Bruno Latour

With the rise of science, we moderns believe, the world changed irrevocably, separating us forever from our primitive, premodern ancestors. But if we were to let go of this fond conviction, Bruno Latour asks, what would the world look like? His book, an anthropology of science, shows us how much of modernity is actually a matter of faith. What does it mean to be modern? What difference does the scientific method make? The difference, Latour explains, is in our careful distinctions between nature and society, between human and thing, distinctions that our benighted ancestors, in their world of alchemy, astrology, and phrenology, never made. But alongside this purifying practice that defines modernity, there exists another seemingly contrary one: the construction of systems that mix politics, science, technology, and nature. The ozone debate is such a hybrid, in Latour’s analysis, as are global warming, deforestation, even the idea of black holes. As these hybrids proliferate, the prospect of keeping nature and culture in their separate mental chambers becomes overwhelming—and rather than try, Latour suggests, we should rethink our distinctions, rethink the definition and constitution of modernity itself. His book offers a new explanation of science that finally recognizes the connections between nature and culture—and so, between our culture and others, past and present. Nothing short of a reworking of our mental landscape. We Have Never Been Modern blurs the boundaries among science, the humanities, and the social sciences to enhance understanding on all sides. A summation of the work of one of the most influential and provocative interpreters of science, it aims at saving what is good and valuable in modernity and replacing the rest with a broader, fairer, and finer sense of possibility.

We Have Never Been Modern

The present ecological mutation has organized the whole political landscape for the last thirty years. This could explain the deadly cocktail of exploding inequalities, massive deregulation, and conversion of the dream of globalization into a nightmare for most people. What holds these three phenomena together is the conviction, shared by some powerful people, that the ecological threat is real and that the only way for them to survive is to abandon any pretense at sharing a common future with the rest of the world. Hence their flight offshore and their massive investment in climate change denial. The Left has been slow to turn its attention to this new situation. It is still organized along an axis that goes from investment in local values to the hope of globalization and just at the time when, everywhere, people dissatisfied with the ideal of modernity are turning back to the protection of national or even ethnic borders. This is why it is urgent to shift sideways and to define politics as what leads toward the Earth and not toward the global or the national. Belonging to a territory is the phenomenon most in need of rethinking and careful redescription; learning new ways to inhabit the Earth is our biggest challenge. Bringing us down to earth is the task of politics today.

Down to Earth, Politics in the New Climatic Regime

French sociologist Bruno Latour has previously written about the relationship between people, science and technology. In this book he sets out his own ideas about 'actor network theory' and its relevance to management and organisation theory.

An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory

Reassembling the Social

From weaker to stronger rhetoric : literature - Laboratories - From weak points to strongholds : machines - Insiders out - From short to longer networks : tribunals of reason - Centres of calculation.

How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society

Science in Action

Steve Woolgar

"The pioneering 'laboratory study' in the sociology of scientific knowledge. . . . The first and, deservedly, the most influential book-length account of day-to-day work in a single laboratory setting."-- ISIS.

