Revisiting Friedrich Engels’s Dialectics of Nature in an Age of Digital Idealism

Christopher Leslie
{"title":"Revisiting Friedrich Engels’s Dialectics of Nature in an Age of Digital Idealism","authors":"Christopher Leslie","doi":"10.31269/triplec.v19i1.1223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The idealism that Fredrich Engels seeks to defeat in Dialectics of Nature today pervades online discourse and pedagogies of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The deterministic view that STEM is dedicated to unleashing the inherent power in objects for the service of privileged societies fails to understand the basic principles that Engels proposed. Engels exposes his contemporaries’ flawed understanding of science and technology and provides interdisciplinary examples that exemplify a different way of thinking. Outside of China, Engels’s ideas have been used suggest that social considerations cannot be a part of science because they limit the free exchange of ideas. Within China, particularly after the establishment of the People’s Republic in 1949, these ideas have been the basis of new thinking about the relationships among developers, the government, and the people. Moreover, readers of Dialectics of Nature who are familiar with the basic tenets of Science and Technology Studies (STS), such as social constructivism and actor-network theory, will not be so impressed with the idea that social theory has no place in understanding science and engineering. This analysis suggests avenues of cooperation for international science studies. In addition, it provides a starting point for pedagogies to promote the development for science and technology that reduces inequality and supports the notion that the liberal arts have an important place in the study of science and engineering, an insight known as STEAM.","PeriodicalId":45788,"journal":{"name":"TRIPLEC-Communication Capitalism & Critique","volume":"28 8 1","pages":"78-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TRIPLEC-Communication Capitalism & Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v19i1.1223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The idealism that Fredrich Engels seeks to defeat in Dialectics of Nature today pervades online discourse and pedagogies of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The deterministic view that STEM is dedicated to unleashing the inherent power in objects for the service of privileged societies fails to understand the basic principles that Engels proposed. Engels exposes his contemporaries’ flawed understanding of science and technology and provides interdisciplinary examples that exemplify a different way of thinking. Outside of China, Engels’s ideas have been used suggest that social considerations cannot be a part of science because they limit the free exchange of ideas. Within China, particularly after the establishment of the People’s Republic in 1949, these ideas have been the basis of new thinking about the relationships among developers, the government, and the people. Moreover, readers of Dialectics of Nature who are familiar with the basic tenets of Science and Technology Studies (STS), such as social constructivism and actor-network theory, will not be so impressed with the idea that social theory has no place in understanding science and engineering. This analysis suggests avenues of cooperation for international science studies. In addition, it provides a starting point for pedagogies to promote the development for science and technology that reduces inequality and supports the notion that the liberal arts have an important place in the study of science and engineering, an insight known as STEAM.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在数字唯心主义时代重新审视恩格斯的自然辩证法
弗里德里希·恩格斯在《自然辩证法》中试图击败的唯心主义今天弥漫在科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)的在线话语和教学法中。这种决定论的观点认为,STEM致力于释放对象的内在力量,为特权社会服务,这未能理解恩格斯提出的基本原则。恩格斯揭露了同时代人对科学和技术的错误理解,并提供了跨学科的例子,说明了一种不同的思维方式。在中国以外,恩格斯的思想被用来表明社会考虑不能成为科学的一部分,因为它们限制了思想的自由交流。在中国,特别是1949年中华人民共和国成立后,这些思想成为对开发商、政府和人民之间关系的新思考的基础。此外,《自然辩证法》的读者如果熟悉科学技术研究(STS)的基本原则,如社会建构主义和行动者网络理论,就不会对社会理论在理解科学和工程中没有地位的观点印象深刻。这一分析为国际科学研究提供了合作的途径。此外,它还为促进科学和技术的发展提供了一个起点,从而减少了不平等,并支持了文科在科学和工程研究中占有重要地位的观点,这种观点被称为STEAM。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
14
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Advertising – a Necessary “Elixir of Life” for Capitalism: On the Critique of the Political Economy of Advertising How Work as a Category of Thought Has Been Disrupted in Neoliberal Capitalist Societies Media, Journalism, and the Public Sphere in Private Family Ownership. On the Critique of the Political Economy of Capitalist Media Enterprises “There is a better you in you”: Promises and Ideologies of Self-Tracking Technologies Toward a Reevaluation of Siegfried Kracauer and the Frankfurt School
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1