Scenarios of the future play a significant role in anticipatory governance of new and emerging science and technologies. Plausibility is generally considered an important criterion for high quality scenarios. Lately, the usefulness of anticipatory governance has come under attack. Some of this criticism is directed at the practice of framing normative reflection on emerging science and technology in terms of the 'future' they will eventually produce. Such 'future discourse' is claimed, among others, to maintain an a-historical conception of the future, to be lacking in imagination, to reify innovation processes and to ignore their contingency, and, ultimately, to share the hubris of technoscience. This paper investigates to what extent sociotechnical and techno-ethical scenario approaches are liable to this criticism of 'future talk', in particular as voiced by philosopher of technology Alfred Nordmann. In addition, it questions whether the aim to develop plausible scenarios increases or decreases such liability.
|Journal||International journal of foresight and innovation policy|
|Publication status||Published - 2013|