摘要
布鲁诺·拉图尔(Bruno Latour,1947-)是当代法国科学知识社会学家、社会建构论者、爱丁堡学派早期核心人物和巴黎学派领军人物。其开创的“实验室研究”,直接促成了科学知识社会学继“社会学转向”之后的又一次转向——“人类学转向”;他在实验室研究基础上构建出的“行动者网络理论”(actor-network-theory,英文缩写ANT),标志着科学研究中与爱丁堡学派分庭抗衡的新学派——巴黎学派的诞生。此学派将实验室实践与更大范围的技术-政治磋商联系起来,认为科学实践与其社会背景是在同一过程中产生,并不具有因果关系,它们相互建构、共同演进,从一个侧面说明当代科学研究(science studies)的实践转向的重大趋势。
本文围绕拉图尔的“行动者网络理论”,力求对其科学哲学思想做出全面探讨。主要通过对布鲁诺·拉图尔本人关于行动者网络理论的专著和论文进行翻译、梳理,以把握行动者网络理论的基本内涵;并在行动者网络理论的指导下研究其科学建构,同时运用对比、逻辑分析等方法,尝试对拉图尔的行动者网络理论进行深入辨析。
拉图尔的学术思想与其研究经历密切相关,受多方面理论背景的浸染。他从知识社会学、科学社会学和科学知识社会学等学术流派中汲取营养,同时反对传统科学哲学对科学权威地位的辩护,批判科学社会学的默顿模式,不满布鲁尔(David Bloor)等人的强纲领对科学知识的对称解释,强调把知识社会学的原理推进到包括自然科学在内的全部知识领域;拉图尔延续了法国科学哲学传统,同时借鉴人类学、社会学和符号学的分析方法,研究实验室、追随科学家和工程师、使用“网络”这一隐喻,在卡龙(M.Callon)和劳(J.Law)的理论基础上,构建出巴黎学派的行动者网络理论。
关于拉图尔和布鲁尔之间关于强纲领的论战,其核心是布鲁尔强纲领的对称性原则与拉图尔的普遍对称性原则之间的争论,二人理论的本质不同在于坚持还是消解主体-客体模式,由于所持不同的形而上学标准导致了两种不同的相对主义,而争论双方陷入了相同的哲学困境;关于以拉图尔为代表的后科学知识社会学(后SSK)与柯林斯(Harry Collins)和耶尔莱(Steven Yearley)为代表的科学知识社会学(SSK)之争,集中体现了社会建构内部间在本体论、认识论、科学观上的分歧,分别表现为:社会实在论与自然—社会混合本体论的对立、规范主义进路与描述主义进路的对立、表征科学观与实践科学观之间的对立。
拉图尔行动者网络理论的核心概念如行动者、网络和代理等需要追溯并澄清,其构建过程需要细致分析;ANT的理论样态展现为普遍对称性原则、行动者网络、转译社会学和经验假说;ANT的理论依据是:区分社会的社会学和联系的社会学,关于群体、行动、客体、事实的性质以及如何书写文本的问题等方面存在五个不确定;ANT的界定难题在于,是否授予非人(non-humans)以行动者的角色、如何进行科学解释、致力于“重塑”社会还是坚持分化和解构;拉图尔行动者网络理论的实践本体论意义因此凸显:一种以实践建构取代社会建构的理论。拉图尔的实践转向不但给SSK带来了新的活力,也启发了80年代以来相对沉闷的科学哲学。
以福柯知识考古学的历史本体论学说为参照,可以追索拉图尔的实践本体论如何成为学术上激进、实践上具批判力的思考基础。拉图尔行动者网络的理论贡献在于,它消解了传统的主客体模式,回到混沌、权力与实践的本体论哲学,打破了自然-社会的传统二分法,从整体论上重构科学与社会关系,坚持知识是权力的产物,走向科学实践的考察。拉图尔行动者网络理论在研究视角、研究方法、研究对象、关系思维和过程思维等几个方面均具有启示意义,然而也存在不少问题。
本文既是对拉图尔思想的尝试性探索,又是介绍当代国外知名学者学术思想的一项基础性工作。对拉图尔的哲学思想进行全面的研究,有助于促进国内有关拉图尔研究方面的进展,同时对我国科学哲学和科学社会学的研究具有重要的理论意义和学术价值,有助于我们更好地把握国外科学哲学思想最近几十年的发展;拉图尔的哲学思想带有强烈的改良社会的意涵,或许能为中国现代化建设的决策制定提供有益的参考。
Bruno Latour (1947- ) is a sociologist of scientific knowledge, social constructivist, one of the early core member of "Edinburgh School", and leading figure of "Paris School" who lives in contemporary France. The "Laboratory Studies" which he initiated has directly led to "The Anthropological Turn" of sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK for short), another turn following "the Sociological Turn". The "Actor-Network Theory"(ANT for short) which he built on the foundation of laboratory studies signified the naissance of "Paris School", a new school that was to rival "Edinburgh School" in science studies. Associating the laboratory practice with the techno-political consultation of wider scope, this school indicated that scientific practice and the corresponding social background come into being in the same process, without any consequence; besides, they construct each other and evolve together. This elaboration indicates from one side the grand tendency of the contemporary science studies, the turn of practice.
This dissertation focuses on the "Actor-Network Theory" of Latour and aims at providing a general portrait of his philosophical ideas of science. The author tries to gripe the gist of the "Actor-Network Theory", chiefly by translating and scrutinizing Bruno Latour's own monographs and theses. The author also attempts to examine the scientific construction of the "Actor-Network Theory" within the framework of the theory itself, as well as striving to make a thorough anatomy of the theory by means of comparison, logical analysis, etc.
The intellectual ideas of Latour are closely related to his experiences of study. That is to say, his thought was influenced by various intellectual backgrounds. He was nurtured by various academic branches such as sociology of knowledge, sociology of science, sociology of scientific knowledge, etc. Meanwhile, he argued against authority of science, which was defended by traditional philosophy of science. He criticized the Merton Mode in sociology of science and he made some critical remarks on the asymmetrical explanation by Strong Program of Bloor and others. He insisted that the principles of sociology of knowledge should be extended to all areas of knowledge including natural science. Inheriting the tradition of French philosophy of science, as well as incorporating the analytical methods of anthropology, sociology and semiology, Latour researched laboratories, followed scientists and engineers, and finally built the "Actor-Network Theory" of "Paris School" on the theoretical foundation laid by M. Callon and J. Law, utilizing the "Network" as metaphor.
