fergusonComments-Jessica

Memo 13-

Your grid generally seems to refrain from making normative claims that extend into the future, except in the case of deviant contributions to science. Even if you do not intend on extending into the repurcussions of your work on future developments in global technoscience construction, where could you see your work getting picked up? Considering that you are interested in the subaltern or deviant or marginalized unacknowledged contributions to techsci what might be the intended and unintended effects of your work? I ask because there are at least two audiences that are going to take advantage of your work. The first is individuals that are utilizing and plan on utilizing knowledge from groups that they haven't acknowledged. The second are the groups, Vandana Shiva style, that are ignored and thus attempting to mobilize these groups for some sort of political goal.

Memo 14- You might already know the distinctions between subaltern and simply marginalized, but I know that I had been using these terms interchangeably and was soundly criticized that this was not true--simply a word of warning as you work through these issues.

Second, is this project turning into a historical comparison between the colonial appropriation of the west indies and americas and the tie in with later colonial (and today's) appropriation? I'm just wondering as the narratives could be kept completely separate and become two different books or could be mashed up as one.

Memo 15- Colonial Technoscience - Is this core category colonial technoscience as a collaboration between colonizer and non-normative persons or is it about appropriation and invisibility of the persons? Its the difference between stealing through lack of recognition of cooperation and stealing through taking wholesale technoscientific knowledge.

Access and Appropriation of Technology - This is actually going to be somewhat similar to the first core category. Is it the process of appropriation that you are interested in and thus make visible present mechanisms of taking or the open up of existing knowledge to find the incorporated products of appropriation and thus make visible past contribution.

Sociology of Knowledge - perhaps less "sociology of knowledge" and more "alternative knowledge".

Memo 16- I'm confused about how this is a study of cognitive science. If this were the case you'd be looking at how existing in different places creates different capabilities for intelligence rather than knowledge creation per se...but I'm also not well versed in cogsci so perhaps there are other options. The only thing I can think of is the turnbull story about navigation through island systems creating not just knowledge systems different than what we are used to but possibly cognitive tropes for thinking in other contexts.

so the historiography aspect would be the breaking open of contemporary technoscience knowledge to locate authorship?

The lines on expertise makes me think that this might be a core category item in that you seem to be interested in how expertise is bounded so that the knowledge that is created outside of these boundaries can be taken without acknowledgment, possibly due to it simply being "obvious" or some other categorization.

What would this project look like if it was an anthropology of technology? I've been trying to work out the differences between the two lately so it would be interesting to see what you might make of your own project as an anthropological pursuit rather than sociological. I suppose you'd be more interested in the british style social anthropology rather than cultural anthropology.