Post by account_disabled on Feb 24, 2024 10:32:48 GMT
He was a solid critic of Marxism but mainly for methodological reasons.were often actually directed at Althusser whose work he accused of reproducing the failings of French historical epistemology on a broader level namely an uncritical scientism and the preeminence of philosophical principles over the concrete practices of scientists.
Althusserian Marxism in its aspiration to total knowledge Austria Phone Number List for Latour the most modernist of all projects which in his view was not a compliment. He was more favorable to the Marxist contingent of the first geneimself noted that the book was consistent with the scientific ethos in an introduction. Latours next work Science in Action published in English in was defined as a field manual for science studies in general looking beyond the laboratory at the ways in which science gained power in everyone. Scientific truth claimed to be backed by the authority of nature itself an ideal of which Galileo appeared as an iconic figure the solitary dissident vindicated by reality.
No matter how great the religious authority of the Church was the fact that the Earth moved surpassed it. Since then every dissident has imagined himself as a Galileo maintaining his stance against corrupt powers. But Latour observed that it is not always so clear which side nature is on. Nature does not simply speak for itself but rather does so through spokespersons these are those who measure and interpret the physical world. Until the laboratories are built the studies are published the articles are read nature says nothing at all. Constructing a fact for example showing that the Earth moves around the sun is a difficult task that involves a demanding set of practices.