http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147713 Tue, 21 Apr 2026 07:42:08 GMT 2026-04-21T07:42:08Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147759 The novel Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus (1818) is a rich source of information on the image of science in early nineteenth-century society, revealing clear aspects of the social dimension of scientific research at the time. The purpose of this paper is, after contextualising the scientific environment at the time of the work and the education that Mary Shelley, its author, received, to carry out an exhaustive analysis of the original text in order to reveal characteristics of the scientific practice of the time, in particular the values and motivations that guide the practice of science in the narrative. The analysis reveals that: (1) the values that characterise scientific practice in the Frankenstein universe are: rigour; altruism; endeavour and perseverance; determination; courage; imagination; serenity; recognition; and responsibility; while (2) the motivations for undertaking scientific activity are: curiosity and interest; passion or enthusiasm; ambition; and will. The characterisation of scientific work derived from the book exhibits a conceptualisation of what is considered good science that seems to be current in the imaginary of science today.; La novela Frankenstein o El moderno Prometeo (1818) es una fuente de información abundante sobre la imagen de la ciencia en la sociedad de principios del siglo XIX que permite revelar aspectos nítidos de la dimensión social de la investigación científica de la época. El propósito de este trabajo es, tras contextualizar algunos elementos clave del entorno científico coetáneo a la obra y la educación que recibió Mary Shelley —su autora—, realizar un análisis exhaustivo del texto original para revelar características de la práctica científica del momento, en particular los valores y motivaciones que guían el ejercicio de la ciencia en la narración. El análisis revela que: (1) los valores que caracterizan la práctica científica en el universo Frankenstein son: rigor; altruismo; empeño y perseverancia; determinación; valentía; imaginación; serenidad; reconocimiento; y responsabilidad; mientras que (2) las motivaciones para emprender la actividad científica son: curiosidad e interés; pasión o entusiasmo; ambición; y voluntad. La caracterización de la labor científica a partir de la obra exhibe una conceptualización de lo que se considera buena ciencia que parece vigente en el imaginario de la ciencia actual. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147759 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147758 The main objective of this article is to characterize and discuss certain problems inherent to the electronic voting systems from a philosophical and sociological technological views so that it is able to put into discussion some of the assumption that underlie the attempts to modernize the traditional voting system./nIn a context marked by the fascination for new technologies, different voices are in charge of highlighting the presumed advantages of electronic voting as a solution to the difficulties faced by traditional voting systems. Thus, in the face of the promises and expectations that surround the technophile narratives around their implementation, the article seeks, also, to put in tension that optimistic look that permeates public speeches in the light of different experts who conceive the electronic voting device as a box black by disabling the control and auditing of the vote by the citizens. Consequently, as an opaque and closed system, voting technologies devices appear as a faithful exponent to the technological alienation.; El presente artículo tiene como objetivo central caracterizar y discutir ciertas problemáticas que encierran los dispositivos electrónicos de votación desde una mirada sociológica y filosófica de la tecnología que sea capaz de tensionar algunos de los presupuestos y prenociones que subyacen a los intentos de modernizar los sistemas tradicionales de voto. En un contexto signado por la fascinación por las nuevas tecnologías, distintas voces se encargan de subrayar las presuntas ventajas de la votación electrónica como solución ante las dificultades que enfrenta la votación tradicional. Así, frente a las promesas y expectativas que envuelven a las narrativas tecnofílicas en torno a su implementación, también se busca poner en discusión ese cariz tecnooptimista que impregna a los discursos públicos a la luz de diferentes estudios que conciben al dispositivo del voto electrónico como una caja negra, al inhabilitar el control y auditoría del voto por parte de la ciudadanía. Por consiguiente, en tanto sistema opaco y cerrado, estos dispositivos aparecen como un fiel representante de la alienación tecnológica. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147758 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147757 The notion of understanding has been subjected to intense analysis within studies devoted to the philosophy of science. In recent years, two major accounts have emerged. The first, called veritism, has employed the traditional epistemological concepts of truth and knowledge to analyze the basic characteristics of understanding. By contrast, the second account has dissociated truth from understanding highlighting its pragmatic and contextual components. The aim of the paper will be to argue in favor of the latter account. For this purpose, one of the main pragmatic alternatives that have been proposed in recent years, the theory of Henk de Regt, will be evaluated. It will be shown that this position faces three fundamental difficulties that need to be addressed in order to justify the pragmatic position. In order to address them, an alternative and innovative notion of understanding will be articulated.; La noción de comprensión ha sido sometida a un intenso análisis dentro de los estudios dedicados a la filosofía de la ciencia. En los últimos años, han surgido dos posturas claramente diferenciadas. Una primera postura, denominada veritismo, ha empleado los conceptos tradicionales de verdad y conocimiento para analizar las características básicas de la misma. La segunda postura ha considerado preciso desligar la verdad de la comprensión reseñando los componentes pragmáticos y contextuales de la misma. El objetivo del artículo será argumentar a favor de esta última postura. Para ello, se evaluará una de las principales alternativas pragmáticas que se han propuesto en los últimos años, la teoría de Henk de Regt. Se mostrará que esta postura afronta tres dificultades fundamentales que es preciso abordar a fin de justificar la postura pragmática. Con tal objetivo, se articulará una noción alternativa e innovadora de comprensión. