Industry 4.0 and the Limitations of Rhetoric of Techno-optimism in Polish Popular Science Discourse

• Autorzy: Bartłomiej Knosala
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: The basic premise of this article is the claim that technology is largely socially constructed. Invoking Armin Grunwald's framing of the hermeneutic approach to technology assessment, we analyse discourses on Industry 4.0 in polish popular science. Design/methodology/approach: The conclusions were reached by analysing the basic metaphors used to describe Industry 4.0 in popular science discourse. We were juxtaposed the techno-optimistic narrative of Industry 4.0 with some findings from science and technology studies (STS). As theoretical basis we used Armin Grunwald's hermeneutical model of technology assessment. Findings: In the course of the work we find that narrative about Industry 4.0 in polish popular science is characterized by naïve techno-optimism. We also indicate on the deterministic model of development of technology and technological fetishism contained in the narrative about Industry 4.0. Research limitations/implications: Similar research can be conducted on broader, international scale. Social implications: Paper can raise awareness of the persuasive nature of the discourse on Industry 4.0. It can also contribute to changing perceptions of the overall nature of Industry 4.0 challenges, in which case Industry 4.0 ceases to appear as a solution to all social and environmental problems and begins to be seen as a challenge that requires comprehensive reforms. Originality/value First paper analyzing the rhetoric of Industry 4.0 in polish popular science.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Industry 4.0; Technology assessment

PL

Przemysł 4.0; Ocena technologii

• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2022
• Numer: z. 165
• Strony: 79--88

Twórcy

autor

Bartłomiej Knosala

• Silesian University of Technology

Bibliografia

• 1. Bińczyk, E. (2012). Technonauka w społeczeństwie ryzyka. Filozofia wobec niepożądanych następstw praktycznego sukcesu nauki. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika.
• 2. Fabiani, P. (2009). The Philosophy of the Imagination in Vico and Malebranche. Firenze: Firenze University Press.
• 3. Frase, P. (2016). Four Futures: Life After Capitalism. London-New York: Verso.
• 4. Grunwald, A. (2016). The Hermeneutic Side of Responsible Research and Innovation. London: ISLE ltd, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• 5. Harrari, Y.N. (2017). Reboot for the AI revolution. Nature, 550, 324-327, https://doi.org/10.1038/550324a.
• 6. Kagerman, H. et al. (2013). Recommendation for implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0. Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group; https://www.din.de/blob/76902/e8cac883f42bf28536e7e8165993f1fd/recommendationsfor-implementing-industry-4-0-data.pdf, July 2, 2022.
• 7. Kuzior, A., Fobel, P. (2019). The Future (Industry 4.0) is closer than we think. Will it also be ethical? International Conference of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering. ICCMSE 2019, Rhodes, Greece. Melville: American Institute of Physics.
• 8. Kuzior, A. (2017). Problem bezrobocia technologicznego w perspektywie rozwoju Przemysłu 4.0. Etyka Biznesu i Zrównoważony Rozwój. Interdyscyplinarne Studia Teoretyczno-Empiryczne, Vol. 4, pp. 31-39.
• 9. Manyika, J. et al. (2013). Disruptive technologies: Advences that will transform life, business and the global economy. McKinsey Global Institute, https://www.mckinsey.com/ ~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/McKinsey%20Digital/Our%20Insights/Disrup tive%20technologies/MGI_Disruptive_technologies_Full_report_May2013.ashx, July 7, 2022.
• 10. Morrar, R. et al. (2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0): A Social Innovation Perspective. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7/11, 12-20.
• 11. Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: New York University Press.
• 12. Ober, J. (2022). Adaptacja innowacji w świetle zachowań organizacyjnych. Wybrane aspekty. Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej.
• 13. Osika G. (2019). Social Innovation as Support to Industry 4.0. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, vol. 141. Politechnika Śląska, pp. 289-301.
• 14. Piccarozzi, M., Aquilani, B., Gatti, C. (2018). Industry 4.0 in management Studies: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 10, 3821, https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ sustainability, July 2019, doi:103390/su10103821.
• 15. Poniewierski, A. (2020). Speed. Bez granic w cyfrowym świecie.
• 16. Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Cologny-Geneva: World Economic Forum, https://luminariaz.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-2016-21.pdf, July 7, 2022.
• 17. Stankiewicz, P. (2015). Klasyczna i partycypacyjna ocena technologii. Studia Biura Analiz Sejmowych, 3(43), pp. 35-55.
• 18. Synowiec, A. (2013). W stronę analizy tekstu - krytyczna teoria dyskursu. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, vol. 65. Politechnika Śląska, pp. 383-396

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2022.165.6