What is your opinion on the assessment of the impact of the Industry 4.0 technological revolution on research processes, on the development of scientific research, methodologies of research, the emergence of new fields of science, etc.?
Please reply
Best wishes
Great discussion and important points. I can only recommend consulting Science and Technology Studies literature on ontological and epistemological questions.
And some further specific additions to the discussion in this thread:
Reza Biria computations = socially crafted conceptions of the situation of measuerement
Charalambos Tsekeris I agree with your assessment per se, however, I try to emphasize the role of (geographical) localities (and consequentially inequality) in discussing "industry 4.0 technologies [that] will help us collect and analyse immense amounts of data about human and nonhuman behaviour and social interactions.
Also, it seems critical to me, to highlight the ways these formalized ways of collecting and analyzing that helps us in producing knowledge are locally, and thus too socially, crafted, since the decisions on the inner workings of "4.0 technologies" (or black boxes) are made in specific places/spaces and time, and by exclusive groups of actors.
Francisco Fatas-Villafranca ad 3): and unfortunately not as horizontal and accessible to everyone.
And another question to the readers of this thread: What are "4.0 technologies" or how are they to be defined/identified?
Big question. Let us take a vantage point of physical science, and particularly research on infrastructure. 4IR instructs a better appreciation of humanity (unpacked in the paper below). So, how does better appreciation of humanity lead to rigour? For that to happen, 4IR must create a crisis of knowledge. That would create an urgency to ask deeper questions, deeper whys. Will it happen?
Preprint Transport and the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Dramatic advances in industry and current developments in technology have a great bearing on the so called scientific revolution. As a consequence, we should realize that industry and technology emerge from interacting laws that are deeply rooted in computations influencing the way we define and state our social ambitions.
Dear colleague,
I would like to recommend you our recently started EU funded H2020 project "Beyond 4.0: Inclusive Futures for Europe BEYOND the impacts of Industrie 4.0 and Digital Disruption" (2019 - 2022). BEYOND 4.0 combines historical, EU-wide, regional and company level data. We generate three new outcomes:
1. Scientific understanding of new technology impact;
2. Diagnostic and developmental tools to lever technological opportunities;
3. Evidence-based support for social and competitive EU policy strategy.
You can read more at:
https://www.researchgate.net/project/H2020-Beyond-40-Inclusive-Futures-for-Europe-BEYOND-the-impacts-of-Industrie-40-and-Digital-Disruption
Given the extensive government subsidies in some countries, Industrie 4.0 appears to be a gold mine for technological developers and consultants. This increases the risk of companies taking poorly considered adoption decisions.
Industry 4.0 technologies will help us collect and analyse immense amounts of data about human and nonhuman behaviour and social interactions. But these technologies need to be combined with the meta-sciences of chaos, complexity, networks, criticality and nonlinearity. Hence, new transdisciplinary fields of scientific research will unpredictably emerge.
best,
CT
Apart from the important "pros" highlighted above regarding the industry 4.0 technology revolution I would add three "cons" that should be tackled in research: 1)Governance of this revolution is not solved. "Technology hidden Lords" and massive technology "servants" can lead our societies to a new technological middle age with huge inequalities, and lords of technology eroding silently our democracies. The recent idea of "augmented democracy" is a bad way for updating democracy. 2) The geopolitical map will dramatically change around the globe during the next generation with uncertain effects. 3) we all know that some of this 4.0 innovations are not as green, sustainable and friendly with nature as many people argue.
I think, the main question is the role of employees in this new situation. How can we change the system of social benefits. How many people can be a part in the LLL, and find new job. I think, this question have many aspects:
- not just legal question, but complex social questions.
Great discussion and important points. I can only recommend consulting Science and Technology Studies literature on ontological and epistemological questions.
And some further specific additions to the discussion in this thread:
Reza Biria computations = socially crafted conceptions of the situation of measuerement
Charalambos Tsekeris I agree with your assessment per se, however, I try to emphasize the role of (geographical) localities (and consequentially inequality) in discussing "industry 4.0 technologies [that] will help us collect and analyse immense amounts of data about human and nonhuman behaviour and social interactions.
Also, it seems critical to me, to highlight the ways these formalized ways of collecting and analyzing that helps us in producing knowledge are locally, and thus too socially, crafted, since the decisions on the inner workings of "4.0 technologies" (or black boxes) are made in specific places/spaces and time, and by exclusive groups of actors.
Francisco Fatas-Villafranca ad 3): and unfortunately not as horizontal and accessible to everyone.
And another question to the readers of this thread: What are "4.0 technologies" or how are they to be defined/identified?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science