The core of the debate between Latour and Bloor on the Strong Program was the confrontation of Bloor's symmetry principle of Strong Program and Latour's second symmetry principle. The essential disagreement between their theories was whether to insist the subject-object schema, or to discard it. Each of them adopted his own criterion of metaphysics and the different criteria resulted in two different kinds of relativisms. Both sides fell into the same philosophical dilemma. The debate between the post-SSK represented by Latour and the SSK represented by Collins and Yearley intensively revealed their disagreement in interior social construction, manifested by the opposition between social realism and ontology of nature-society mixture, between the normative method and descriptive method, between signified view of science and practical view of science, respectively.
It is necessary to trace and clarify the core concepts of Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" such as "actor", "network", "agent", etc. Scrutinizing their respective constructing processes is also indispensable for this research. The form of ANT features the general symmetry principle, Actor-Network, sociology of translation and experiential hypothesis. The theories that provide foundation for ANT are the division between sociology of the social and sociology of associations and the uncertainties of multitude, action, object, nature of fact and how to write down. The defining difficulty for ANT lies in the dilemmas that whether non-humans are to be granted as actors, which direction the explanation of science is going in, whether a study aims at reassembling the social or still insists on dispersion and deconstruction. Hence the significance of Latour's practical ontology unfolds, as a theory of practical construction instead of social construction. The practical turn of Latour not only vitalized SSK, but also illuminated the relatively bleak prospect of philosophy of science.
Resorting to the ontology of Michael Foucault's archeology of knowledge, we can found out how Latour's practical ontology, radical in academics and critical in practice, has become a basis of thinking. The theoretical contribution of Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" lies in the fact that it dispels the traditional subject-object schema and returns to the ontological philosophy of chaos, power and practice, it breaks the traditional dichotomy of nature and society and reconstruct the relationship between science and society, it holds that knowledge is product of power and put forward practical examination of science. Latour's "Actor-Network Theory" is illuminating in its vision, method, and object for study, as well as its reasoning of association and reasoning of process. Nevertheless, there exist some problems.
This dissertation is intended to serve both as a tentative exploration of Latour's thought and as an example of basic work for introducing the intellectual thought of well-known foreign scholars. Hopefully, the extensive research of Latour's philosophical thought can help to boost the correlative researches on Latour in China, as well as to let us understand better the development of philosophy of science in foreign countries in last several decades. The research has both theoretical significance and academic value. Latour's philosophical thought contain strong indication of improving the society, which may serve as instructive reference for decision-making in China's modernization.
引文
1 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].哲学动态,2006(9):3-8
2 赵万里对此有很详细的说明。参见赵万里的《科学的社会建构——科学知识社会学的理论与实践》[M],天津人民出版社,2002,注2 P46.
3 B.Latour.For Bloor...and Beyond:A Reply to David Bloor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,(30):85,114-115
4 Bruno Latour(2000),"Progress or Entanglement? Two models for the long term evolution of human civilization",a lecture for international Conference on World Civilization in the New Century:Trends and Challenges,April 25-26,Taipei,Taiwan.
5 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].《哲学动态》,2006(9):3-8
6 国内学者也有翻译为“科学元勘”的,参看刘华杰和盛晓明关于此问题的探讨:《关于“科学元勘”之“元”字——就教于盛晓明教授》.刘华杰,《中华读书报》.2004年12月.关于science studies的研究范甬,可参看《沙滩上的房子——后现代主义者的科学神话曝光》,[美]诺里塔·克瑞杰主编.蔡仲泽.2003:3.本文仍直译为“科学研究”.
7 Department of Sociology.Lancaster University.UK.ANT Resource Alphabetical List.http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/centres/css/ant/ant.htm
8 B.Latour.Ethnography of a 'high-tech' case:About Aramis.Technological Choices:Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic.1993,(1):372-398.
9 B.Latour.On Recalling ANT.J.Law and J.Hassard(Eds).Actor Network and After.Lancaster University Press,1999:15-25.
10 Ibid.pp.15-25.
11 Ibid.pp.15-25.
12 B.Latour.Reassembling the Social-An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.Oxford University Press,2005:9
13 Ibid.pp.9
14 Ian Hacking.The Social Construction of What?[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1999
15[美]安德鲁·芬伯格.可选择的现代性[M].中国社会科学出版社,2003:99
16[美]安德鲁·芬伯格.现代性理论和技术研究:对联结鸿沟的反思[J].朱春艳、唐丽 译
17[法]皮埃尔·布尔迪厄.科学之科学与反观性-法兰西学院讲座(2000-2001学年)[M].陈圣生,梁亚红等译.广西师范大学出版社,2006:45-53
18 刘珺珺.科学社会学[M].上海人民出版社,1990,P103-114
19 李三虎.赵万里.技术的社会建构.新技术社会学评介.自然辩证法研究,1994(10):52
20 李三虎.当代西方建构主义研究述评.国外社会科学,1997(5):11-16
21 赵万里.科学的社会建构——科学知识社会学的理论与实践.天津人民出版社,2002:281
22 肖峰.技术的社会形成论(SST)及其与科学知识社会学的关系.自然辩证法通讯,2001(5):25,36-42
23 王汉林.“技术的社会形成”研究路线简介.科技进步理论,2003(11):119-121
24 邢怀滨.孔明安.技术的社会建构与新技术社会学的形成.河北学刊,2004(3):29-33
25 许良.技术哲学.复旦大学出版社,2004:215-223
26 谢周佩.两种文化与“行动者网络理论”.浙江社会科学,2001(2):106-110
27 曾晓强.拉图尔科学人类学的反身性问题.科学技术与辩证法,2003(12):46-50
28 贺建芹.打开潘多拉的盒子.山东科技大学学报,2003(12):10-13
29 王阳.拉图尔的理论定位.哲学动态,2003(7):19-24
30 盛晓明.巴黎学派与实验室研究.自然辩证法通讯,2005(5):64-70,111
31 曾晓强.科学实践的人类学-考察创制中的科学.科学技术与辩证法,2002(2):62-66
1 S.Hekman.Hermeneuties & the Soeiology of Knowledge[M].Polity Press.1986:14
2 万中航.哲学小辞典.上海辞书出版社,2003:410
3 S.Woolgar.Science:The Very Idea.Tavistock.1988(9):22
4 苏国勋.社会学与社会建构论[J].国外社会科学,2002(1):5
5 马尔凯.科学与知识社会学[M].林聚任等译.东方出版社,2001:95
6 王华平,盛晓明.社会建构论的三个思想渊源[J].科学学研究,2005(5)
7 南部非洲民族。又称阿马祖鲁人。主要分布在南非纳塔尔省、莱索托东部和斯威士兰东南部。属尼格罗人种班图类型。使用祖鲁语,属尼日尔-科尔多凡语系尔南班图语群。有用拉丁字母拼写的文字。系东南班图恩古尼人北支的后裔。1879年祖鲁人反抗入侵的英国殖民者,又被殖民军打败,长期遭受英国殖民统治。
8 Harking.The Social Construction of What? Cambridge MA:Harvard University Press,1999.
9 Ibid.pp.5
10 Ibid.pp.6
11 Ibid.pp.12
12 Nelson,A.:"How could Facts be Socially Constructed?",Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,25,1994,P541
13 Robert,Audi(ed.):The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy,Cambridge University Press,1999,P855.
14 巴里·巴恩斯,大卫·布鲁尔,约翰·亨利.科学知识:一种社会学分析[M],南京大学出版社,2002.序1.
