Revision summary
Democratization opens the agenda, access, and risks of S&T to public judgment. Habermas, Harding, Marx, Frank, and Wallerstein explain expert and core monopoly. Narmada, generics, people’s science, and digital ID are test cases. Inclusion can coexist with surveillance and gig degradation. The claim is for a public science, not against method.
Model answer
Introduction
Democratization of science and technology means that the direction of research, the ownership of tools, and the risks of application are opened to public judgment, not left only to labs, firms, and ministries. Inclusive development fails when innovation serves a core of users and dumps risk on a periphery.
Body
Why sociologists argue this
- Jurgen Habermas distinguished technical control from practical and emancipatory knowledge. Science as expert monopoly colonises the lifeworld.
- Sandra Harding’s standpoint and strong objectivity ask whose questions get funded. A science that ignores women’s work or Dalit exposure to toxins is not neutral.
- Karl Marx treated technology as a labour process under capital: machinery can degrade work even as output rises.
- Immanuel Wallerstein and Andre Gunder Frank: patents, labs, and high-tech sit in cores; dirty process and e-waste sit in peripheries.
What democratization looks like
- Public agenda-setting: farmers, patients, and forest users helping name research problems, as in some participatory plant-breeding and people’s science movements.
- Access: generic medicines, open data, and public digital goods versus enclosure.
- Risk consent: nuclear, genetic, and large-dam choices after Narmada-style hearing, not after the concrete is poured.
- Education and language: Census literacy is not enough if scientific citizenship stays English-and-metro.
Inclusive development
- Aadhaar, UPI, and platform work show technology as inclusion and as surveillance or gig degradation together.
- Green revolution raised grain and also regional and class polarisation; the next round of agri-tech repeats the question.
- SHG digital bookkeeping can include women or add unpaid admin labour.
- Climate tech without land rights will not include those Chipko first named.
Comment
- The argument is not anti-science. It is anti-oligarchy of expertise and capital in the name of development.
- Merton’s CUDOS norms already asked for communalism of knowledge; democratization extends that to direction and harm.
- Without it, “development” is growth for some and a new closed stratification of know-how.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD ST[Science and technology] --> EXP[Expert and capital monopoly] DEM[Democratization] --> AG[Public agenda access consent] EXP --> EXCL[Exclusive development] AG --> INC[Inclusive development]
Conclusion
Sociologists argue for democratizing science and technology because expertise and capital otherwise steer development toward cores and degrade work and environments at the edge. Habermas, Harding, Marx, and world-system theory support the claim. Inclusive development needs public agenda, access, and consent, as Narmada and medicine-access fights show.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Are traditional social institutions getting weakend as agents of social change in the contemporary society ? Substantiate.
Next question in the 2022 paper (Q8). View answer →
-
Does this mean voters should design reactors?
No. It means goals, siting, and harm are public questions. Calculation remains specialist.
-
Is digital India already democratic S&T?
Access widened. Control of data, algorithms, and gig ratings often did not. Inclusion is unfinished.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q8(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Examine the role of science and technology in addressing age-old taboos and superstitions -
2022 · Q1(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
The difference between information and data in social science is subtle. Comment. -
2022 · Q5(e) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Trace the trajectory of development perspectives on social change. -
2022 · Q8(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Are traditional social institutions getting weakend as agents of social change in the contemporary society ? Substantiate. -
2022 · Q8(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
How do you understand the relationship between patriarchy and social development ? -
2021 · Q7(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Critically examine the contribution of dependency theories in understanding the present global scenario. -
2021 · Q8(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Describe the role of Science and Technology in enabling us to face the challenges triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. -
2020 · Q4(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
Is humanity at the mercy of Nature, Science and Technology ? Comment in the light of pandemic situation.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Delimit the scope of sociology in relation to other social sciences.
Sociology
Sociology studies patterned relations among groups and institutions as a whole. Comte, Durkheim, Weber, and Marx named that object in different ways. Economics, political science, psychology, history, and anthropology cut the same life along one axis. Census and NFHS already show large-scale social structure. The limit is complementary science, not a takeover of every neighbouring field.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
How does a researcher achieve objectivity in interpretative research?
Sociology as Science
Interpretative research studies meaning, not only counts. Weber kept value-relevance in problem choice and demanded value-discipline in proof. Harding’s strong objectivity names the researcher’s location. Geertz, prolonged fieldwork, triangulation, and respondent checks test the reading. Empathy without evidence is not objectivity.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
The difference between information and data in social science is subtle. Comment.
Social Change in Modern Society
Information is a report; data are information organised for a research question. Durkheim turned official suicide counts into sociological data by classification. Blumer warned that grids can freeze living meanings. Census and NFHS are public information until a defined indicator is built. Numbers alone do not make data.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.