Biblioteca Digital de VanguardiaTraduction / Trahison: Notes on ANT
What would it be to "speak for" a the ory or a tradition in Science, echnology and Society? What would it be to "represent" that theory? To offer an account? An authoritative account of its charac er, its development, its strengths and its weak nesses? Some times I am faced with...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo científico |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México
2006
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=10504204 http://biblioteca-repositorio.clacso.edu.ar/handle/CLACSO/86320 |
| Sumario: | What would it be to "speak for" a the ory or a tradition in Science, echnology and Society? What would it be to "represent" that theory? To offer an account? An authoritative account of its charac er, its development, its strengths and its weak nesses? Some times I am faced with this question. I am asked to speak for actor network theory. To tell about it. To offer a verdict. When this happens I feel uncomfortable. For the request poses a problem. The problem of what it is to be a "faithful representative". And in particular with what it might mean to "represent" a theory that talks of representation in terms of translation. Which seeks to undermine the very idea that there might be such a thing as fidelity. Faithful translation. Which stresses that all representation also betrays its object. Per haps there is no good an swer. Or perhaps, there are many. But here is one possibility. That one might represent actor network theory by performing it rather than summarising it. By exploring a small number of case studies rather than seeking to uncover its "fundamental rules". By telling of examples that are both faithful and un faithful. By stressing that traduction is also trahison. |
|---|