Formation of the modern scientific field: the experience of synthetic biology in the context of the sociology of expectations
https://doi.org/10.26907/2079-5912.2025.3.67-72
Abstract
The article attempts to conceptualize the process of forming a modern research field, using the example of synthetic biology. The author focuses on the practices of contemporary scientists in shaping new research fields, aiming to identify patterns of their formation. The article demonstrates modern practices that contribute to the emergence of new research fields, which consist of constructing a desired vision of the future. The theoretical and methodological foundation of the article relies on the concepts of the "sociology of expectations" and "textuality" by German sociologist Clemens Blümel, as well as the concept of "performativity" by Danish sociologist Mads Borup. The author not only explicates the relevance of the "sociology of expectations" concept in the context of modern science but also identifies its epistemological boundaries using the example of synthetic biology.
About the Author
M. V. Lagutin
Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Lagutin Mark Vladimirovich, postgraduate student, assistant, Institute of Social and Philosophical Sciences and Mass Communications, Department of General Philosophy
Kazan, 420008
References
1. Moiseeva A.P. The Phenomenon of Technoscience. Vectors of Well-Being: Economy and Society. 2017; (2 (25)):45–58. (In Russ.)
2. Roco M.C., Bainbridge W.S. Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science. – Arlington, Virginia: National Science Foundation, 2002. 482 p.
3. Schummer J. From Nano-Convergence to NBIC-Convergence: «The best way to predict the future is to create it». Governing Future Technologies: Nanotechnology and the Rise of an Assessment Regime. 2009; (27 (1)):57–71.
4. Borup M., Brown N., Konrad K., Van Lente H. The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. 2006; (18 (3–4)):285–298.
5. Blümel C. Ordering the past, envisioning future(s): How review articles in synthetic biology make use of heterogeneous expectations. Futures. 2024: (155):103302.
6. Clomburg J.M., Gonzalez R. Biofuel production in Escherichia coli: the role of metabolic engineering and synthetic biology. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2010; (86 (2)):419–434.
7. Gözen I., Köksal E. S., Põldsalu I., Xue L., Spustova K., Pedrueza-Villalmanzo E., Ryskulov R., Meng F., Jesorka A. Protocells: Milestones and Recent Advances. Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany). 2022; (18):1–32.
8. Morgan M.S. Narrative ordering and explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. 2017; (62):86–97.
9. Onishchenko G.G., Kutyrev V.V., Odinokov G.N., Safronov V.A. Synthetic biology: risks and prospects. Problems of especially dangerous infections. 2014; (3):5–10. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Lagutin M.V. Formation of the modern scientific field: the experience of synthetic biology in the context of the sociology of expectations. The Kazan Socially-Humanitarian Bulletin. 2025;(3(70)):67-72. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2079-5912.2025.3.67-72
Views:
45
Email this article 