15 Andrew Pikering.Mangle of Practice[M].1996.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1995.9.
16 Micheal.Mulkay.Science and the Sociology of Knowledge[M].London:George Allen and Unwin,1979.95.
17 Steven.Shapin.Here and Everywhere:Sociology of Scientific Knowledge[J].Annual Review of Sociology 21,1995,pp.305.
18 蔡仲,郑玮.从“社会建构”到“科学实践”[J].科学技术与辩证法,2007(8):53-54
19 Pickering,A.(ed.)(1992) Science as Practice and Culture[M].Chicago,University of Chicago Press.7
20 Michel Serres,Latour B.Conversations on the Science,Culture,and Time[M],The University of Michigan Press,1995,P30
21[法]福柯,康纪莱姆.《正常与病理》一书引言[A].杜小真.《福柯集》[M],上海远东出版社,1998:450
22 冯俊.法国近代哲学[M].台湾:远流出版事业股份有限公司,2000:565.
23 吴国盛.走向科学思想史研究[J].自然辩证法研究,1994(2)
24 福尔迈.进化认识论[M].武汉大学出版社,1994:15
25 波普.科学发现的逻辑[J].自然科学哲学问题丛刊,1981(1):15
26[日]金森修.巴什拉:科学与诗[M].河北教育出版社,2002:1
27 莫伟民.卡瓦耶斯的概念哲学及其传承[J].哲学研究,2004(1):60-67
28[法]布鲁诺·拉图尔,[英]伍尔加.实验室生活[M].北京:东方出版社,2004:254
29 郭明哲.巴什拉的科学认识论述评[J].自然辩证法研究,2008(1)
30[德]A·施密特.历史和结构[M].重庆出版社,1993:101
31 Essai sur la connaissance approchee,Vrin,1928,PP270
32 L'activite rationaliste de la physique contemporaine,Presses Universitaires de France,1951,P23
33[法]G·巴什拉.科学精神的形成.江苏教育出版社,2006:9
34 Ibid.PP.19
35 张成岗.阿尔都塞的科学认识论:从“绵延”到“断裂”[J].河北学刊,2003(3):69
36[美]加里·古廷.20世纪法国哲学[M].江苏人民出版社,2005:321
37 Ibid.pp.71
38 关于traduire的翻译问题,请参考http://sts.nthu.edu.tw/board/read.php?f=2&i=54&t=54
39 Michel Serres,Hermes:Literature,Science,Philosophy.Josue V.Harari and David F Bell,eds.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press,1982.83
40 Ibid.pp.121
41 Vincent Descombes.Modern French Philosophy[M].trans,L·Scott-Fox and J·M·Harding,Cambridge University Press,1980,85
42 Michel Serres,Conversations on the Science,Culture,and Time[M]The University of Michigan Press,1995.10
43 米歇尔·塞尔.“结构与引进:走向神话的数学”(Structure et importation:des mathematiques aux mythes”),(1961年11月);收入《赫尔墨斯》(Hermes.第一卷,题为“传播”(La Communication),Minuit,1968
44 Michel Serres,La Traduction,[M]Minuit,1974,259
45 乔治·E·马尔库斯,米开尔·M·J费彻尔.作为文化批评的人类学:一个人文学科的实验时代[M].北京:三联书店,1998:158
46 转引自Latour B(2005b).Reassembling the Social:An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.New York:Oxford University Press.P15
47 Ibid.pp.15
48 Ibid.pp.16
49 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].哲学动态,2006(9):3-8
50 Ibid.pp.85
51[比利时]J.M.布洛克曼.结构主义[M].李幼蒸译.北京:商务印书馆,1980:9
52 Latour,B.and S.Woolgar(1986).Laboratory Life:The Construction of Sceintific Facts[M].Princeton,NJ.:Princeton University Press.P51
1 D.Bloor.Anti-Latour.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,(30),P81-82
2 Bruno Latour The Pasteurization of France[M],Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1988,P252.
3 Latour B.Give me a Laboratory and I will Raise the World[A],In KD Knorr-Cetina,MJ Mulkay (Eds1).Science Observed[C],Beverly Hills:Sage,1983,P153.
4 R.Weinert.Vicissitudes of Laboratory Life.British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.1992,(43):427.
5 D.BIoor,Knowledge and Social Imagery,(The Second Edition) Chicago,University of Chicago Press,1991(1976),P1
6 B.Latour.For Bloor...and Beyond:A Reply to David Bloor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,(30):85,114-115
7 B.Latour.One More Turn after the Social Turn:Easing Science Studies into the Non-Modern World.in Eman,McMullin(editor).The Social Dimensions of Science.Notre Dame University Press,1992:272-292
8 B.Latour.One More Turn after the Social Turn:Easing Science Studies into the Non-Modern World.in Eman,McMullin(editor).The Social Dimensions of Science.Notre Dame University Press,1992:277
9 B.Latour.One More Turn after the Social Turn:Easing Science Studies into the Non-Modern World.in Eman,McMullin(editor).The Social Dimensions of Science.Notre Dame University Press,1992:272-292
10 拉图尔.科学在行动[M].刘文旋,郑开译.北京:东方出版社,2005:418
11 B.Latour,M.Callon.Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School! A Reply to Collins and Yearley.In A.Picketing(Ed.) Science as Practice and Culture.Chicago University Press,1992,P348
12 Latour,Bruno 1993.We Have Never Been Modern.Trans.Catherine Porter.New York and London:Harvester Wheatshea P51-55
13 布鲁尔.知识和社会意向[M].艾彦译.北京:东方出版社,2001:7-8
14 S.Woolgar.Science:The Very ldea.Tavistock.1988,(9):22
15 Latour B.We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press,1993.p.95
16 Callon M.&Latour,B.,Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.352
17 Latour B.Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society[M],Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1987.Latour,B.Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society[M],Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1987.P144
18[美]安德鲁·皮克林.实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学[M],邢冬梅译.南京:南京大学出版社,2004:11
19 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Epistemological Chicken[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.322
20 Callon,M.& Latour,B.,Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Picketing,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.348
21 Latour,B.,We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.p.86
22 B.Latour.For Bloor...and Beyond:A Reply to David BIoor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,30A(1):116
