Actor-Network Theory: a brief overview:
According to the Wikipedia article, the actor-netowrk theory (ANT) can be more technically described as a “material-semiotic” method, although it is defined as a theory that maps simultaneous relationships between material things and between semotic things (concepts). Actor-network theory is a way of exploring the relationship ties within a network, developer Bruno Latour explains, it is not a theory 'of' anything but rather a method, or a 'how-to-book.' The method is directly in line with the insights of ethnomethodology, a methodology that studies people and how they interact with objects. It attempts to summarize how material-semiotic networks come together to function as a whole. There are actors within each network that create meaning; those clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic.
ANT explores explicit methods for relating different elements together into a network so that it forms a cohesive whole. Latour describes the networks as transient, or impermanent. The networks, existing in a constant making and re-making, will dissolve if relations are not repeatedly performed. Once actors engage with an the actor-network, they are caught up in the web of relations, and it all becomes part of the "Entelechy,' which was Aristotle's definition of motion. (Entelechy, Wikipedia).
"Actor-Network Rochambeau," an article posted to Any-Space-Whatever blog, reviewed Bruno Latour's Politics of Nature, with a satirical spin of criticism. Latour's writings remind his audience of the implications of flat ontology, in which all entities receive equal treatment and ontological status, none subordinate to any others. All entities can be defined as animate or inanimate, human or nonhuman. Flat ontology, or the study of essence, implies there is no hierarchy or power relations to take into consideration between entities. This criticism is unique because it highlights a unique perspective: computer are just as influential on humans as humans are on computers. There is controversy over this approach because it postulates that human actors and non-humans actors deserve the same treatment. According to the ANT Wikipedia article, actor-network theory assumes that all entities in a network can and should be described in the same terms. ANT defines this aspect of thinking as the 'principle of generalized symmetry.'
Understanding through examples:
Wikipedia used an effective example of a car to portray the dynamics of the actor network theory. Cars are viewed as a single object, but it serves as an effective example of a complex system in which any actor can be considered a sum of other, smaller actors. A car is an example of a complex system. Many electronic and mechanical systems are built into the car and hidden from the driver's view. When we experience a series of small networks as a whole, we are experiencing that object as punctualized. It is not until the battery dies or the oil needs changing that we experience the object as de-punctualized. De-punctualization occurs when networks become visible as separate systems because of a glitch or failure. Like this car breakdown example, this can occur when any elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole.
I created my own example in a mind map to show the assemblage of my own life. This mind map can be understood in thinking of each individual as a network. I exist as a network of people and I am a combination of all these people, places, concepts and things. If something where to shift in one of these areas of life, my life would also change.
According to the Wikipedia article, the actor-netowrk theory (ANT) can be more technically described as a “material-semiotic” method, although it is defined as a theory that maps simultaneous relationships between material things and between semotic things (concepts). Actor-network theory is a way of exploring the relationship ties within a network, developer Bruno Latour explains, it is not a theory 'of' anything but rather a method, or a 'how-to-book.' The method is directly in line with the insights of ethnomethodology, a methodology that studies people and how they interact with objects. It attempts to summarize how material-semiotic networks come together to function as a whole. There are actors within each network that create meaning; those clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic.
ANT explores explicit methods for relating different elements together into a network so that it forms a cohesive whole. Latour describes the networks as transient, or impermanent. The networks, existing in a constant making and re-making, will dissolve if relations are not repeatedly performed. Once actors engage with an the actor-network, they are caught up in the web of relations, and it all becomes part of the "Entelechy,' which was Aristotle's definition of motion. (Entelechy, Wikipedia).
"Actor-Network Rochambeau," an article posted to Any-Space-Whatever blog, reviewed Bruno Latour's Politics of Nature, with a satirical spin of criticism. Latour's writings remind his audience of the implications of flat ontology, in which all entities receive equal treatment and ontological status, none subordinate to any others. All entities can be defined as animate or inanimate, human or nonhuman. Flat ontology, or the study of essence, implies there is no hierarchy or power relations to take into consideration between entities. This criticism is unique because it highlights a unique perspective: computer are just as influential on humans as humans are on computers. There is controversy over this approach because it postulates that human actors and non-humans actors deserve the same treatment. According to the ANT Wikipedia article, actor-network theory assumes that all entities in a network can and should be described in the same terms. ANT defines this aspect of thinking as the 'principle of generalized symmetry.'
Understanding through examples:
Wikipedia used an effective example of a car to portray the dynamics of the actor network theory. Cars are viewed as a single object, but it serves as an effective example of a complex system in which any actor can be considered a sum of other, smaller actors. A car is an example of a complex system. Many electronic and mechanical systems are built into the car and hidden from the driver's view. When we experience a series of small networks as a whole, we are experiencing that object as punctualized. It is not until the battery dies or the oil needs changing that we experience the object as de-punctualized. De-punctualization occurs when networks become visible as separate systems because of a glitch or failure. Like this car breakdown example, this can occur when any elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole.
I created my own example in a mind map to show the assemblage of my own life. This mind map can be understood in thinking of each individual as a network. I exist as a network of people and I am a combination of all these people, places, concepts and things. If something where to shift in one of these areas of life, my life would also change.
This is how I made my mind map!
Sources:
‘Actor Network Theory’, Wikipedia
‘A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity’, Wikipedia
‘Actor Network Rochambeau’, any-space-whatever blog
'Entelechy', Wikipedia
No comments:
Post a Comment