The aim of this chapter is to understand how the concept of Social Technology emerged, evolved, was shaped, and undergone semantic appropriations in Latin America. By reviewing relevant literature on the subject, the historical evolution of the concept was traced back, evidencing how it has been appropriated and redefined by different actors involved in its discussion, development, and application. The analyses arrived at two main syntheses. On the one hand, the geopolitical context of Latin America, especially Brazil, shaped both the experiments and the production of knowledge on Social Technology. On the other hand, while the concept became more prominent and widely used, it remained an epistemic, practical, and political category crossed by tensions, disputes, and co-optations. Moreover, as the concept gained traction, superficial use was widespread. Such findings imply revisiting and strengthening the concept, facing the challenge posed by the emergence of other terms, which, despite seeming close, are market-oriented and more aligned with the hegemonic rationality.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Social Technology: Historical Development and Appropriations of the Concept

  • Carolina Bagattolli,
  • Giovanna Pezarico

摘要

The aim of this chapter is to understand how the concept of Social Technology emerged, evolved, was shaped, and undergone semantic appropriations in Latin America. By reviewing relevant literature on the subject, the historical evolution of the concept was traced back, evidencing how it has been appropriated and redefined by different actors involved in its discussion, development, and application. The analyses arrived at two main syntheses. On the one hand, the geopolitical context of Latin America, especially Brazil, shaped both the experiments and the production of knowledge on Social Technology. On the other hand, while the concept became more prominent and widely used, it remained an epistemic, practical, and political category crossed by tensions, disputes, and co-optations. Moreover, as the concept gained traction, superficial use was widespread. Such findings imply revisiting and strengthening the concept, facing the challenge posed by the emergence of other terms, which, despite seeming close, are market-oriented and more aligned with the hegemonic rationality.