23 Bloor,David.Anti-Latour[J].Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,1999,30A(1):98
24 Bloor,David.Knowledge and Social lmage[M].London:Routledge&KeganPaul,1976.6.
25 B.Latour.For BIoor...and Beyond:A Reply to David BIoor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,30A(1):123-124
26 Bloor,David.Anti-Latour[J].StudiesinHistoryandPhilosophyofScience,1999,30A(1):86
27 Bloor,David.Anti-Latour[J].StudiesinHistoryandPhilosophyofScience,1999,30A(1):93
28 Latour B.We Have Never Been Modern[M].Translated by Catherine Porter.NewYork:Harvester Wheatsheaf,1993.111-114.
29 B.Latour.For BIoor...and Beyond:A Reply to David BIoor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.1999,30A(1):124
30 Bloor,David.Reply to Bruno Latour[J].Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,1999.30A(1) 136
31 刘鹏 蔡仲《从规则悖论之争看建构主义研究进路的转向》载《科学文化评论》第四卷 第5期(2007):27-36
31 刘鹏 蔡仲《从“认识论的鸡”之争看社会建构主义研究进路的分野》载《自然辩证法通讯》2007年第4期:44-49
33 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Epistemological Chicken[A];Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Journey into Space[A];Woolgar S.Some Remarks About Positionism:A Reply to Collins and Yearly[A];Callon,M.&Latour,B.Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.pp.301-389
34 Collins,H.M.,Stages in the Empirical Programme of Relativism[J],Social Studies of Science,11(1981).pp.3-10
35 Yearley,S.,From One Dependency to Another:the Political Economy of Science Policy in the Irish Republic 1922-90'[J],Science,Technology and Human Values,20(1995).pp.171-196
36 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Epistemological Chicken[A],in Picketing,A.(eds.),Science as Practice andCulture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.323
37 Pickering,A.,Time and a Theory of the Visible[J],Human Studies,20(1997).p.326
38 Pels,D.,The Politics of SSK:Neutrality versus Commitment[J],Social Studies of Science,26(1996).p.280
39 安德鲁·皮克林,实践的冲撞—时间、力量与科学[M],邢冬梅译,南京:南京大学出版社,2004.p.10
40 Callon,M.&Latour,B.,Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Picketing,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.347
41 Callon,M.&Latour,B.,Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Picketing,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.354
42 Latour,B.,We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.pp.95-96
43 B.巴恩斯,D.布鲁尔,相对主义、理性主义和知识社会学[J],鲁旭东摘译,《哲学译丛》2001(1).p.8
44 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Epistemological Chicken[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.310
45 Callon,M.&Latour,B.,Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.P.357
46 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Journey into Space[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice andCulture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.383
47[美]安德鲁·皮克林.实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学[M].邢冬梅译.南京:南京大学出版社,2004:22
48[英]大卫·布鲁尔,知识和社会意象[M].艾彦译.北京:东方出版社,2001:4
49 Pickering,A.,Time and a Theory of the Visible[J],Human Studies,20(1997).p.326
50 Collins,H.M.& Yearley,S.,Epistemological Chicken[A],in Picketing,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.302
51[美]安德鲁·皮克林,实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学[M].邢冬梅译.南京:南京大学出版社,2004:4
52 Pickering,A.,From Science as Knowledge to Science as Practice[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.pp.7-8
53 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].哲学动态,2006(9):3-8
54 Latour B(1999) Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Scientific Studies(Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press) p.14
55 Latour,Bruno & Woolgar,S.(1986),Laboratory Life:The Construction of Scientific Fact(Princeton:Princeton University).P281
56 B.Latour(2000),"Progress or Entanglement? Two models for the long term evolution of human civilization",a lecture for International Conference on World Civilization in the New Century:Trends and Challenges,April 25-26,Taipei,Taiwan.
57 B.Latour.We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.pp.40
58 Ibid,pp.35-43
59 Shapin,S.& Schaffer,S.(1985),Leviathan and Air Pump Princeton:Princeton University Press p.332
60 B.Latour.We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.pp 16-17
61 Ibid.p.27
62 Ibid.p.27
63 Shapin,S.& Schaffer,S.(1985),Leviathan and Air Pump Princeton:Princeton University Press P.344
64 B.Latour.We Have Never Been Modern[M],translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.p.26
65 Ibid.p.29
66 Ibid.p.30
67 Ibid.p.31
68 B.Latour(1999),Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Scientific Studies(Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press).P3-4
69 B.Latour(1999),Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Scientific Studies(Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press).P.5-6
70 Ibid.p.8
71 Ibid.p.9
72 Ibid.p.8
73 Ibid.p.7-8
74 Bloor David(1999a),"Anti-Latour",Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,Vol.30,No.1:82
75 Ibid.pp.87
7 Ibid.pp.87
77 Ibid.pp.96
78 Ibid.pp.88
79 B Laour(1992),"One more turn after the social turn...",in E.McMuilin(ed.),The Social Dimension of Science(Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press) P.282
80 Ibid.p.283
81 Bloor David(1999a),"Anti-Latour",Studies in History and Philosophy of Science,Vol.30,No.1:98
82 ibid.p.97
83 Latour B Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Scientific Studies Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Presspp.9-10.
84 Hacking,Ian(1999),The Social Construction of What? Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press p.67)
85 M.Foucault,The History of Sexuality,V.Ⅰ:An Introduction,Translated by R Hurley,NY,PaRandom House Inc,1978,P.105
86 M.Foucault,The History of Sexuality,V.Ⅰ:An Introduction,Translated by R.Hurley,NY,PaRandom House Inc,1978,P.43.
87 W.E.B.& TJ.Pinch,The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts,in W.E.Bijker,etc(eds)The Social Construction of Technological Systems:New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology,The MIT Press,1987,P.18.
88 科尔.科学的制造:在自然界与社会之间.林建成、王毅译.上海:上海人民出版社,2001:45.
89 李三虎.当代西方建构主义研究述评[J].国外社会科学.1997(5):14.
90 D.Bloor,"Anti-Latour',Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science,V.30,1999,P81-82.
91 B.Latour,One more Turn after the Social Turn,in M.Biagioli ed:The Science Studies Reader,Routledge Inc,1999,P.278.
92 M.Callon.Struggles and Negotiations to define what is Problematic and what is not:the Sociology of Translation.The Social Process of Scientific Investigation:Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook.1980,(4):197-219
93 M.Callon.Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation:Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of Saint Brieuc Bay.Power,Action and Belief:a new Sociology of Knowledge?Sociological Review Monograph.1986,(32):196-233.
94 M.Callon.Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation:Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of Saint Brieuc Bay.Power,Action and Belief:a new Sociology of Knowledge?Sociological Review Monograph.1986,(32):196-233.
95 J.Law.On the Methods of Long Distance Control:Vessels,Navigation and the Portuguese Route to India.Power,Action and Belief:a new Sociology of Knowledge? Sociological Review Monograph.1986,(32):234-263.
