10 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2018
    1. Latour’s description of the earth in the Anthropocene as “an active, local, limited, sensitive, fragile, trembling and easily irritated envelope.”

      Poetic description of the CZO

    2. most recently in Scienc

      Possibly Gaia 2.0 By Timothy M. Lenton, Bruno Latour Science14 Sep 2018 : 1066-1068 Could humans add some level of self-awareness to Earth's self-regulation?

    3. Latour realized he was witnessing the beginnings a seismic rhetorical shift: from scientists appealing to transcendent, capital-T Truth to touting the robust networks through which truth is, and has always been, established

      Shift in rhetoric to the social production of truth

    4. In that sense, there is no outside anymore

      connect to the intertwined effects of macro and quantum entities

    5. science was social because it brought together a multitude of human and nonhuman entities and harnessed their collective power to act on and transform the world

      The social life of science

    6. to wonder what it would look like to study scientific knowledge not as a cognitive process but as an embodied cultural practice enabled by instruments, machinery and specific historical conditions

      As it always should be

    7. possibly overstating the reach of French theory

      Possibly?

    8. Those who worried that Latour’s early work was opening a Pandora’s box may feel that their fears have been more than borne out

      And yet, who has demonstrated that post-truth emanated from critical theory in academia? How was it transmitted to the Trumpian base?

    9. Bruno Latour, the Post-Truth Philosopher, Mounts a Defense of Science

      Latour on science and truth.

    10. At a meeting between French industrialists and a climatologist a few years ago, Latour was struck when he heard the scientist defend his results not on the basis of the unimpeachable authority of science but by laying out to his audience his manufacturing secrets: “the large number of researchers involved in climate analysis, the complex system for verifying data, the articles and reports, the principle of peer evaluation, the vast network of weather stations, floating weather buoys, satellites and computers that ensure the flow of information.” The climate denialists, by contrast, the scientist said, had none of this institutional architecture. Latour realized he was witnessing the beginnings a seismic rhetorical shift: from scientists appealing to transcendent, capital-T Truth to touting the robust networks through which truth is, and has always been, established.

      A paradigm shift in the rhetoric of science, from metanarratives of truth to the mechanics of truth manufacture.