Suchergebnisse

In this commentary, Kristin Asdal reflects on pragmatism as one of the methodological touchstones of Science, technology and society (STS). In its focus on practices, pragmatist STS can be prone to falling into a problematic presentism, obscuring the historicity of the practices being studied, and to falling into problematic material/semiotic binaries. But what does it take, in practice, to be pragmatic? In her commentary, Asdal points to how this ought to imply being open when it comes to our choice of methods, thus finding creative ways of maintaining a crucial recognition of history as well as relations between the textual and the material. This in turn might instantiate new, distinctive, and inspiring modes of pragmatist methodological insight—such as precisely in these special issue papers devoted to animal care. These papers are also inspiringly pragmatic, in the meaning of careful—in order not to be overtly programmatic, i.e. deciding beforehand your position or standpoint on a given topic, such as human–animal relations. Following on from this she puts forward the notion "interested methods."

Since the early 1980s, actor-network theory has contested the status of "context" as an explanatory resource. Expressions and concepts such as "transformations of social worlds," "enactments," and "ontological politics" provide resources for grasping the ways in which agents actively transform the world and add something new. This has been of immense importance and serves as a warning against reducing events and actors to a given context. But a side effect of this forward looking move is that not enough attention is given to that which enables issues and situations to emerge in the first place. Moreover, the focus on that which is constantly being enacted seems to have privileged the contemporary as the object of study and ethnography as the method of inquiry. History and the study of texts—from the past—seem, increasingly, to get lost in Science and Technology Studies. The aim of this article is instead to use actor-network theory resources as a historicizing method. The article explores the tense concern for the animal in political debates at the turn of the twentieth century. The article argues that contexts should not be seen as something external, but rather integral to the relevant text and situation, thus the very issue at stake.

In the last few years the tradition of science studies has started to turn "outwards" and engage in empirical studies of politics. This article is part of this movement. I present a cluster of selected stories to show how a specific form of governable nature was created in a particular set of scientific and technical practices. Through these stories I show how a new governable entity called "fluorine" altered established policies in Norway. I also show that this material entity "fluorine" became governable because it was quantified. This quantification helped to create "political fluorine" as a crucial object in real political events. Thus, the article is on the significance of numerical technologies in the making of the political. However, the politics of nature and its objects, come into being (or not) when they encounter other entities, such as the factory or "the economy". The ambition of this is article is to demonstrate the ways in which these clashes or confrontations help to shape both a state politics and a politics of resistance.

Ordinary political institutions such as parliaments remain under-explored in Science and Technology Studies (STS) and the conceptual resources for studying politics are far less developed than for science. But sites like parliaments are far more interesting than are their received images. This article argues that novel re-combinations of the issue-literature in STS and the works on parliament and objectivity by the German scholar Max Weber can provide us with analytical resources for grasping parliamentary politics with new lenses. In fact, reading Weber in light of the issue-literature provides for a better understanding of his work, and points towards how Weber's accounts are crucially about parliamentary politics as work – on and with issues and the matters at hand. In addition, Weber may improve STS's accounts of politics by his way of including the ordered and procedural side to issue-politics: Issue-politics is both about 'opening up' an issue as well as coming to decisions and take action. The article underlines this by discussing an often-misread part of Weber's work, namely his work on objectivity and points to how political procedure was a key inspiration to his understanding and developing of this notion.