96 J.Law.Technology and heterogeneous engineering:the case of Portuguese Expansion.in Bijker,Hughes(eds).The Social Construction of Technological Systems.MIT press,1987:111-134
97 J.Law.Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network:Ordering,Stratety and Heterogeneity.http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/centres/css/ant/ant.htm
98 J.Law.On the Methods of Long Distance Control:Vessels,Navigation and the Portuguese Route to India.Power,Action and Belief:a new Sociology of Knowledge? Sociological Review Monograph.1986,(32):234-263.
99 Latour B.Glossary for Pandora's Hope.http://bubbler.net/Glossary/PandoraHope
100 Latour B.The Pasteurization of France[M].Havard University Press,1988:252
101 Latour B.2005/1987,Science in Action[M].Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.P4
102 吴莹等.跟随行动者重组社会—读拉图尔的《重组社会:行动者网络理论》[J].社会学研究 2008(2):222
103 Latour B(2006),Reassembling the Social:An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory[M].New York:Oxford University Press.P 39.
104 Ibid.pp.39
105 拉图尔.科学在行动[M].刘文旋,郑开译.上海:东方出版社,2005:298
106 Latour B(1999),Pandora'sHope.Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.pp.174-215
107 操作主义(operationalism)是美国物理学家和哲学家布里奇曼(P.W.Bridgman,1882-1961)创立的一种哲学学说,认为所有科学理论术语和概念都是一套操作。
108 Latour.B(1999).Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Science Studies.Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard Unity Press.P172-173
109 Ibid.pp.156
110 Bruno Latour We Have Never Been Modern[M].Massachusetts:Harvard University Press,1993,95
111 Michel Callon,Bruno Latourl Don't Throw the Baby Out With the Bath School! A Reply to Collins and Yearley[A].In AndrewlPickering(Ed1)1Science as Practice and Culture[C]Chicago:Chicago University Press,1992,350,348,346
112 Michel Callon,Bruno Latour,Don't Throw the Baby Out With the Bath School! A Reply to Collins and Yearley[A].In AndrewlPickering(Ed1)1Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:Chicago University Press,1992,350,348,346
113 Bruno Latour,A One More Turn After the Social Turn.[A]lin E Mc Mullin(ed1) The Social Dimension of Science[M],Notre Dame:Indiana University of Notre Dame Press,1992,272-295,282
114 B.Latour(2006),Reassembling the Social:An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.[M]New York:Oxford University Press.P1
115 Ibid,P159
116 Ibid.pp.88-93
117 Ibid.pp.1-2
118 Ibid.pp.160
119 Ibid.pp.9
120 Ibid.pp.11
121 Ibid.pp.9
122 Ibid.pp.9
123 Ibid.pp.22
124 Ibid.pp.27-42
125 Ibid.pp.43-62
126 Ibid.pp.63-86
127 Ibid.pp.87-120
128 Ibid.pp.121-141
129 Ibid.pp.165-172
130 Ibid.pp.173-190
131 Ibid.pp.191-218
132 Ibid.pp.219-246
133 Ibid.pp.247-262
134王阳.拉图尔的理论定位[J].哲学动态,2003,(7):19-24
135赵万里.科学的社会建构[M].天津人民出版社,2002:287.
136Michel Callon,Four Models for the Dynamics of Science[A].In Sheila Jasanoff(eds1)Handbook of Science and Technology[C]London:Sage,1995,P52.
137拉图尔.科学在行动[M].刘文旋,郑开译.上海:东方出版社,2005:185
138Ibid.pp.184
139Ibid.pp.195-204
140Ibid.pp.203
141Ibid.pp.206
142Ibid.pp.219
143 B.Latour.Reassembling the Social-An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.Oxford University Press,2005,P10
144 Ibid.pp.11
145 Ibid.pp.11
146 Ibid.pp.11
147见Timothy Lenoir(1999)对符号学与普遍对称性原则的讨论。
148 Latour B.(1987).Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.P14
149 Latour,B.and S.Woolgar(1986).Laboratory Life:The Construction of Sceintific Facts.Princeton,NJ.:Princeton University Press.P147
150 B.Latour(1988).The Pasteurization of France.President and Fellows of Harvard College.P9-10
151 B.Latour(1988).Pasteurization of France.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.P11
152Translation一词的翻译在台湾学界曾有过讨论,在此,仍然使用“转译”。相关讨论请见http://sts.nthu.edu.tw的“STS理论与方法讨论版”(http://sts.nthu.edu.tw/board/list.php?f=2)
153 Law(2004).After Method.London and New York:Routledge.glossary
154亦有学者特别论述提出,强调论述与物质的混合的“物质—论述”实践(material-semotic practices)说法,请见Donna Haraway(1994)的说法。
155请见Collins and Yearly(1992) and Callon and Latour(1992),Latour(1999a) and Bloor(1999a)关于ANT与爱丁堡的对称性原则差异的比较。
156 Latour B(2003),Is Re-modernization Occurring-And If So,How to Prove It? A Commentary on Ulrich Beck.Theory,Culture & Society 20(2):40.
157请见Alfred Whithead(1985),Michel Serres(1995),Gilbert Simondon(Mackenzie 2002),Foucault(1991a;1997a),和Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari(2002)所各自提出的过程性本体论。
158 Latour B(1987).Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.Ch.2
159 Latour(1999).Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Science Studies.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard Unity Press.P133-173
160 Latour(1999).Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Science Studies.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard Unity Press.P24-80
161 Latour B(1991) Technology is Society Made Durable.in A Sociology of Monsters? Essays on Power,Technology and Determination,edited by J.Law.London:Routledge,pp.76-88.
162 Leigh-Star,S.and J.R.Griesemer(1989) Institutional Ecology,"Translations," and Boundary Objects:Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology,1907-39.Social Studies of Science 19:509.
163 Latour B(1999).Pandora's Hope:Essays on the Reality of Science Studies.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard Unity Press.266-80.
164 Latour B(1993).We Have Never Been Modern.Harlow,England:Longman.pp50-5
165 Latour,B.(1983) Give Me a Laboratory and I will Raise the World.in Science Observed,edited by K.Knorr Cetina and M.J.Mulkay.London:Sage,pp.158.
166 Sergio Sismondo,2004,An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies,Blackwell.P66
167 B.Latour,For Bloor and Beyond:A Reply to David Bloor's'Anti-Latour'[J],Studies in the History andPhilosophy of Science.Ⅴ.30,1999,PP.114-115.
168 李正风.实践建构论:对一种科学观的初步探讨[J].哲学研究,2006(1):65
169 见A.Pickering,"Time and a Theory of the Visible,"[J].Human Studies,1997,20:325-333.