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147757 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147756 Technological pessimism is a perspective that, since the middle of the 20th century, became popular both in intellectual circles and in popular culture, becoming one of the most common ways of thinking about technology. In this paper we will characterize the essentialist thought style, showing how it permeates this perspective of technology, endowing it with autonomy, and as an intrinsic source of dire consequences, both for society and for nature. A historical reconstruction of the essentialist perspective will be made, characterizing its formulation in Aristotle's philosophical thought. From there, we will investigate the way in which the essentialist perspective is deployed before technology in academia, as well as in popular culture. Finally, the case of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) will be presented as a space of debate where we can see the essentialist thought style mobilized.; El pesimismo tecnológico es una perspectiva que, desde mediados del siglo XX, se popularizó tanto en círculos intelectuales como en la cultura popular, convirtiéndose en una de las maneras más comunes de pensar la tecnología. En el presente trabajo caracterizaremos el estilo de pensamiento esencialista, mostrando de qué manera permea dicha perspectiva de la tecnología, dotando a esta de autonomía y considerándola una fuente intrínseca de consecuencias nefastas, tanto para la sociedad como para la naturaleza. Se hará una reconstrucción histórica de la perspectiva esencialista, caracterizando su formulación en el pensamiento filosófico de Aristóteles. A partir de allí, se indagará en el modo en que la perspectiva esencialista se despliega frente a la tecnología tanto en círculos académicos como en la cultura popular. Sobre el final, se expondrá el caso de los organismos genéticamente modificados (OGM) como un espacio de debate donde podremos ver el estilo de pensamiento esencialista movilizado. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147756 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147755 This article proposes a critical review of the technological causes that led to the Chernobyl disaster, pointing out some issues that are still debatable and controversial even for the nuclear experts themselves. How is it possible that an electro-nuclear reactor could be destabilized and explode like a bomb due to the wrong decisions taken by its operators? What if it had been a sabotage or —as one would say today— a terrorist act? Based on these questions and due to the dual conception (military and civil) of the ill-fated RBMK-1000 prototype, together with the uncertainty of not really knowing how its explosion occurred, allow Chernobyl to be awarded the character of "post-normal accident", both from an extra-technical as well as an intra-technical point of view. With this theoretical proposal and from an engineering perspective, the article exhorts to reconsider the epistemological challenge that the unique nature of nuclear and radiological risk represents for the STS field of studies.; Este artículo propone una revisión crítica de las causas tecnológicas que provocaron el desastre de Chernobyl, señalando algunas cuestiones que todavía son debatibles y polémicas hasta para los propios expertos nucleares. ¿Cómo es posible que un reactor electronuclear pudiera estallar como una bomba debido a las decisiones erradas de sus operarios? ¿Y si hubiera sido un sabotaje o —como se diría hoy día— un acto terrorista? A partir de estas interrogantes se fundamenta que la concepción dual (militar y civil) del aciago prototipo RBMK-1000, junto a la incertidumbre de no saber realmente cómo se produjo su explosión, permiten otorgar a Chernobyl el carácter de "accidente postnormal", tanto desde un punto de vista extratécnico como intratécnico. Con esta propuesta teórica se exhorta desde una perspectiva ingenieril a recapacitar sobre el desafío epistemológico que representa el carácter único del riesgo nuclear y radiológico para el campo de estudios CTS. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147755 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147754 This paper aims to analyze and reflect on the academic life of the winners of the L'Oreal Peru award, revealing the role of visibility, recognition and objectivity in scientific work from a gender perspective./nTraditionally, the academic world has always been covered with good manners and a sense of duty to be. Apparently, the sense of the objective and meritocratic regulates the flow of relationships within it, however, this is not so, since it is a space of struggle for power through the exercise of the legitimacy of knowledge, which is shaped as an institutionalized social construction and established within an academic community. So, on what does this legitimacy depend and on what is it based? These are some of the questions we intend to elucidate in this article.; /nThe results of this research show that the field of women's academic life is a highly complex space due to the set of relationships and power disputes that are interwoven within it. In this scenario, mandates such as the competition for visibility and recognition constitute the central axis of this dispute.; El presente trabajo pretende analizar y reflexionar en torno al campo de la vida académica de las ganadoras del premio L'Oreal Perú develando el rol que cumple la visibilidad, el reconocimiento y la objetividad en la labor científica desde un enfoque de género./nLo académico, por tradición siempre se encontró revestido de buenas formas y del deber ser. En apariencia, el sentido de lo objetivo y meritocrático reglamenta el fluir de las relaciones en su interior, sin embargo no es así, ya que se trata de un espacio de lucha por el poder a través del ejercicio de la legitimidad del saber, el mismo que se conforma como una construcción social institucionalizada e instaurada dentro de una comunidad académica. Entonces, ¿de qué depende dicha legitimidad y en qué se fundamenta? Son algunas de las interrogantes que pretendemos dilucidar en el presente artículo.; /nLos resultados de la presente investigación evidencian que el campo de la vida académica de las mujeres, constituye un espacio altamente complejo por el conjunto de relaciones y disputas de poder que se entretejen en su interior. En dicho escenario, mandatos tales como la competencia por la visibilidad y el reconocimiento constituye el eje central de esta disputa. