Connections

The Mangle of Science is an analytical tool native to Science and Technological Studies. Although it deals with issues found in this part of the academic world it is not restricted to the STS context. As its application to Gaming demonatrates, the themes of Agency and Contigency are relevant in other analytic.environments.

The synergies in this regard work in both directions. The applicability or relevance of the Mangle beyond STS indicate existing conceptual contexts or problem spaces with similar topics. Indeed aspects of the Mangle's thematic structure may already have been developed in another guise within foreign disciplines. It is with a translator's ear I wish to investigate listen foreign overlap between disciplines.

Causal Complexity

In Economics the idea of complex systems break the classical dichotomy between causal explanations which emphasise unique events and those which focus on wider trends. In descriptions of History this is the dilectic of Great Actors or Ziet Geists. The tension is whether to seek insight into the past through descriptions of important actors who drive events or by understanding the society currents of the age which carry the world along.

Complexity offers a path between these poles, each of which having something to offer but neither seemingly, or so it is argued, a complete or compelling account. Complexity emphasises the role of individuals in context. In other words, the unique and transient causal efficacy of specific agents in temporal contexts.

Complexity and Agency

The recognition of complexity in causal systems provides for a divergence in outcome depending on the position in the causal matrix. The efficacy of each agent is tied to their (nested) relationships to others in the wider context. Agency is therefore not the property of an individual, nor the context (for context alone cannot act), but rather the complex. Hence, descriptions of events where individuals rose to an occasion should account for the efficacy of the individual and the causal context of the occasion.

Sandbox

Agent 1

Professor X, an experienced mind at the University of Somewhere, is a highly-educated (several degrees from various revered institutions) faculty member with many years experience teaching and sitting on funding panels. During a plenery talk as an invited speaker at the prestegious Conference on Things he spoke critically of a rival's work (obviously without being so crass as to mention the rival by name). The majority of participants heeded the message, relaying X's account as authoritative in subsequent conversations. The field took the favoured path.

cf. The dismissal of the pilot wave theory of quantum mechanics in 1920s.

Agent 2

Doctor U works as researcher at a the same University. She was schooled and worked in a lower tear educational establishment before applying succefully to Somewhere. Well regarded within the faculty, U spoke with collegues about a potential research avenue over coffee. The suggestion was met with interest but not univeral enthusiasm. After some intitial investigations the demands of other facaulty interests prohibited further research.

Dynamic Complexity and Contigency

Introducing dynamism to the causal matrix fits well with notion of contingency in the Mangle. The complexity of the system resists a simplistic account of individual or group causation such that there are various postitions in the causal matrix where variation could affect the outcome if events. While the dynamic nature of the matrix suggests the same variation at a position in the matrix cannot be guaranteed to produce the same effect as the causal relations evolve with time.

Causal contexts such as tipping points give a mechanism for the conditions of causal efficacy which are evolving functions.

sandbox

Professor Y was highly thought of in his field with a prestigious position. He has been involved in a debate with a college for some years. Initially his criticisms were quite influential advocating caution against paradigmatic shifts in theory. But over the years his peers seem to have become tired of his objections, and many fruitful avenues have developed despite his reservations. Even without a conclusive outcome, the field has moved away from his position while Professor Y continues to publish.

cf. Ehrenhaft critique of Millikan's oil drop results.