170蔡仲,郑玮.从“社会建构”到“科学实践”[J].科学技术与辩证法,2007(8):55
171 Rouse,Joseph(1996).Engaging Science:How to Understand ItsPracticesPhilosophically[M],Comell University Press.P177
1 Foucault(1991a),Question of Method.in The Foucault Effect:Studies in Governmentality,edited by P.Burchell,et al.London:Harvester Wheatsheaf,pp.:76-78
2Foucault(1997a) On the Genealogy of Ethics:An Overview of Work in Progress.In Ethics:Subjectivity and Truth,edited by P.Rabinow.London:Penguin,pp.262.
3[法]米歇尔·福柯.什么是启蒙?[A].汪晖,陈燕谷主编.文化与公共性[C].北京:三联书店,1998:440
4 Foucault(1991b).Remarks on Marx:Conversations with Duccio Trombadori.New York:Semiotext.P33
5 Ibid.pp.33-4
6 Ibid.pp.37
7 Ibid.pp.38
8[美]安德鲁·皮克林著.《实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学》[M].刑冬梅译.南京大学出版社,2004:9
9Ibid.pp.10
10 Ibid.P11
11 Lynch,M.,From the"Will to Theory"to the Discursive Collage:A Reply to Bloor's"Left and Right Wittgensteinians"[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.pp.283-300
12 Pickering,A.,From Science as Knowledge to Science as Practice[A],in Pickering,A.(eds.),Science as Practice and Culture[C],Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.p.14
13 Ibid.pp.20
14 Ibid.pp.120
15 Ibid.pp.14
16[美]安德鲁·皮克林并《实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学》[M],南京大学出版社,刑冬梅译.2004:12
17 Ibid.PP.13
18Ibid.pp.14
19 B.Latour.We Have Never Been Modern[M].translated by Catherine Porter,Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.pp.37
20 Ibid.pp.63
21 Ibid.pp.63
22 Ibid.pp.15
23 Ibid.pp.30
24 Ibid.pp.31
25 B.Latour.One More Turn after the Social Turn:Easing Science Studies into the Non-Modern World.in Eman,McMullin(edito0.The Social Dimensions of'Science.Notre Dame University Press,1992:284-286
26 Ibid.pp.281
27 B.Latour.We Have Never Been Modern[M].translated by Catherine Porter Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press,1993.pp.75
28[德]海德格尔著.海德格尔选集[M].孙周兴选编.生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1996:936
29 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观——在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].《哲学动态》,2006(9):3-8
30 伊莎白、麦港.分歧与协议:分析社会规范变迁的一种研究路径[J].《清华社会学评论(特辑)》,鹭江出版社,2000:11
31 成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观——在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].《哲学动态》,2006(9):3-8
32[法]菲利普·柯尔库夫.新社会学[M].钱翰译.社会科学文献出版社,2000:97
33 Law,John&John Hassard Malden(eds.) 1999,Actor Network Theory and After.Mass:Blackwell.PP.19
34 Stark,David."Review on Actor Network Theory and After." Contemporary Sociology 30(1).2001,pp.97
35 Neil Spiller(ed) Cyber Reader:Critical Writings for the Digital Era,London:Phaidon,2002,pp.97.
36 Deleuze and Guattari.A Thousand Plateaus:Capitalism and Schizophrenia,London:University of Minnesota Press,2000,pp.5
37 麦永雄.后现代多维空间与文学间性[J].《清华大学学报》,2007(2).
38成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观—在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].《哲学动态》,2006(9).
39拉图尔.科学在行动[M].刘文旋,郑开译.东方出版社,2005:132-133
40成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].《哲学动态》,2006(9):3-8
41 Ibid.PP.3-8
42 Bourdieu P(2004).Science of Science and Reflexivity.Cambridge:Polity Press.PP.16-20
43 Ibid.PP.27-31
44 Ibid.PP.35
45 ANT的回应,见Callon和Latour(1992)。以及Lynch(1993:107-13)从类似的方法—本体论混淆角度对ANT的批评。
46 Redfield,P.(2002).The Half-Life of Empire in Outer Space.Social Studies of Science 32(5-6):795
47[美]安德鲁·芬伯格.可选择的现代性[M].中国社会科学出版社,2003(6):269
48 赵万里.科学的社会建构——科学知识社会学的理论和实践[M].天津人民出版社,2002:27.
49 L.Hacking.The Social Construction of What? Harvard University.
50谢鸿昆.默顿科学社会学述评[J].唐山学院学报.2002,(9):4-7
51[法]柯尔库夫.新社会学[M].钱翰译.社会科学文献出版社,2000:95
1拉图尔,伍尔加.实验室生活:科学事实的建构过程[M].张伯霖,刁小英译.东方出版社,2004:157.
2吉尔兹.《地方性知识》[M].中央编译出版社出版,1983:219-220.
3巴恩斯.科学知识与社会学理论[M].鲁旭东译.东方出版社,2001:64
1.Latour,B.(1983) Give Me a Laboratory and I will Raise the World.in Science Observed,edited by K.Knorr Cetina and M.J.Mulkay.London:Sage,pp.141-70.
2.Latour,B.(1986) The Power of Association.in Power,Knowledge and Belief,edited by J.Law.London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,pp.264-279
3.Latour,B.and S.Woolgar(1986).Laboratory Life:The Construction of Sceintific Facts.Princeton,NJ.:Princeton University Press.
4.Latour,B.(1987).Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.
5.Latour,B.(1988a).Irreductions:Part two of The Pasteurization of France.Cambridge,MA.:Harvard University Press.
6.Latour,B.(1988b).The Pasteurization of France.President and Fellows of Harvard College.
7.Latour,B.(1988c).Pasteurization of France.Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press.
8.Latour,B.(1988d) The Politics of Explanation:An Alternative.in Knowledge and Reflexivity:New Frontiers in the Sociology of Knowledge,edited by S.Woolgar.London:SAGE Publications,pp.155-177
9.Latour,B.(1991) Technology is Society Made Durable.in A Sociology of Monsters?Essays on Power,Technology and Determination,edited by J.Law.London:Routledge,pp.103-31.
10.Latour,B.(1992) Where are the missing masses? sociology of a few mundane artefacts.in Shaping Technology/Building Society:Studies in Sociotechnological Change,edited byW.Bijker and J.Law.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press,pp.225-259
11.Latour,B.(1993).We Have Never Been Modern.Harlow,England:Longman.
12.Latour,B.(1996).Aramis or the Love of Technology.Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard University Press.
13.Latour,B.(1999a) For David Bloor.And Beyond:A Reply to David Bloor's 'Anti-Latour'.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30A(1):113-29.
14.— (1999b) On Recalling ANT. in Actor Network and After, edited by J. Law and J. Hassard. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 15-25.
15.— (1999c) One More Turn After the Social Turn. in Science Studies Reader,edited by M. Biagioli. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 276-89.
16.— (1999d). Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies.Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard Unity Press.
