Actor-network Theory (ant),

Bruno Latour (1947- ) is a sociologist of scientific knowledge, social constructivist, one of the early core member of "Edinburgh School", and leading figure of "Paris School" who lives in contemporary France. The "Laboratory Studies" which he initiated has directly led to "The Anthropological Turn" of sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK for short), another turn following "the Sociological Turn". The "Actor-Network Theory"(ANT for short) which he built on the foundation of laboratory studies signified the naissance of "Paris School", a new school that was to rival "Edinburgh School" in science studies. Associating the laboratory practice with the techno-political consultation of wider scope, this school indicated that scientific practice and the corresponding social background come into being in the same process, without any consequence; besides, they construct each other and evolve together. This elaboration indicates from one side the grand tendency of the contemporary science studies, the turn of practice.This dissertation focuses on the "Actor-Network Theory" of Latour and aims at providing a general portrait of his philosophical ideas of science. The author tries to gripe the gist of the "Actor-Network Theory", chiefly by translating and scrutinizing Bruno Latour's own monographs and theses. The author also attempts to examine the scientific construction of the "Actor-Network Theory" within the framework of the theory itself, as well as striving to make a thorough anatomy of the theory by means of comparison, logical analysis, etc.The intellectual ideas of Latour are closely related to his experiences of study. That is to say, his thought was influenced by various intellectual backgrounds. He was nurtured by various academic branches such as sociology of knowledge, sociology of science, sociology of scientific knowledge, etc. Meanwhile, he argued against authority of science, which was defended by traditional philosophy of science. He criticized the Merton Mode in sociology of science and he made some critical remarks on the asymmetrical explanation by Strong Program of Bloor and others. He insisted that the principles of sociology of knowledge should be extended to all areas of knowledge including natural science. Inheriting the tradition of French philosophy of science, as well as incorporating the analytical methods of anthropology, sociology and semiology, Latour researched laboratories, followed scientists and engineers, and finally built the "Actor-Network Theory" of "Paris School" on the theoretical foundation laid by M. Callon and J. Law, utilizing the "Network" as metaphor.The core of the debate between Latour and Bloor on the Strong Program was the confrontation of Bloor's symmetry principle of Strong Program and Latour's second symmetry principle. The essential disagreement between their theories was whether to insist the subject-object schema, or to discard it. Each of them adopted his own criterion of metaphysics and the different criteria resulted in two different kinds of relativisms. Both sides fell into the same philosophical dilemma. The debate between the post-SSK represented by Latour and the SSK represented by Collins and Yearley intensively revealed their disagreement in interior social construction, manifested by the opposition between social realism and ontology of nature-society mixture, between the normative method and descriptive method, between signified view of science and practical view of science, respectively.It is necessary to trace and clarify the core concepts of Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" such as "actor", "network", "agent", etc. Scrutinizing their respective constructing processes is also indispensable for this research. The form of ANT features the general symmetry principle, Actor-Network, sociology of translation and experiential hypothesis. The theories that provide foundation for ANT are the division between sociology of the social and sociology of associations and the uncertainties of multitude, action, object, nature of fact and how to write down. The defining difficulty for ANT lies in the dilemmas that whether non-humans are to be granted as actors, which direction the explanation of science is going in, whether a study aims at reassembling the social or still insists on dispersion and deconstruction. Hence the significance of Latour's practical ontology unfolds, as a theory of practical construction instead of social construction. The practical turn of Latour not only vitalized SSK, but also illuminated the relatively bleak prospect of philosophy of science.Resorting to the ontology of Michael Foucault's archeology of knowledge, we can found out how Latour's practical ontology, radical in academics and critical in practice, has become a basis of thinking. The theoretical contribution of Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" lies in the fact that it dispels the traditional subject-object schema and returns to the ontological philosophy of chaos, power and practice, it breaks the traditional dichotomy of nature and society and reconstruct the relationship between science and society, it holds that knowledge is product of power and put forward practical examination of science. Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" is illuminating in its vision, method, and object for study, as well as its reasoning of association and reasoning of process. Nevertheless, there exist some problems.This dissertation is intended to serve both as a tentative exploration of Latour's thought and as an example of basic work for introducing the intellectual thought of well-known foreign scholars. Hopefully, the extensive research of Latour's philosophical thought can help to boost the correlative researches on Latour in China, as well as to let us understand better the development of philosophy of science in foreign countries in last several decades. The research has both theoretical significance and academic value. Latour's philosophical thought contain strong indication of improving the society, which may serve as instructive reference for decision-making in China's modernization.