The Construction of Scientific Facts

Laboratory Life

A major work by one of the more innovative thinkers of our time, Politics of Nature does nothing less than establish the conceptual context for political ecology--transplanting the terms of ecology into more fertile philosophical soil than its proponents have thus far envisioned. Bruno Latour announces his project dramatically: "Political ecology has nothing whatsoever to do with nature, this jumble of Greek philosophy, French Cartesianism and American parks." Nature, he asserts, far from being an obvious domain of reality, is a way of assembling political order without due process. Thus, his book proposes an end to the old dichotomy between nature and society--and the constitution, in its place, of a collective, a community incorporating humans and nonhumans and building on the experiences of the sciences as they are actually practiced. In a critique of the distinction between fact and value, Latour suggests a redescription of the type of political philosophy implicated in such a "commonsense" division--which here reveals itself as distinctly uncommonsensical and in fact fatal to democracy and to a healthy development of the sciences. Moving beyond the modernist institutions of "mononaturalism" and "multiculturalism," Latour develops the idea of "multinaturalism," a complex collectivity determined not by outside experts claiming absolute reason but by "diplomats" who are flexible and open to experimentation. Table of Contents: Introduction: What Is to Be Done with Political Ecology? 1. Why Political Ecology Has to Let Go of Nature First, Get Out of the Cave Ecological Crisis or Crisis of Objectivity? The End of Nature The Pitfall of "Social Representations" of Nature The Fragile Aid of Comparative Anthropology What Successor for the Bicameral Collective? 2. How to Bring the Collective Together Difficulties in Convoking the Collective First Division: Learning to Be Circumspect with Spokespersons Second Division: Associations of Humans and Nonhumans Third Division between Humans and Nonhumans: Reality and Recalcitrance A More or Less Articulated Collective The Return to Civil Peace 3. A New Separation of Powers Some Disadvantages of the Concepts of Fact and Value The Power to Take into Account and the Power to Put in Order The Collective's Two Powers of Representation Verifying That the Essential Guarantees Have Been Maintained A New Exteriority 4. Skills for the Collective The Third Nature and the Quarrel between the Two "Eco" Sciences Contribution of the Professions to the Procedures of the Houses The Work of the Houses The Common Dwelling, the Oikos 5. Exploring Common Worlds Time's Two Arrows The Learning Curve The Third Power and the Question of the State The Exercise of Diplomacy War and Peace for the Sciences Conclusion: What Is to Be Done? Political Ecology! Summary of the Argument (for Readers in a Hurry...) Glossary Notes Bibliography Index From the book: What is to be done with political ecology? Nothing. What is to be done? Political ecology! All those who have hoped that the politics of nature would bring about a renewal of public life have asked the first question, while noting the stagnation of the so-called "green" movements. They would like very much to know why so promising an endeavor has so often come to naught. Appearances notwithstanding, everyone is bound to answer the second question the same way. We have no choice: politics does not fall neatly on one side of a divide and nature on the other. From the time the term "politics" was invented, every type of politics has been defined by its relation to nature, whose every feature, property, and function depends on the polemical will to limit, reform, establish, short-circuit, or enlighten public life. As a result, we cannot choose whether to engage in it surreptitiously, by distinguishing between questions of nature and questions of politics, or explicitly, by treating those two sets of questions as a single issue that arises for all collectives. While the ecology movements tell us that nature is rapidly invading politics, we shall have to imagine - most often aligning ourselves with these movements but sometimes against them - what a politics finally freed from the sword of Damocles we call nature might be like.

POLITICS OF NATURE

The emergence of modern sciences in the seventeenth century profoundly renewed our understanding of nature. For the last three centuries new ideas of nature have been continually developed by theology, politics, economics, and science, especially the sciences of the material world. The situation is even more unstable today, now that we have entered an ecological mutation of unprecedented scale. Some call it the Anthropocene, but it is best described as a new climatic regime. And a new regime it certainly is, since the many unexpected connections between human activity and the natural world oblige every one of us to reopen the earlier notions of nature and redistribute what had been packed inside. So the question now arises: what will replace the old ways of looking at nature? This book explores a potential candidate proposed by James Lovelock when he chose the name ?Gaia? for the fragile, complex system through which living phenomena modify the Earth. The fact that he was immediately misunderstood proves simply that his readers have tried to fit this new notion into an older frame, transforming Gaia into a single organism, a kind of giant thermostat, some sort of New Age goddess, or even divine Providence. In this series of lectures on ?natural religion,? Bruno Latour argues that the complex and ambiguous figure of Gaia offers, on the contrary, an ideal way to disentangle the ethical, political, theological, and scientific aspects of the now obsolete notion of nature. He lays the groundwork for a future collaboration among scientists, theologians, activists, and artists as they, and we, begin to adjust to the new climatic regime.

Eight Lectures on the New Climatic Regime

Facing Gaia

Bruno Latour has written a unique and wonderful tale of a technological dream gone wrong. As the young engineer and professor follow Aramis' trail--conducting interviews, analyzing documents, assessing the evidence--perspectives keep shifting: the truth is revealed as multilayered, unascertainable, comprising an array of possibilities worthy of Rashomon. The reader is eventually led to see the project from the point of view of Aramis, and along the way gains insight into the relationship between human beings and their technological creations. This charming and profound book, part novel and part sociological study, is Latour at his thought-provoking best.

Aramis, Or the Love of Technology

Describes Pasteur's roles in improving health practices in France and identifies the other forces that helped implement his ideas about health care.