17— (2000), " Progress or Entanglement? Two models for the long term evolution of human civilization", a lecture for International Conference on World Civilization in the New Century: Trends and Challenges, April 25-26, Taipei, Taiwan.
18.— (2003) Is Re-modernization Occurring - And If So, How to Prove It? A Commentary on Ulrich Beck. Theory, Culture & Society 20 (2): 35-48.
19.— (2004). Politics of Nature: How to Bring Sciences into Democracy.Cambrdieg,Mass.: Harvard University Press.
20.— (2005a). Reassembling the Social. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.— (2005b). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.New York: Oxford University Press.
22.Barchelard (1957). Lapoetique de l'espace, Presses Universitaires de France
23.W. E. Bijker ,etc(eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems :New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, The MIT Press ,1987 ,P.18.
24.Bloor, D. (1991 [1976]). Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.— (1999) Anti-Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30A(1):81-112.
26.— (1999) Reply to Bruno Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30A (1): 131-36.
27.Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of Science and Reflexivity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
28.Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.New York and London: Routledge.
29.Callon, M. (1986) Elements of a Sociology of Translation: the Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay. in Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? edited by J. Law. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,pp.196-223
30.— Struggles and Negotiations to define what is Problematic and what is not:the Sociology of Translation. The Social Process of Scientific Investigation:Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. 1980,(4): 197-219
31.— (1986) The Sociology of Actor-Network: the Case of the Electric Vehicle.In Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology of Science in the Real World, edited by M. Callon, et al. London: Macumillan, pp.19-34
32.Callon, M. and B. Latour (1986) Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How Actors Macro-structure Reality and How Sociologists Help Them to Do So? in Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro- and Macro-Solutions, edited by K. Knorr Certina and A. Cicrourel. London: Routledge andKegan Paul, pp.277-303
33.— (1992) Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School! in Science as Practice and Culture, edited by A. Pickering. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 343-68.
34.Callon, M. and J. Law (1995) Agency and the Hybrid Collectif. South Atlantic Quarterly 94: 481-507.
35.Collins , H.M. & Yearley , S., Epistemological Chicken( A), in Pickering , A.(eds.), Science as Practice and Culture 〔C〕 , Chicago : The University of Chicago Press ,1992. p. 322
36.Collins, H.M., Stages in the Empirical Programme of Relativism 〔J〕, Social Studies of Science , 11 (1981). pp. 3 -10
37.— (1982) Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks. in Science in Context:Reading in the Sociology of Science, edited by B. Barnes and D. Edge. Milton Keynes:The Open University Press, pp.44-64
38.— (1985). Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice.London: Sage. Collins, H. M. and S. Yearley (1992) Epistemological Chicken. in Science as
39.— Practice and Culture, edited by A. Pickering. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 301-26.
40.Deleutze, G. and F. Guattari (2002). A Thousand Plateaus. London and New York: Continuum.
41. Foucault,M.— (1991a) Question of Method. in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, edited by P. Burchell, et al. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf,pp.73-86.
42.— (1991b). Remarks on Marx: Conversations with Duccio Trombadori. New York: Semiotext.
43.— (1997a) On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress. In Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, edited by P. Rabinow. London: Penguin, pp. 254-80.
44.Hacking, Ian (1999), The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, Mass:Harvard University Press.
45.S. Hekman. Hermeneuties & the Soeiology of Knowledge 〔M〕 .Polity Press. 1986
46.Law, J. (1986) On the Method of Long Distance Control: Vessels, Navigation and the Portuguese Route to India. in Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? edited by J. Law. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp.234-63
47.— (1987) Technology and Heterogeneous Engineering: The Case of Portuguese Expansion.in The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and history of Technology, edited by W. Bijker, et al.Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, pp. 111-34.
48.J. Law. Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network: Ordering, Stratety and Heterogeneity. http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/centres/css/ant/ant.htm
49.J. Law (2004). After Method. London and New York: Routledge.
50.Leigh-Star, S. and J. R. Griesemer (1989) Institutional Ecology,"Translations," and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science 19: 387-420.
51.Lynch, M., From the"Will to Theory"to the Discursive Collage : A Reply to Bloor's"Left and Right Wittgensteinians" (A) , in Pickering, A. (eds.), Science as Practice and Culture 〔C〕 , Chicago : The University of Chicago Press , 1992. pp. 283-300
52.Nelson, A.: "How could Facts be Socially Constructed?", Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 25,1994,P541
53.Pickering, A., Time and a Theory of the Visible 〔J〕 , Human Studies, 20(1997). p. 326
54.—Science as Practice and Culture 〔C〕 , Chicago : The University of Chicago Press, 1992. pp. 7-8
55.—,'Time and a Theory of the Visible ,"[J ] .Human Studies ,1997 ,20 :325 -333.
56.— (1984). Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57.— (1995). The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
58.Redfield, P. (2002) The Half-Life of Empire in Outer Space. Social Studies of Science 32 (5-6): 791-825.
59.Robert, Audi (ed.): The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, 1999, P855.
60.Rouse, Joseph, 1996,Engaging Science: How to Understand Its Practices Philosophically, Cornell University Press.P177
61.Serres, M. and B. Latour (1995). Conversation on Science, Culture, and Time.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
62.Michel Serres, Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy. Josue V.Harari and David F Bell,eds. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982.
63.Michel Serres , La Traduction, [M]Minuit, 1974,259
64.Michel Serres, The Natural Contract, [M] Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress, 1995,
65.Shapin, S. and S. Scaffer (1985). Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes,Boyle,and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
66. Steven. Shapin .Here and Everywhere : Sociology of Scientific Knowledge[J]. Annual Review of Sociology 21 ;305.
67.Star, S. L. and J. R. Griesemer (1989) Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and
68.Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science 19: 387-420.
69.Vincent Descombes, Modern French Philosophy[M]trans, L·Scott- Fox and J·M· Harding, Cambridge University Press, 1980
70.R. Weinert. Vicissitudes of Laboratory Life. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 1992,(43):427.
71.Whitehead, A. N. (1985). Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. New York:The Free Press.
72.S.Woolgar.Science:The Very Idea.Tavistock.1988,(9):22
73.Yearley,S.,From One Dependency to Another:the Political Economy of Science Policy in the Irish Republic 1922-90'(J),Science,Technology and Human Values,20(1995).pp.171-196
74.[法]布鲁诺·拉图尔,[英]伍尔加.实验室生活[M].北京:东方出版社,2004
75.[法]拉图尔.科学在行动[M].刘文旋,郑开译.北京:东方出版社,2005
76.[法]菲利普·柯尔库夫.新社会学[M].钱翰译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000.
77.[英]马尔凯.科学与知识社会学[M].林聚任译.北京:东方出版社,2001.
78.[英]巴里·巴恩斯,大卫·布鲁尔,约翰·亨利.科学知识:一种社会学分析[M].南京:南京大学出版社,2002.
