From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience

There are more publics involved in science than one would imagine at first sight. In technoscientific conditions what counts as knowledge creation is not primarily the individual experimental achievement that gives coherence to scientific practice and separates science from its publics; rather, it i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Papadopoulos, Dimitris
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis (Routledge) 2015
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/
_version_ 1848799119234039808
author Papadopoulos, Dimitris
author_facet Papadopoulos, Dimitris
author_sort Papadopoulos, Dimitris
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description There are more publics involved in science than one would imagine at first sight. In technoscientific conditions what counts as knowledge creation is not primarily the individual experimental achievement that gives coherence to scientific practice and separates science from its publics; rather, it is a form of dispersed experimentation in more than human worlds: distributed invention power. This form of labour involves intensive relationalities and transversal experimentation across different groups of people, other species and material environments. Distributed invention power is organised and regulated through the pervasive securitisation of technoscience: surveillance and control of technoscientific fields as well as financialisation of its activities and research outputs. The securitisation of science reorders the traditional split between the public sphere, the private sector and the commons. The folding of each one of these spheres into the other underlies a constant, often antagonistic, oscillation between big science and open science. What is constitutive of the diverse movements that sustain open technoscience is not that they challenge technoscience as such but that they try to create alternative knowledge practices inside different fields of technoscience. This distinction is of importance: it implies that a politics of publics can no longer be socially and materially transformative. What instigates transformation is the socially distributed and more than human experimentation with technoscience to create alternative forms of life.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T20:30:36Z
format Article
id nottingham-55108
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
language English
last_indexed 2025-11-14T20:30:36Z
publishDate 2015
publisher Taylor & Francis (Routledge)
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-551082018-09-25T10:55:53Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/ From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience Papadopoulos, Dimitris There are more publics involved in science than one would imagine at first sight. In technoscientific conditions what counts as knowledge creation is not primarily the individual experimental achievement that gives coherence to scientific practice and separates science from its publics; rather, it is a form of dispersed experimentation in more than human worlds: distributed invention power. This form of labour involves intensive relationalities and transversal experimentation across different groups of people, other species and material environments. Distributed invention power is organised and regulated through the pervasive securitisation of technoscience: surveillance and control of technoscientific fields as well as financialisation of its activities and research outputs. The securitisation of science reorders the traditional split between the public sphere, the private sector and the commons. The folding of each one of these spheres into the other underlies a constant, often antagonistic, oscillation between big science and open science. What is constitutive of the diverse movements that sustain open technoscience is not that they challenge technoscience as such but that they try to create alternative knowledge practices inside different fields of technoscience. This distinction is of importance: it implies that a politics of publics can no longer be socially and materially transformative. What instigates transformation is the socially distributed and more than human experimentation with technoscience to create alternative forms of life. Taylor & Francis (Routledge) 2015-01-02 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/1/OpenTechnoscience-SaC-Papadopoulos-5F-AAM-OpenAccess.pdf Papadopoulos, Dimitris (2015) From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience. Science as Culture, 24 (1). pp. 108-121. ISSN 1470-1189 Invention power; Experimental labour; Open technoscience; Ecological transversality; Securitisation; Alter-ontologies https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09505431.2014.986322 doi:10.1080/09505431.2014.986322 doi:10.1080/09505431.2014.986322
spellingShingle Invention power; Experimental labour; Open technoscience; Ecological transversality; Securitisation; Alter-ontologies
Papadopoulos, Dimitris
From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title_full From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title_fullStr From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title_full_unstemmed From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title_short From publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
title_sort from publics to practitioners: invention power and open technoscience
topic Invention power; Experimental labour; Open technoscience; Ecological transversality; Securitisation; Alter-ontologies
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/55108/