Le Nanomonde des chercheurs Analyse sociologique des pratiques et des discours sur l'instrumentation en nanotechnologies

In the vanguard of the current scientific innovation, the research in nanotechnologies joins in a promise of conquest of a new dimension: the Nanoworld. Defined by a dimensionality criterion including all the objects between 1 and 100 nanometers and by the application of the laws of the quantum physics in the analysis of phenomenon, this new territory of knowledge is used as a social showcase for the promises of radical processing of our understanding of the reality, through in particular the production of "nano" objects displaying revolutionary properties, such as carbon nanotubes. But what exactly is the nature of this dimension? How is it defined, and who, once the speeches and practices have been analyzed, eventually controls it? Through a grounded research in two nanotechnologies laboratories and a series of interviews with researchers, I have analyzed the importance of technical instrumentation as a structuring element of the Nanoworld, both in practice and speeches. Furthermore, the concept of technical thought allows to report the nature of aprioris within the research work in nanotechnologies.;By going through the various works made by humanities on nanotechnologies, the square of the instrumentation, if evocated as an element of accessibility to join the Nanoworld, is only rarely considered in a problematic perspective. Through the analysis of the reflexive speech of the research practitionners, it seems that the instrumentation, much more than being a simple material element of the laboratory, structures the interpersonal relations. It creates a network of cognitive interdependence where every researcher is situated according to his instrumental expertise. It structures the relations within the researchers' group. This cognitive sharing is a way to establish social relationships, while being an element of determination of the nature of the researches on the Nanoworld.;The instrumentation is thus naturalized as a granted component of "laboratory life". Yet, the analysis of the attempts of control of the research context and a discussion around the efficiency of the technical system of the instrumentation in nanotechnologies, the auto-reference aspect which takes the work of exploration of the Nanoworld becomes highlighted. This aspect of closure on the technical system of the instrumentation is parallel with the way the speeches on the nanotechnologies---both internal and external to the scientific sphere---present the objects of the Nanoworld and the research on these objects through their performative aspect..;By insisting on the performances of the products of their research, scientists and developers of the nanotechnologies turn the Nanoworld into a dimension of merchandised knowledge, in the same logic as neoliberal market ideas. However, far from corresponding to an enrichment of the expertises, this model of merchandisation entails their impoverishment. Furthermore, a difficulty to train the "nanos" researchers of the future arised in the past few years. This double standard is obvious as a consequence of the technical imperative of the speech performativity and the choice of individual researchers. Thus, the analysis I conducted here insists on the idea that it is according to the technical way of thinking that the Nanoworld is investigated, conquered, and, finally, exploited.