Essay Example on Latour's 'Lab Life': Actor-Network Constructivism

'Laboratory life' which is Latour's representation of his laboratory science life is always concerned with the most natural way with which science could be approached with. The one claim that, however, draws interest commonly known as theory 'Actor-network' is constructivism involved in the rejection of an idea of determination socially and through scientific knowledge. Sterling (2003), insinuates that both of his parents believe that science was a source of truth that is, without a doubt, rational truth. He also attests to the fact that science was from a long time trustworthy and could be exported to the numerous corners of activities that involve the presence of human activity which is the social aspect of human beings. It mainly focuses on the idea that nature is mostly not as well understood as social aspects of it are understood. The mainly concerned thought is one which is insinuated as scientific knowledge affecting the relations established between humans, objects, and animals which are engaged in practices that are purely scientific.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

According to the discussed theory, 'actor' is anything that in some way, affects the production of theories and scientific driven statements. For a given entity to become an actor it is most definitely not required to have mental states that are contently and should have the ability to perform actions as behaviors that are describable under influenced intentions in that case, there can be many sorts of interactions and even relations among actors as some actors perform more than others do. A network is a group of actors which are stable in their translations, and through this, they determine the place and functions of the actors who are within the given. Establishment of a scientific belief, from the actor-network theory, always draws back to the view of the actor-network. In any given sense, scientific beliefs facts and also theories concerning the same are taken for construction taking place in networks that have already been established.

The actor-network theory, however, shares some assumptions basically which have social constructivism as the theory conceived in Edinburgh school and both entertain the idea of nature being part of scientific practices but also controversial on the idea that social forces happen to be in existence independently of scientific practices. The idea revolving around scientific knowledge and related facts happens to be an analysis of history and beliefs that are scientific but do not have the ability to show that the scientific methods cause an increase on the probability of scientific beliefs being rather best examples of representation in the independence of an external world instead of them being categorized in different formations many being social like relations which are power based on relations and are believed of being of effect to scientific information in a way which could be studied empirically and even sociologically.

In the modern world, both technological and scientific discoveries treat research as some war, which could only be satisfied by its domination (Amsterdamsk, 1990). In comparison to the normal view that scientific development is based on viewing of the society, the view on the society claims that during the first half of the beginning of the twentieth century the government made it available that funds were present in pursuit of research that involved science causing science to be propelled in the direction slowly yielding to unlock of energy that was of nuclear origin. It is also claimed that forces in the market led to the advancing of science with instances such as medical field operations requiring income that is generated through the treatment that is medicated, production of drugs and also resources of research that is of biotechnological profit leading to breakthroughs in genetic engineering (Bruni & Teli, 2007). Also, contrary to Latour's claim, science is fully dependent on social aspects, and it happens not to be static but changing over time, causing a reflection on larger societies that are fully embedded.

Latour's claims, therefore, rest on the full fact that there's no justification for social actors being treated as real ones while the natural ones are getting the treatment that is entitled to social constructs. There's an issue that arises in his approach posing a question that lies between the semiotic analytical level and the level that is seen as the real one causing an obscureness on his point. According to Holbrook and Rannikmae (2009), the emphasis which is frontally placed on scientific literacy is recognized only when scientific skills relate and lead to the production of citizens that are responsible. Latour's claim is therefore not supported fully as the society considered the rejected 'actor's' theory as social biased and embedding t of science emphasizing the appreciation of the nature of science rather than lab generated attributes and acquisition of socio-scientific skills and values. It is, therefore, most likely not successful on the aspect which not all given relations are purely scientific say, it doesn't need a scientific relation for people of the same gender to relate nor is there any scientific relation for people of opposite genders to be in a sort of relation. Also, there are no scientific phenomena in the explanation of how objects relate to human beings.

References

Bruni, A., & Teli, M. (2007). Reassembling the social-An introduction to actor network theory. Management Learning, 38(1), 121-125.

Holbrook J & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education.

Fausto-Sterling, A. (2003). Science matters, culture matters. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine.

Amsterdamska, O. (1990) Science, Technology, & Human Values.