Nicholas J. Rowland, Jan-H. Passoth, Alexander B. Kinney
{"title":"拉图尔的代表作,重组:布鲁诺·拉图尔的《重组社会:行为者网络理论导论》书评","authors":"Nicholas J. Rowland, Jan-H. Passoth, Alexander B. Kinney","doi":"10.4245/SPONGE.V5I1.14968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It seems peculiar that a non-theory, anti-method has managed to become canonical, but that is what Bruno Latour will introduce you to in his book; the post-pluralist, post-humanist attitude called Actor-Network-Theory (ANT). Drawing together heaps of controversial research, Latour resuscitates ANT after its 1999 death (see Law and Hassard 1999). Like Graham Harman’s book about Latour, The Prince of Networks (2009), Reassembling the Social is the outcome of various lectures and seminars, and must be read as such. Readers looking for the second incarnation of Science in Action (1987) or a follow-up to The Pasteurization of France (1988) will be sorely disappointed because Latour’s offering here is more akin to Politics of Nature (2004) or We Have Never Been Modern (1993) in that the audience gets a repetitive synthesis peppered with apercu rather than reams of deep empirical analysis, as Gubert (2007, 603) has also suggested. Conceivably, the book might be the classroom workhorse for Latour’s new transnational teaching and research project “Mapping Controversies,” which is running simultaneously in six institutions (see http://www.demoscience.org/).","PeriodicalId":29732,"journal":{"name":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Latour's greatest hits, reassembled: Review of Bruno Latour's Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas J. Rowland, Jan-H. Passoth, Alexander B. Kinney\",\"doi\":\"10.4245/SPONGE.V5I1.14968\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It seems peculiar that a non-theory, anti-method has managed to become canonical, but that is what Bruno Latour will introduce you to in his book; the post-pluralist, post-humanist attitude called Actor-Network-Theory (ANT). Drawing together heaps of controversial research, Latour resuscitates ANT after its 1999 death (see Law and Hassard 1999). Like Graham Harman’s book about Latour, The Prince of Networks (2009), Reassembling the Social is the outcome of various lectures and seminars, and must be read as such. Readers looking for the second incarnation of Science in Action (1987) or a follow-up to The Pasteurization of France (1988) will be sorely disappointed because Latour’s offering here is more akin to Politics of Nature (2004) or We Have Never Been Modern (1993) in that the audience gets a repetitive synthesis peppered with apercu rather than reams of deep empirical analysis, as Gubert (2007, 603) has also suggested. Conceivably, the book might be the classroom workhorse for Latour’s new transnational teaching and research project “Mapping Controversies,” which is running simultaneously in six institutions (see http://www.demoscience.org/).\",\"PeriodicalId\":29732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4245/SPONGE.V5I1.14968\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spontaneous Generations-Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4245/SPONGE.V5I1.14968","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
摘要
一种非理论、反方法的理论成为了规范,这似乎很奇怪,但布鲁诺·拉图尔将在他的书中向你们介绍这一点;后多元主义、后人文主义的态度被称为行动者网络理论(ANT)。拉图尔汇集了大量有争议的研究成果,使1999年倒闭的ANT公司起死回生(见Law and Hassard 1999)。就像格雷厄姆·哈曼关于拉图尔的书《网络王子》(2009)一样,《重组社会》是各种讲座和研讨会的成果,必须这样读。寻找《行动中的科学》(1987)或《法国的巴氏灭菌》(1988)的续集的读者将会非常失望,因为拉图尔在这里提供的内容更类似于《自然的政治》(2004)或《我们从未现代》(1993),因为观众得到的是一种重复的综合,其中充斥着apercu,而不是像古伯特(2007,603)所建议的那样,大量深入的实证分析。可以想象,这本书可能会成为拉图尔新的跨国教学和研究项目“测绘争议”的课堂教材,该项目正在六个机构同时开展(见http://www.demoscience.org/)。
Latour's greatest hits, reassembled: Review of Bruno Latour's Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
It seems peculiar that a non-theory, anti-method has managed to become canonical, but that is what Bruno Latour will introduce you to in his book; the post-pluralist, post-humanist attitude called Actor-Network-Theory (ANT). Drawing together heaps of controversial research, Latour resuscitates ANT after its 1999 death (see Law and Hassard 1999). Like Graham Harman’s book about Latour, The Prince of Networks (2009), Reassembling the Social is the outcome of various lectures and seminars, and must be read as such. Readers looking for the second incarnation of Science in Action (1987) or a follow-up to The Pasteurization of France (1988) will be sorely disappointed because Latour’s offering here is more akin to Politics of Nature (2004) or We Have Never Been Modern (1993) in that the audience gets a repetitive synthesis peppered with apercu rather than reams of deep empirical analysis, as Gubert (2007, 603) has also suggested. Conceivably, the book might be the classroom workhorse for Latour’s new transnational teaching and research project “Mapping Controversies,” which is running simultaneously in six institutions (see http://www.demoscience.org/).