+ All Categories
Home > Documents > 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science...

1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science...

Date post: 15-Dec-2015
Category:
Upload: dakota-rule
View: 217 times
Download: 2 times
Share this document with a friend
18
1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so thanks to: Adrian Evans, Mara Miele (Cardiff) Endre Danyi, Vicky Singleton (Lancaster) Nick Bingham, Steve Hinchliffe (Open University) Kristin Asdal, Marianne Lien, Ingunn Moser (Oslo) Emma Roe (Southampton) Annemarie Mol (Twente)
Transcript
Page 1: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

1

Method, Performativityand PoliticsJohn Law, Science Studies, Lancaster

Centre for Science StudiesLancaster University

All work is collaborative, so thanks to:

Adrian Evans, Mara Miele (Cardiff)Endre Danyi, Vicky Singleton (Lancaster)Nick Bingham, Steve Hinchliffe (Open University)

Kristin Asdal, Marianne Lien, Ingunn Moser (Oslo) Emma Roe (Southampton) Annemarie Mol (Twente)

Page 2: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

2

1. Discovery? or

2. Performativity!1. Not idealist

2. Not (social constructivist)

Introduction: two views of knowledge

Page 3: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

3

1. Standard view: knowledge1. Corresponds to reality

2. Tool for handling reality (pragmatism)

2. Non-standard view: performativity: Knowledge practices generate/enact

1. Workable knowledge and

2. Realities to match

How do Knowledge Practices Work?

Page 4: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

4

Real and Unreal Napoleons

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Napoleon_Bonaparte.jpg

• How?

• Making solid realitiesis:

– Difficult!– Has to be done in

manylocations/practices

Page 5: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

5

Summary:knowledge practices:

1. Enact truth claims

2. Enact realities

3. Do this with difficulty

4. Within a hinterland of other practices

Page 6: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

6

Notes on the hinterland: How much does it cost to undo realities?

• Unsubstantiated hypotheses?

• Published papers?

• Embedded experimental techniques?

Page 7: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

7

‘We say that the laws of Newton may be found in Gabon and that this is quite remarkable since that is a long way from England. But I have seen Lepetit camemberts in the supermarkets of California. This is also quite remarkable, since Lisieux is a long way from Los Angeles. Either there are two miracles that have to be admired together in the same way, or there are none.’ (Bruno Latour, Irreductions, 227)

The Consequences of Performativity 1

Page 8: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

8

1. Science and its truths only exist within networks of practice.Truth not universal.

2. We can try to enact better versions of the real‘Ontological politics’

The Consequences of Performativity 2

Page 9: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

9

1. Sex ≠ gender

2. There are multiple biologies (multiple sexes)

3. Which are to be preferred? A politics of the real (an ontological politics)

The Consequences of Performativity 3:Biology is not Destiny

Page 10: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

10

So What do Surveys Do? An archaeology of the Eurobarometer

htt

p:/

/ww

w.d

kim

ag

es.

com

/dis

cove

r/H

om

e/H

isto

ry/A

rch

ae

olo

gy/

Te

chn

iqu

es/

Te

chn

iqu

es-

21

.htm

l

Page 11: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

11

1. Attitudes

2. Opposed to Realities?

3. Or just very specific?(Real but only in thecontext of attitudesurveys?)

Layer 1: the European Consumer

?

Page 12: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

12

1. Farm Animal welfare

2. Creating ‘European Political Project’

Layer 2: Politics in Europe

http://www.animalactivism.org/documents/photos/med_19672_battery-cages4.jpg

Page 13: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

13

Consumers =1. Individual decision-

makers2. Rational3. Ethical4. Under-informedPolitics

to be done in supermarkets at point of purchase?

Layer 3: Subjectivity and the Location of Politics

‘The labelling of products would certainly help the consumer to opt for a greater selectivity of purchases in favour of animal welfare products.’ .’ (EB 2007, 49)

Page 14: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

14

1. set of individuals,2. measurable attributes,3. aggregated4. isomorphous5. homogeneous European collective

space 6. Representational assumptions on

sample-population relations

Layer 4: Europe:a Container filled with Individuals

Page 15: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

15

• Versions of Collectivity– Romantic collective = emergent

homogeneous whole containing parts known: (a) abstractly (b) explicitly, and (c) centrally

– Baroque collective = inside, non-coherent, heterogeneous assemblage known:(a) sensuously/specifically, (b) implicitly, and (c) resistant to overview

Layer 5: Collectivity:a Statistical Collection (Romanticism)

Page 16: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

16

1. Consumers may request information but ...

2. Citizens (and therefore polities) can demand it.

3. ‘Ontological politics’: enacting better versions of the real

Layer 6: the Citizen-Consumer

‘To make … choices [about purchasing animal products] it is crucial that the public has information that enables them to determine the welfare conditions that lie behind the products they see on shelves.’ (EB 2007, 49)

Page 17: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

17

1. European Consumer

2. European Politics

3. Subjectivities and the Location of Politics

4. Europe: a container of individuals

5. Collectivity as emergent statistical collection (romanticism)

6. Citizen-consumer

Layers in Eurobarometer?

Page 18: 1 Method, Performativity and Politics John Law, Science Studies, Lancaster Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University All work is collaborative, so.

18

1. Endless

2. Enacted realities are non-coherent (practices are ramshackle)

3. Reality is not destiny: it is multiple

4. When we describe we are also creating: what do we think of the ontological politics of our reality-making machines?

5. Enacting new realities is costly

Performativity: the implications


Recommended