Just out: “Mapping “the ANT multiple”: A comparative, critical and reflexive analysis” by University of Sussex Science Policy Research Unit Brighton UK; University of Tartu Institute of Social Studies Tartu Estonia) in The Theory of Social Behavior.
AbstractDespite decades of development, Actor‐Network Theory(ANT) continues to be characterized by a good deal ofambiguities and internal tensions. This situation hasled to a suggestion that instead of one ANT it may bemeaningful to speak of ‘the ANT multiple’. Followingthis line of reasoning, this article aims to create a mapof the variety of positions riding under the ANT banner.Based on an in‐depth reading of ANT literature, sevendifferent interpretations of ANT are identified and sub-jected to critical analysis; it also accommodates for theconcerns of ANT proponents about the way ANT hasbeen previously criticized. The results of the analysisserve to increase the reflexivity of both sides of thedebate about their underlying assumptions, and providesuggestions how ANT could be employed, developedand criticized more productively in the future.
This is one of many times we have mentioned and discussed good old ANT and good old Bruno Latour: reflexivity, ANT and Foucault, post-ANT, even the ANT of ANT, how forest think, the Paris attacks.
Pingback: ANT Multiple!? | deer hunting
she’s the leading light for sure.
That is a great paper on ANT and Mol’s empirical philosophy/ontological sociology approach.
looks good, got a copy to spare?
Click to access 90295_330874.pdf