摘要
In this paper, we explore conceptualizations of ‘ordinary’ citizens common in public engagement forums on emerging technologies and assumptions from deliberative theory that ordinary people are more likely to be appropriately ‘changed’ through deliberative processes facilitated by experts. Looking at a large US public forum event [the National Citizens Technology Forum (NCTF)], we asked: What were the goals for this exercise and how did they shape conceptualizations of ordinariness and representativeness? Whose goals and conceptualizations were they? Were the engaged citizens ordinary and representative—and were they changed by the exercise? Our exploration revealed that exercise organizers conceived of ordinary citizens as people lacking science and technology backgrounds, without advocacy or business connections to the technologies at hand, and demographically reflecting the US population. Exercise materials also implied that ideal ordinary participants would lack strong opinions and emotions about these technologies. Actual NCTF participants, however, tended to be more educated, have higher incomes, and to be more liberal than the US public, and participants from all backgrounds had a range of relevant knowledge, experiences and opinions about science and technology. They were changed by the exercise in complex and conflicting ways—based as much on their own knowledge and reflections on relational dynamics as on exercise processes, interactions with experts, and information provided in the exercise. We argue that inadequately explored ideas about ordinary citizens are highly problematic. Further, invisible assumptions about what is ‘normal’ among experts and status quo institutions serve to reify the lay–expert divide that engagement exercises are intended to counteract.
中文摘要
在本文中，我们探讨了公众参与论坛中关于新兴技术的“普通”公民的概念化，以及来自商议理论的假设，即普通人更有可能通过专家推动的商议过程得到适当的“改变”。看看美国的一个大型公共论坛活动 [国家公民技术论坛 (NCTF)]，我们问道：这项活动的目标是什么？它们如何塑造普通性和代表性的概念？他们的目标和概念是谁的？参与的公民是否普通且具有代表性——他们是否因行动而改变？我们的探索表明，演习组织者将普通公民视为缺乏科学和技术背景的人，没有宣传或与手头技术的业务联系，并且在人口统计上反映了美国人口。练习材料还暗示，理想的普通参与者对这些技术缺乏强烈的意见和情感。然而，实际的 NCTF 参与者往往比美国公众受教育程度更高、收入更高、更自由，来自不同背景的参与者对科学和技术具有一系列相关知识、经验和观点。他们以复杂且相互矛盾的方式因演习而发生了变化——基于他们自己的知识和对关系动态的思考以及演习过程、与专家的互动以及演习中提供的信息。我们认为，关于普通公民的未充分探索的想法是非常有问题的。此外，关于专家和现状机构中什么是“正常”的无形假设有助于具体化参与活动旨在抵消的外行 - 专家鸿沟。