The Pasteurization of France

Bruno Latour has written a unique and wonderful tale of a technological dream gone wrong. The story of the birth and death of Aramis—the guided-transportation system intended for Paris—is told in this thought-provoking and fictional account by several different parties: an engineer and his professor; company executives and elected officials; a sociologist; and finally Aramis itself, who delivers a passionate plea on behalf of technological innovations that risk being abandoned by their makers. As the young engineer and professor follow Aramis’s trail—conducting interviews, analyzing documents, assessing the evidence—perspectives keep shifting: the truth is revealed as multilayered, unascertainable, comprising an array of possibilities worthy of Rashomon. This charming and profound book, part novel and part sociological study, is Latour at his thought-provoking best.

Aramis, Or The Love of Technology

Peter Weibel

Atmospheres of Democracy : [exhibition], ZKM, Center for Art and Media Karlsruhe, 20.03.-03-10.2005

Making Things Public

In a new approach to philosophical anthropology, Bruno Latour offers answers to questions raised in We Have Never Been Modern: If not modern, what have we been, and what values should we inherit? An Inquiry into Modes of Existence offers a new basis for diplomatic encounters with other societies at a time of ecological crisis.

An Inquiry into Modes of Existence

Michel Serres

Illuminating conversations with one of France's most respected--and controversial--philosophers

Conversations on Science, Culture, and Time

Eine Serie politischer Unwetter hat die Welt durcheinandergebracht. Die Instrumente, mit denen wir uns früher orientierten, funktionieren nicht mehr. Verstanden wir Politik lange als einen Zeitstrahl, der von einer lokalen Vergangenheit in eine globale Zukunft führen würde, realisieren wir nun, dass der Globus für unsere Globalisierungspläne zu klein ist. Der Weg in eine behütetere Vergangenheit erweist sich ebenfalls als Fiktion. Wir hängen in der Luft, der jähe Absturz droht. In dieser brisanten Situation gilt es zuallererst, wieder festen Boden unter den Füßen zu gewinnen und sich dann neu zu orientieren. Bruno Latour unternimmt den Versuch, die Landschaft des Politischen neu zu vermessen und unsere politischen Leidenschaften auf neue Gegenstände auszurichten. Jenseits überkommener Unterscheidungen wie links und rechts, fortschrittlich und reaktionär plädiert er für eine radikal materialistische Politik, die nicht nur den Produktionsprozess einbezieht, sondern auch die ökologischen Bedingungen unserer Existenz.

Das terrestrische Manifest

The emergence of modern sciences in the seventeenth century profoundly renewed our understanding of nature. For the last three centuries new ideas of nature have been continually developed by theology, politics, economics, and science, especially the sciences of the material world. The situation is even more unstable today, now that we have entered an ecological mutation of unprecedented scale. Some call it the Anthropocene, but it is best described as a new climatic regime. And a new regime it certainly is, since the many unexpected connections between human activity and the natural world oblige every one of us to reopen the earlier notions of nature and redistribute what had been packed inside. So the question now arises: what will replace the old ways of looking at nature? This book explores a potential candidate proposed by James Lovelock when he chose the name 'Gaia' for the fragile, complex system through which living phenomena modify the Earth. The fact that he was immediately misunderstood proves simply that his readers have tried to fit this new notion into an older frame, transforming Gaia into a single organism, a kind of giant thermostat, some sort of New Age goddess, or even divine Providence. In this series of lectures on 'natural religion,' Bruno Latour argues that the complex and ambiguous figure of Gaia offers, on the contrary, an ideal way to disentangle the ethical, political, theological, and scientific aspects of the now obsolete notion of nature. He lays the groundwork for a future collaboration among scientists, theologians, activists, and artists as they, and we, begin to adjust to the new climatic regime.

guerre et paix ; suivi de Irreductions

Les microbes

In this book Bruno Latour calls upon Christians to join the struggle to avert a climate catastrophe. First and foremost, Christians need to overcome their lack of interest in ‘earthly things’ and pay attention to the Earth at a time when it is being neglected. He also urges Christians to renew their understanding of their faith in the context of the new image of the world that has emerged from Earth system science – that of a world in which the myriad of beings that inhabit the world are interdependent and living in close proximity on a slender, fragile membrane on the surface of the planet. This new image of the world cannot fail to have an impact on the sciences, on politics and on religion, just as, in earlier centuries, the cosmology of Copernicus and Galileo upset the old order. Latour sees the ecological crisis, and the cosmological mutation that it entails, as an opportunity to convey anew, to the largest possible audience, the tradition of Christianity as it has never been appreciated before, by bringing to bear the lessons of eschatology on the great crisis that looms before us all.

