Three myths of neutrality in TA - How different forms of TA imply different understandings of neutrality

Technology Assessment (TA) is predicated on a set of basic ideas including neutrality. Over time and in various contexts, the term has been interpreted differently, giving rise to several ‘foundational myths’ of neutrality (in an understanding oriented at Roland Barthes' concept of everyday myths). Three of them pertaining to interests, arguments and factual claims are presented. They are associated with particular forms of TA emerging from the OTA experience, from the participatory turn and from the social constructivist approach. Each of these understandings has a particular political function for TA in the respective context. The ‘colonizing’ factors, respectively, that contribute to the understandings not only go along with forms of current TA but also influence how TA addresses problems with respect to factuality and normativity. To prepare for the future, TA might revisit different understandings of neutrality and make them more explicit. A more reflexive understanding might come from a re-orientation at the normative foundations of the liberal democratic and social state TA always had been based on.