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147754 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147753 The logistic restructuring of the port world of Valparaíso - historical enclave of the South Pacific maritime trade - has raised social and cultural differences, gaps and obstacles with repercussions on the projections of the city, its inhabitants and the actors of the port world. This article outlines the category of "production of cognitive boundaries" with the purpose of showing the conflict of representations involved in this restructuring process and its relevance to enable a productive dialogue between the different stakeholders.; La reconversión logística del mundo portuario de Valparaíso – enclave histórico del comercio marítimo del pacífico sur – ha planteado diferendos, brechas y obstáculos de índole social y cultural que repercuten en las proyecciones de la ciudad, de sus habitantes y de los actores del mundo portuario. El presente artículo esboza la categoría de "producción de límites cognitivos" con el propósito de mostrar el conflicto de representaciones que supone este proceso de reestructuración y su relevancia para posibilitar un dialogo productivo entre las diferentes partes interesadas. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147753 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147752 Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147752 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147751 In this paper we concentrate on facial recognition technology and emphasize that in recent decades, the idea that this type of technology is "objective" and devoid of human errors and biases has been installed in public discourse, assigning it any responsibility to the "good or bad use" that is made of it. Faced with this rhetoric, we argue that when it comes to talking about technological artifacts, neutrality is impossible, even in the very instance of design. To this end, based on the ideas of North American pragmatism, we analyze a real case to show that it is not possible to sustain a dichotomy between facts and values, and that it is necessary to recognize that there is no sharp distinction between the design of technology and the use that we make of it.; En este trabajo nos concentramos en la tecnología de reconocimiento facial y hacemos hincapié en que en las últimas décadas se instaló en el discurso público la idea de que este tipo de tecnología es "objetiva" y carente de los errores y sesgos humanos, adjudicándole cualquier responsabilidad al "buen o mal uso" que se haga de ella. Frente a esta retórica, argumentamos que a la hora de hablar de artefactos tecnológicos la neutralidad es imposible, aun en la instancia misma del diseño. A tal efecto, a partir de las ideas del pragmatismo norteamericano analizamos un caso real, para mostrar que no es posible sostener una dicotomía entre hechos y valores y que es necesario reconocer que no existe una distinción tajante entre el diseño de la tecnología y el uso que hacemos de ella. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147751 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147750 Galileo (1564-1642), in his well-known Discorsi (Galileo, 1638), briefly turning his attention to the fracture of a beam, starts an interesting discussion on the beam's breakage as well as its location. Could the section and breaking point of a beam have been determined beforehand? Furthermore, is it specific to the material? What Galileo did was not merely challenge a physics problem, but the prevailing knowledge of his time: namely, Aristotelianism on one hand, and Nominalism on the other. As a matter of fact, must the breakage of an element be treated as a universal or is it particular to a given material?/nThe present essay aims to prove how Galileo, confronting the structural problem and bringing it into the realm of science, was not just raising a problem but, using Salviati's words, he also established what actually takes place. Many years later, with the progress of physics, strength of materials and theory of structures, figures such as Claude Navier (1785-1836) and Benoît Clapeyron (1799-1864) confirmed once again that the Pisan turned out to be right.; /nThis article intends to combine technical fields such as strength of materials and theory of structures with others like the history of science and philosophy proper. A cooperative approach to these disciplines can be doubtlessly helpful to improve the knowledge, learning and teaching of their different curricula, giving the reader a global, holistic perspective.; /n; Galileo (1564-1642), in his well-known Discorsi (Galileo, 1638), briefly turning his attention to the fracture of a beam, starts an interesting discussion on the beam's breakage as well as its location. Could the section and breaking point of a beam have been determined beforehand? Furthermore, is it specific to the material? What Galileo did was not merely challenge a physics problem, but the prevailing knowledge of his time: namely, Aristotelianism on one hand, and Nominalism on the other. As a matter of fact, must the breakage of an element be treated as a universal or is it particular to a given material/nThe present essay aims to prove how Galileo, confronting the structural problem and bringing it into the realm of science, was not just raising a problem but, using Salviati's words, he also established what actually takes place. Many years later, with the progress of physics, strength of materials and theory of structures, figures such as Claude Navier (1785-1836) and Benoît Clapeyron (1799-1864) confirmed once again that the Pisan turned out to be right.; /nThis article intends to combine technical fields such as strength of materials and theory of structures with others like the history of science and philosophy proper. A cooperative approach to these disciplines can be doubtlessly helpful to improve the knowledge, learning and teaching of their different curricula, giving the reader a global, holistic perspective. Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147750 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147749 Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147749 2021-11-29T00:00:00Z