"[T]he history and sociology of technology, and the emergent field is known as science and technology studies (STS). Collectively, these fields, without much anthropological involvement, have developed a concept, the sociotechnical system concept (48) that refuses to deny the sociality of human technological activity"
"[O]ne reason for the rapid advance of STS is its refusal to accept the myths of science and technology at face value. Mulkay (74), for example, shows that sociology's refusal to develop a sociological analysis of scientific knowledge stems from sociologists' uncritical acceptance of a mythic Standard View of science. I suggest that the achievement of truly social anthropology of technology likewise requires extending anthropology's recent productive venture into reflexivity"
"[S]sociotechnical systems may very well include ritual components with explicit productive goals that we find "false," such as enhancing the fertility of the earth; but to ignore them is to miss the crucial role they play in the coordination of labour. I would, therefore, argue that the social anthropology of technology, against all common sense, should adopt a principle of absolute impartiality with respect to whether a given activity "works" (i.e. is "technical") or "doesn't work" (i.e. is "magicoreligious"); only if we adopt such impartiality do the social dimensions of sociotechnical activity come to the fore"