79.[法]米歇尔·福柯.什么是启蒙?[A].汪晖,陈燕谷主编.文化与公共性[C].北京:三联书店,1998.
80.[法]福柯.知识考古学[M].谢强,马月译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2003.
81.[法]福柯.权力的眼睛——福柯访谈录[M].严锋译.上海:上海人民出版社,1997.
82.[法]福柯.福柯集[M].杜小真编选.上海:上海远东出版社,2003.
83.[法]福柯.言与文(Ⅲ),转引自冯俊等.后现代主义哲学演讲录[M].北京:商务印书馆,2003.
84.[法]福柯.疯癫与文明:理性时代的疯癫史[M].刘北成,杨远婴译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2003.
85.[法]米歇尔·福柯.必须保卫社会[M].钱翰译.上海:上海人民出版社,1999.
86.[法]福柯,康纪莱姆.正常与病理一书引言[A].杜小真.福柯集,上海远东出版社,1998.
87.[英]布鲁尔.知识和社会意向[M].艾彦译.东方出版社,2001.
88.[日]金森修.巴什拉:科学与诗[M].河北教育出版社2002.
89.[德]福尔迈.进化认识论[M]武汉大学出版社,1994.
90.[法]巴什拉:论土地与意志,转引自理性与激情——巴什拉传[M],北京大学出版社,1997
91.[美]加里·古廷(Gary Gutting),20世纪法国哲学[M],江苏人民出版社,2005年1月
92.[美]科尔,科学的制造:在自然界与社会之间[M],林建成、王毅译,上海人民出版社,2001
93.[美]乔治·E·马尔库斯,米开尔·M·J费彻尔.作为文化批评的人类学:一个人文学科的实验时代[M].北京:北京三联书店,1998.
94.[美]安德鲁·皮克林,实践的冲撞——时间、力量与科学[M],邢冬梅译,南京:南京大学出版社,2004.
95.[美]安德鲁·芬伯格.可选择的现代性[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社 2003.
96.[法]皮埃尔·布尔迪厄.科学之科学与反观性-法兰西学院讲座(2000-2001学年)[M].陈圣生、梁亚红等译.广西师范大学出版社,2006.
97.[加]瑟乔·西斯蒙多.科学技术学导论[M].徐为民、孟强、崔海灵、陈海丹译.上海:上海世纪出版集团 2007.
98.[德]海德格尔著.海德格尔选集[M].孙周兴选编.生活·读书·新知上海三联书店,1996.
99.王铭铭.想象的异邦:社会与文化人类学散论[C].上海:上海人民出版社,1998.
100.李幼蒸.理论符号学导读-人文符号学[M].台北:唐山出版社,1996.
101.万中航.哲学小辞典.上海:上海辞书出版社,2003.
102.许良.技术哲学[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.
103.冯俊.法国近代哲学[M].台湾:远流出版事业股份有限公司 2000.
104.赵万里.科学的社会建构——科学知识社会学的理论与实践[M].天津人民出版社,2002.
105.周丽昀.当代西方科学观比较研究:实在、建构和实践[M].上海社会科学院出版社,2007.
106.成素梅.拉图尔的科学哲学观-在巴黎对拉图尔的专访[J].哲学动态2006年第9期P3-8
107.李三虎.当代西方建构主义研究述评[J].国外社会科学.1997,(5):11-16
108.肖峰.技术的社会形成论(SST)及其与科学知识社会学的关系[J].自然辩证法通讯.2001,(5)
109.王汉林.“技术的社会形成”研究路线简介[J].科技进步理论.2003,(11)
110.邢怀滨,孔明安.技术的社会建构与新技术社会学的形成[J].河北学刊.2004,(3)
111.谢周佩.两种文化与“行动者网络理论”[J].浙江社会科学.2001,(2)
112.蔡仲,郑玮.从“社会建构”到“科学实践”[J].科学技术与辩证法.2007年第8期
113.王华平,盛晓明.社会建构论的三个思想渊源[J].科学学研究,2005年第5期
114.曾晓强.拉图尔科学人类学的反身性问题[J].科学技术与辩证法.2003,(12)
115.贺建芹.打开潘多拉的盒子[J].山东科技大学学报.2003,(12)
116.苏国勋.社会学与社会建构论[J].国外社会科学,2002,(1).
117.王阳.拉图尔的理论定位[J].哲学动态.2003,(7)
118.盛晓明.巴黎学派与实验室研究[J].自然辩证法通讯.2005,(5):
119.曾晓强.科学实践的人类学:考察创制中的科学[J].科学技术与辩证法.2002,(2)
120.吴国盛.走向科学思想史研究[J].自然辩证法研究,1994(2)
121.波普尔.科学发现的逻辑[J].自然科学哲学问题丛刊,1981(1),
122.张成岗.阿尔都塞的科学认识论:从“绵延”到“断裂”[J].河北学刊,2003(3)
123.莫伟民.卡瓦耶斯的概念哲学及其传承[J].哲学研究,2004(1)
124.郭明哲.巴什拉的科学认识论述评[J].自然辩证法研究,2008(1)
125.麦永雄.后现代多维空间与文学间性[J].清华大学学报,2007(2)
126.谢鸿昆.默顿科学社会学述评.[J]唐山学院学报,2002(9)
127.刘鹏,蔡仲.从“认识论的鸡”之争看社会建构主义研究进路的分野[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007(4)
128.刘鹏,蔡仲.从规则悖论之争看建构主义研究进路的转向[J].科学文化评论第四卷,2007(5)
129.B.巴恩斯,D.布鲁尔.相对主义、理性主义和知识社会学[J].鲁旭东摘译.哲学译丛,2001(1)
130.吴莹等.跟随行动者重组社会—读拉图尔的《重组社会:行动者网络理论》[J].社会学研究,2008(2)
131.哈丽特·朱可曼.科学社会学五十年(续1).李传实,马亭亭译.山东科技大学学报(社会科学版),2004(3)
132.哈丽特·朱可曼,科学社会学五十年(续完).刘新钢、王硕鹏译.山东科技大学学报(社会科学版),2004(4)
133.伊莎白,麦港(2000).分歧与协议:分析社会规范变迁的一种研究路径[J].清华社会学评论(特辑),厦门:鹭江出版社.
134.杨艳萍.徜徉于人文与自然之间的科学史家与科学哲学家—福柯[J].自然辩证法研究,2002,(7)
135.[法]福柯.福柯答复萨特[J].世界哲学,2002,(5).
136.李正风.实践建构论:对一种科学观的初步探讨[J].哲学研究,2006(1)
网站:http://sts.nthu.edu.tw http://www.lancs.ac.uk/FSS/sociology/css/ant http://sts.nthu.edu.tw http://www.bruno-latour.fr