Genuine question: can anyone point me to a practical usage of actor-network theory? (from Bruno Latour). I read [[Technology appropriation in a de-growing economy]] and they discuss a Marxist spin on ANT. For the purposes of appropriating technology from Big Tech for degrowth ends. And while I like all the words, I can’t quite get a grasp on what it really means and what you’d actually do…
@neil https://anagora.org/Technology+appropriation+in+a+de-growing+economy
Node [[technology appropriation in a de growing economy]] in anagora.org
@neil for me ANT has meant 1) follow the actors, instead of relying on “social” explanations 2) actors can be anything that makes a difference in the world, not just people. I wouldn’t describe it as practical 🙂
@neil In a sense, any organiser could use ANT in building movements and cultural formations? Enrolment, obligatory passage point, immutable mobiles etc, all help to figure the ways in which objects and geographies play parts in ‘social’ organisation as ‘actants’. This isn’t the only way to think about the power of ‘stuff’ of course – for example ‘material culture’ has been playing this role in anthropology for a long time.But maybe this isn’t what you meant by practical usage?
@neil not sure if you’re after examples only in de-growth or more generally? If latter, my short answer is: design = ANT in practice(& Transition Design = ANT for degrowth)Latour’s _Aramis_ describes ANT-ish efforts to create new public transport.Akrich’s article on inscribing users into new electricity systems might be useful: AKRICH, M. “The De-Scription of Technical Objects.” Shaping Technology Building Society: Studjes in Sociotechnical Change (1992)See also: http://www.bruno-latour.fr/node/212
The Key to Success in Innovation (Part I & Part II) | bruno-latour.fr
@neil sorry, now thinking these are too elementary for what you’re after, and probably known to you already
@neil Uhm, I’m curious about the “Marxist spin”. I thought many marxist thinkers more or less reject ANT. Especially eco-marxists (like Andreas Malm and Alf Hornborg) argue that the theory/framework isn’t really capable of addressing power, inequalities and capitalism because you would need analytical distinctions (between the social and the natural for example) to do that — ‘practical usage’ in social movements therefore impossible.
@neil maybe this will help w/ the marxist angle? https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/latours-metamorphosis
Alyssa Battistoni, Latour’s Metamorphosis — Sidecar
@neil I have found ANT useful as a approach for mapping out the actors in a given situation and thinking through how they may enroll others (inc nonhumans) in the network and how tasks get delegated to actors. Do you have to say you are using ANT to do that? Not necessarily. But the vocabulary is helpful.
@neil Imagine social networks as having parts which are sentient, having developmental changes over time and by context. @sociology
@edsu Thanks Ed – would you describe it as useful/interesting/worth a look, if not necessarily on-the-ground practical?
@mike_hales Thanks Mike – sounds worth investigating then. In this very particular instance I’m wondering if it would be a useful way of mapping technology stacks (and all the wide variety of actants that entails) and then thinking about how the dynamics of them would play out were you to substitute particular actants with alternatives.
@camerontw No these look great, thanks – I’m completely new to the notion of ANT so any useful orientations and real-world examples that others have found helpful are much appreciated
@jine Thank you, that’s really useful context. The main thrust of my interest is addressing power, inequalities and capitalism so this is good to know! That said if ANT could still help as a tool for understanding, and then something else might be needed as the actual means for changing, guess could still be useful.
@dollyjorgensen Thank you – it sounds like it can be useful as a tool for discovery and description of a given system, which in itself is of use, even if it might not necessarily tell you what needs doing to change that system.
@Delib Thanks, that’s very helpful to know that it can help understand developmental changes over time as I’m very interested in that. (any pointers to names of concepts within ANT that deal specifically with those developmental changes?)
@jine Brilliant, thank you. This really helps get a handle on it. I skimmed Vetesse’s article and it does come across as overly harsh/polemical. Towards the end he does seem to accept some utility in ANT-like ideas, just critiques them at their most extreme, so your summary seems like a good rubric – perhaps ANT useful on a descriptive level, maybe not the right tool for strategy and praxis.
@neil politicsofnature.org is pretty interesting imo
@neil yes, like others have said in this thread, I think he is very helpful when thinking about what gets attention, and as a result, what gets described and analyzed. As someone working on the boundaries/fringes of the technical and the social he has been like a helpful friend.
@neil I can really recommend the ANT chapter of this handbook: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/An+Introduction+to+Science+and+Technology+Studies%2C+2nd+Edition-p-9781405187657 (you can find it in your favorite on-line community shadow library)In particular the sections on the limits and controversies of ANT might speak to some of your questions or reservations. I found it very helpful when I first started looking at ANT.