Choreographies of co-modification: instrumentizing cod for immunology and the economy.

IF 1.6 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Tone Druglitrø, Silje Rebecca Morsman, Kristin Asdal
{"title":"Choreographies of co-modification: instrumentizing cod for immunology and the economy.","authors":"Tone Druglitrø, Silje Rebecca Morsman, Kristin Asdal","doi":"10.1007/s40656-025-00677-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>How to make sense of the struggle of scientists in their efforts to answer demands to contribute simultaneously to the advancement of science and the economy? The life sciences are understood to be particularly affected by the increased institutional and political expectations to engender scientific innovations and value creation Fochler et al., (Minerva, 54:175-200, 2016). The expectations are often closely linked to the tools that life scientists work with, such as new sequencing technologies or model organisms that are invested with hopes of novelty. The experimental life of the Atlantic cod, which is our object of study, serves here as an entry point for understanding this significant feature of contemporary life sciences. The paper shows how equipping a species to do experimental work is not necessarily about having it perform only one type of job Clarke & Fujimura (1992) or performing in one, and exclusively one, site. On the contrary, an experimental organism may be promising and interesting due to how it can be put to work to perform both in and for science, and in and for the economy, simultaneously. In analyzing the double entendre of experimental work, this paper draws upon the analytical concepts co-modification and choreography that have been carefully crafted in close empirical studies. The notion co-modification is put to work together with the notion of choreography to delineate both the material and semiotic work that go into the drawing together of the inside and outside of the lab and the material arrangements that shape the rhythm of a disciplined and controlled lab site. Together we refer to this as choreographies of co-modification.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"47 2","pages":"29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12137370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-025-00677-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How to make sense of the struggle of scientists in their efforts to answer demands to contribute simultaneously to the advancement of science and the economy? The life sciences are understood to be particularly affected by the increased institutional and political expectations to engender scientific innovations and value creation Fochler et al., (Minerva, 54:175-200, 2016). The expectations are often closely linked to the tools that life scientists work with, such as new sequencing technologies or model organisms that are invested with hopes of novelty. The experimental life of the Atlantic cod, which is our object of study, serves here as an entry point for understanding this significant feature of contemporary life sciences. The paper shows how equipping a species to do experimental work is not necessarily about having it perform only one type of job Clarke & Fujimura (1992) or performing in one, and exclusively one, site. On the contrary, an experimental organism may be promising and interesting due to how it can be put to work to perform both in and for science, and in and for the economy, simultaneously. In analyzing the double entendre of experimental work, this paper draws upon the analytical concepts co-modification and choreography that have been carefully crafted in close empirical studies. The notion co-modification is put to work together with the notion of choreography to delineate both the material and semiotic work that go into the drawing together of the inside and outside of the lab and the material arrangements that shape the rhythm of a disciplined and controlled lab site. Together we refer to this as choreographies of co-modification.

协同修饰的编排:为免疫学和经济工具化cod。
如何理解科学家们在努力满足同时为科学和经济的发展做出贡献的要求时所进行的斗争?生命科学被理解为特别受到制度和政治期望增加的影响,以产生科学创新和价值创造Fochler等人,(Minerva, 54:175-200, 2016)。这些期望通常与生命科学家使用的工具密切相关,比如新的测序技术或被寄予新颖性希望的模式生物。大西洋鳕鱼的实验生活是我们研究的对象,它是理解当代生命科学这一重要特征的切入点。这篇论文表明,装备一个物种进行实验工作并不一定是让它只做一种工作,也不一定是只在一个地方做。相反,一个实验性的有机体可能是有前途和有趣的,因为它可以同时在科学和经济中发挥作用。在分析实验工作的双关语时,本文借鉴了在密切的实证研究中精心制作的分析概念共修改和编排。共同修饰的概念与编排的概念结合在一起,描绘了实验室内外的材料和符号学工作,以及塑造有纪律和控制的实验室场地节奏的材料安排。我们将此统称为共同修饰的编排。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信