If we lose the Earth, we lose our souls

Pollution des rivières, embryons congelés, virus du sida, trou d'ozone, robots à capteurs... Comment comprendre ces "objets" étranges qui envahissent notre monde ? Relèvent-ils de la nature ou de la culture ? Jusqu'ici, les choses étaient simples : aux scientifiques la gestion de la nature, aux politiques celle de la société. Mais ce traditionnel partage des tâches est impuissant à rendre compte de la prolifération des " hybrides ". D'où le sentiment d'effroi qu'ils procurent, et que ne parviennent pas à apaiser les philosophes contemporains. Et si nous avions fait fausse route ? En fait, notre société " moderne " n'a jamais fonctionné conformément au grand partage qui fonde son système de représentation du monde : celui qui oppose radicalement la nature d'un côté, la culture de l'autre. Dans la pratique, les modernes n'ont cessé de créer des objets hybrides, qui relèvent de l'une comme de l'autre, et qu'ils se refusent à penser. Nous n'avons donc jamais été vraiment modernes, et c'est ce paradigme fondateur qu'il nous faut remettre en cause aujourd'hui pour comprendre notre monde. Traduit dans plus de vingt langues, cet ouvrage, en modifiant de fond en comble la répartition traditionnelle entre la nature au singulier et les cultures au pluriel, a depuis sa parution profondément renouvelé les débats en anthropologie. En offrant une alternative au postmodernisme, il a ouvert de nouveaux champs d'investigation et, avec son " Parlement des choses ", offert à l'écologie de nouvelles possibilités politiques.

essai d'anthropologie symétrique

Nous n'avons jamais été modernes

Nikolaj Schultz

Die katastrophalen Folgen unseres Handelns für die Natur sind inzwischen bekannt. Doch die Emissionen steigen weiter. Gegen das Mantra vom wirtschaftlichen Wachstum wirken die Kassandrarufe junger Aktivist:innen oft ohnmächtig. Und während sich im Namen von Freiheit und Gleichheit einst Massen mobilisieren ließen, führt der Klimaschutz zu neuen Spaltungen. Man denke nur an die Gelbwestenproteste in Frankreich. Für Bruno Latour und Nikolaj Schultz ist klar: So wie einst die Arbeiterklasse den sozialen Fortschritt erkämpfte, bedarf es heute einer ökologischen Klasse, um den Klimawandel aufzuhalten. Wo Bewegungen wie Fridays For Future und lokale Organisationen oft getrennt agieren, plädieren die Soziologen für eine Politik, die den Schutz unserer Lebensgrundlagen ins Zentrum gemeinsamer Anstrengungen stellt. Die Geschichte der Menschen, hieß es bei Marx und Engels, sei die Geschichte von Klassenkämpfen. Kommt es nicht zur Entstehung einer ökologischen Klasse, so Latour und Schultz, wird die Menschheit keine Zukunft haben.

Ein Memorandum | Wie gelingt politisches Handeln in Zeiten des Klimawandels?

Zur Entstehung einer ökologischen Klasse

Under what conditions could ecology, instead of being one cluster of movements among others, organise politics around an agenda and a set of beliefs? Can ecology aspire to define the political horizon in the way that liberalism, socialism, conservatism and other political ideologies have done at various times and places? What can ecology learn from history about how new political movements emerge, and how they win the struggle for ideas long before they translate their ideas into parties and elections? In this short text, consisting of seventy-six talking points, Bruno Latour and Nikolaj Schultz argue that if the ecological movement is to gain ideological consistency and autonomy it must offer a political narrative that recognises, embraces and effectively represents its project in terms of social conflict. Political ecology must accept that it brings along division. It must provide a convincing cartography of the conflicts it generates and, based on this, it must try to define a common horizon of collective action. In order to represent and describe these conflicts, Latour and Schultz propose to reuse the old notions of ‘class’ and ‘class struggle’, albeit infused with a new meaning in line with the ecological concerns of our New Climate Regime. Advancing the idea of a new ecological class, assembled by its collective interests in fighting the logic of production and safeguarding our planet’s conditions of habitability, they ask: how can a proud and self-aware ecological class emerge and take effective action to shape our collective future?

Bruno Latour

About

Books

Join the club