This paper identifies four recent conceptualisations of politics in relation to technoscience, which focus on expertise, institutional participation, the inclusion of non-human others, and the importance of marginalised experiences. The paper argues that each of these forms of politics is mainly concerned with renegotiating the already constituted terms of inclusion in a specific technoscientific field. While in many cases such a strategy is necessary, the paper aims to open up discussion of alternative forms of politics that act as constituent forces of radical social and material transformation in technoscience: alter-ontologies.Keywords alter-ontology, assembly, constituent politics, expertise, objectivity, participation, situated knowledges, technoscience Attempts to find definite descriptions of the connection between technoscience and politics are usually prone to reductionism and oversimplification. The traditional way in philosophy of science to think of this relation was epistemology, where the content of technoscience and the associated politics were subordinated to ways of knowing and defining truth (Alcoff, 1998). Social studies of science emerging in the 1970s contested this view, but their attempts to question traditional epistemology devolved into a new cycle of epistemological disputes between proponents of rationality and sociality (Longino, 2002). These debates will be briefly discussed later in this paper. My argument here is that epistemology is less useful as a tool for discerning and navigating through the intricacies of scientific knowledge/politics than as a tool for reproducing them by other means. The covert politics of epistemology culminated in provoking the science wars of the 1990s.The response to these heated debates in science and technology studies (STS) was an attempt to exit epistemology altogether. Furthermore, there is an increasing tendency to consider science together with technological and other applications --as technoscience or in the words of Jerome Ravetz (2006) post-normal science. These changes led to a new understanding of objectivity; one that limits its validity in time and space to a certain field but nevertheless recognizes that technoscientific knowledge holds objective status within that -2-field. That is, knowledge is shaped by the actual process of technoscientific research and its objects and simultaneously shapes social relations and material arrangements in each particular field. Here, I use the expression 'regions of objectivity' to refer to the ultimate horizon against which any question about politics in technoscience can be discussed. In the sections that follow, I will discuss four current conceptualizations of how politics is considered to be operative in a region of objectivity. I start with a formalist approach to politics, which is mainly concerned with rethinking expertise and creating the appropriate procedures for considering legitimate experts in a debate. A second approach to politics, participatory politics, is concerned with the ex...