Acting in an Uncertain World by Michel Callon - Essay Example

Book Review on the book d: Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy by Michel Callon, Pierre Lascoumes, and YannickBarthe Name Institution Date of submission Book Review on the book titled: Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy by Michel Callon, Pierre Lascoumes, and YannickBarthe Callon and his co-authors in the book titled: Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy tries to provide a rejoinder to question regarding the effectiveness of democracy in a peculiar world. They indicate that it is complex to manage science and technology in the presently available political institutions1.This is because science and technology creates controversies that affect many people’s lives. The general public does not have the proficiency of making decisions regarding technical issues, however; it is not appropriate to leave decisions that impact many people’s lives to specialists in a democracy. Callon and his co-authors state that they cannot leave decisions regarding, “GMOs, mad cow disease (BSE), treatment of household waste, gene therapy, nuclear waste, asbestos, genetic diagnosis, cell phones, and tobacco”2. In addition to the above issues, these authors discuss regarding the anthropogenic problem of global warming, which they admit that remains a challenge to global leaders. Examining all that have been said concerning global warming, one realizes the impact of decisions made regarding the problem of global warming. Particularly, the authors address the impacts of global warming in the wake of industrialization in the Third World countries, which have merely realized the economic benefits of industrialization such as lengthened lifespan and food security. This book is essential since it focuses on the decisions to be made by the specialists concerning various issues affecting the lives of many people around the globe. This paper provides a book review of Callon and co-authors’ book: Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. To begin, it is essential to understand the fact that Callon et al. do not want to replace the democratic institutions. Through their book, they try to explain the significance of these institutions being enriched, improved, expanded, and extended to create a technical democracy. They further indicate that it is essential to make our democracies, “absorb the arguments aroused by science and technology”3.The authors are solely interested in hybrid forums since they are open space where groups come together with the aim of discussing the collective options representing heterogeneousexperts, lawyers, technicians, laypersons and politicians. These are some of the people involved in the decision-making process concerning the problem facing people in an uncertain world. The problems are considered hybrid because they must be addressed at different levels in diverse domains ranging from ethical to economic perspectives. The authors also indicate that physiological problems should be addressed through electromagnetism and nuclear physics4. Secondly, the authors explain the differences of major issue concerning uncertainty created by “false friend” risk5. In short, they indicate that risks associated with the decision made, which are identifiable or describable in terms of underlying series of events. Contingency plan to address these problems remains the work for many states because states can always calculate the probability and develop solutions to the problems. In fact, risk implies certainty concerning conditions6. It is clear that uncertainty involves both the unknown unknowns and anticipations concerning the consequences of the probable decisions. Many people, however; lack the knowledge of conceivable options, constitutional provisions that guide every nation in making decisions about the problems facing most countries. In fact it is not easy to understand thecore problem of ignorance, behavior, ignorance of the entities making the process enigmatic. The uncertainty being talked about in this book is that “We know that we do not know, but that is almost all everyone knows”7. The book barely provides the meaning of uncertainty and thus, the only option is to debate and question the investigations by the partakers in decision-making processes. They further assert that hybrid forums are likely to provide answers to some of these pressing issues affecting the world. However, it is quite obvious that the sole decision should not be left in the hands of leaders of world democracies. Thirdly, the book provides a process of learning and developmental process since the book sets up a dialogical space through hybrid forums whereby controversies are defined, clarified and discussed8. These processes are essential since they bring together specialists, representatives, laypersons, and citizens from different countries to help come up with solutions to problems they face in an uncertain world. To properly understand hybrid forums, Callon et al. takes us through the ANT model of transformation whereby science and technical development and translation involves three major phases: a) From the macrocosm to the microcosm whereby specialist have resolved to reduce the world to the microcosm that simplifies, prunes, and configures everything studied in the library to help in research9. b) In a small world of laboratory, the experts try to turn the occurrence into traces and inscriptions, which are chains of equivalents employed in a study. c) From the microcosm to the macrocosm where experts go back to the laboratory reports and present them to the entire world. The above three movements are the translations that takes the world from one state to another (p.69).However, many challenges are created because experts must enact translations by secluding themselves and working in isolation on the occurrences. But this implies that when experts return back to the world in translation C, they must enact far-reaching changes without consulting the general public. The authors argue that various nations fail to consult the partakers regarding the choices they make and in turn they impact the lives of people who barely had a say in the entire process. This problem is created by the democracies and political decisions made by few individuals in the uncertain world. The authors affirm that decision-making process is certainly a huge issue because the past decades have witnessed the public faith regarding technical and scientific changes portrays universal good. Nonetheless, it becomes significant to very few individuals’ lives depending on the political system. In fact, it is evident that the faith has since been replaced bythe wary question of how is this likely to affect everyone. In the ensuing chapters, Callon et al., “There is nothing ………… more rigorous than a group of non-experts striving to know the reasons behind the impending unbearable misfortunes”10. The authors affirm that the society are inclined to suffer problems such cancer and other diseases associated with the problems created by treatment of household waste, gene therapy, nuclear waste and asbestos among others. In this light, public groups are emerging to deliberate in all the three translation phases highlighted above. The public has begun by playing a role in formulating the problem; taking part in research; and eventually in translation three where they turn back to the world. In every translation, citizens are beginning to dialogically with the scientific processes. For instance, the question of whether or not the sheep in England are likely to become affected by the fallout from Chernobyl. In spite of the satisfactory self-confidence by scientists and researchers, shepherds remain skeptical of the idea. The first reason for the shepherds to remain skeptical is because the specialists were once wrong and it is reasonable to assume they might be wrong again. The feared of shepherds are well founded because of the sequel that acts as a proof. A few months later, the experts affirm the fears of the shepherds that they observed radioactivity is probably because of Chernobyl and other probable sources. The experts demand that they need data dating back to 1986 and despite farmers and their representative’s demand for answers, the data were barely supplied. The administration finally confirms that the availability of data is in doubt. This clearly shows that the administration barely did its job, which marks the blend of conceited certainty, unfounded secrecy, and poor work done by specialists that compels citizens to lose of trust in the experts. This story clearly shows that the farmers stood for their way of life, but authorities and the experts were unable to show truthfulness in the studies. Nonetheless, when everything changed in 2009 and people began talking about the climate change or global warming, it further became controversial. The authors argue that science becomes unnecessary when people’s livelihood is at stake and more so when people no longer trusts their gatekeepers. They demand through this book that all political and democratic decisions must be all-inclusive and incorporate everyone’s input. In this regard, the authors discuss, “Ways of corporation between research in the wild and secluded research”11. They eventually suggest that corporation of all the sectors involved in decision-making process remains crucial. It is noteworthy that the fourth chapter explores the main ideas behind the hybrid forum, while the fifth chapter deliberates concerning how to organize the hybrid forums to efficaciously incorporate inputs from all the stakeholders. In a nutshell, Callon and his co-authors in the book:Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy presents valuable ideas for addressing the problems affecting many people because of the decisions of few individuals. It focuses on the macro-development where everyone’s contribution is considered before a decision is made regarding challenges such as GMOs, mad cow disease (BSE), treatment of household waste, gene therapy, nuclear waste, asbestos, genetic diagnosis, cell phones among other issues. It also hints on ANT learning process, and discusses the approaches for developing hybrid forums, besides the politically oriented work. The three authors are like technocrats trying to educate people on the present institutional democratic structures and ways of making decisions necessary in the modern life. It basically focuses on ways of making the democratic institutions more democratic. Reference List Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., Barthe, Y., & Burchell, G., Acting in an uncertain world: An essay on technical democracy, (Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 2011). Read More