.
https://www.asanet.org/footnotes-article/community-engaged-research-what-it-and-why-it-matters/.
Illich, Ivan. 1990 [1968]. “To Hell with Good Intentions.” In Combining Service and Learning, edited by Kendall, J., 314–320. Raleigh: National Society for Internships and Experiential Education.
Jameson, Frederic. 2009. Valences of the Dialectic. New York: Verso.
Jasanoff, Sheila. 2007. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 2004. “Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.” Critical Inquiry 30 (2): 225–48.
https://doi.org/10.1086/421123.
Levins, Richard, and Richard Charles Lewontin. 1987. The Dialectical Biologist. Cambridge, Mass. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Liboiron, Max, Emily Simmonds, Edward Allen, Emily Wells, Jess Melvin, Alex Zahara, Charles Mather, and All Our Teachers. 2021. “Doing Ethics with Cod.” In Making and Doing: Activating STS through Knowledge Expression and Travel, edited by Downey, Gary Lee and Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, 137–154. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Liboiron, Max, Justine Ammendolia, Katharine Winsor, Alex Zahara, Hillary Bradshaw, Jessica Melvin, Charles Mather, et al. 2017. “Equity in Author Order: A Feminist Laboratory’s Approach.” Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience 3 (2): 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.28968/cftt.v3i2.28850.
Norman, Richard and Sayers, Sean. 1980. Hegel, Marx and Dialectic. A Debate. New Jersey: Humanities Press Inc.
Sismondo, Sergio. 2008. “Science and Technology Studies and an Engaged Program.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by Edward J. Hackett, 3rd ed. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Wright, Erik Olin. 2010. Envisioning Real Utopias. New York: Verso.
Wynne, Bryan. 1995. “Public Understanding of Science.” In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun. 2015. Situated Intervention: Sociological Experiment in Health Care. Inside Technology. Cambridge: The MIT Press.