Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:27:19.053Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Debates in transnational and science studies: a defence and illustration of the virtues of intellectual tolerance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2012

DOMINIQUE PESTRE
DOMINIQUE PESTRE
Affiliation:
Ecole des haute études en sciences sociales (EHESS), Centre Alexandre Koyré, 75013 Paris, France. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When considering the works produced in history of science and transnational history, one is struck by the wide range of issues covered, the profusion of ideas and analyses, the richness and variety of what is proposed. On the other hand, one is also struck by the presence of rather repetitive methodological professions of faith, of declarations of intent about categories and rules that are quite stable over time. This article considers in turn both issues. First, what we have learned in substantial terms, what these historiographical reassessments about science and transnational relations teach us, what has been displaced and what is currently being opened. In the second part, the paper considers what is at stake in these preliminary statements of principle. The article defends the idea that we are facing two major interpretative corpuses that both do count and are heuristically productive, that in practice both are often mixed by historians – but that it is intellectually and politically decisive to consider finely the epistemologies, ontologies and postures that are offered.

Type
Concluding Remarks
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 45 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Transnational History of Science , September 2012 , pp. 425 - 442
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Saunier, Pierre-Yves, ‘Circulations, connexions et espaces transnationaux’, Genèses (2004) 57, pp. 110–126, 110 (my translation)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 A perfect example of the former is Latour, Bruno, Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005Google Scholar. For the latter see Charles Thorpe, ‘Political theory in science and technology studies’, in Edward J. Hackett et al. (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008. Law, John, After Method: Mess in Social Science Research, London: Routledge, 2004Google Scholar.

3 I borrow the notion of ‘interesting’ from Veyne, Paul, Comment on écrit l'histoire, Paris: Seuil, 1969Google Scholar.

4 Two standard historical references are Latour, Bruno, Les microbes, guerre et paix, Paris: Métailié, 1984Google Scholar; and Shapin, Steven and Schaffer, Simon, Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1985Google Scholar.

5 For a detailed presentation see Pestre, Dominique, Introduction aux science studies, Paris: la Découverte, 2007Google Scholar.

6 Pickering, Andrew (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pestre, Dominique, Science, argent et politique, Paris: INRA, 2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Among others see Biagioli, Mario, Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1993Google Scholar.

8 For a historical case study see Fressoz, Jean-Baptiste, L'apocalypse joyeuse: Une histoire du risque technologique, Paris: Seuil, 2012Google Scholar. For environmental history see Hughes, J. Donald, An Environmental History of the World: Humankind's Changing Role in the Community of Life, London: Routledge, 2009Google Scholar; Ponting, Clive, A New Green History of the World: The Environment and the Collapse of Great Civilizations, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2007Google Scholar; Simmons, I.G., Global Environmental History, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Schaffer, Simon, Roberts, Lissa, Raj, Kapil and Delbourgo, James (eds.), The Brokered World: Go-Betweens and Global Intelligence, 1770–1820, Sagamore Beach: Watson Publishing International, 2009Google Scholar.

10 Christian, David, ‘Macrohistory: the play of scales’, Social Evolution & History (2005) 4, pp. 22–59Google Scholar, who quotes Revel, Jacques, Jeux d’échelles, Paris: Hautes études, Seuil, Gallimard, 1996Google Scholar.

11 Quotations are from Vanhaute, Eric, ‘Who is afraid of global history? Ambitions, pitfalls and limits of learning global history’, Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften (2009) 20(2), pp. 22–39, 31Google Scholar.

12 On Calcutta see Raj, Kapil, ‘Managing difference, settling differences: the urban and intellectual dynamics of Calcutta in the 18th century’, Indian Economic and Social History Review (2011) 48, pp. 55–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On eco-geographical constraints see Diamond, Jared, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, New York: Penguin, 2005Google Scholar; and Ponting, op. cit. (8).

13 Raj, Kapil, Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Antonella Romano, ‘L'universalismo della missione cattolica come fenomeno globale? Gesuiti e mondo moderno’, in Michela Catto, Guido Mongini and Silvia Mostaccio (eds.), Evangelizzazione e globalizzazione: Le missioni gesuitiche nell'età moderna tra storia e storiografia, Biblioteca di Nuova Rivista Storica (2010) 42, pp. 117–124.

14 Boudia, Soraya and Jas, Nathalie, ‘Risk and “risk society” in historical perspective’, History and Technology (2007) 23, pp. 317–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Soraya Boudia, ‘Gouverner les risques, gouverner par les risques: Pour une histoire du risque et de la société du risque’, mémoire d'habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université de Strasbourg.

15 A. Dahan, S. Aykut, C. Buffet and A. Viard-Cretat, ‘Les leçons politiques de Copenhague: Faut-il repenser le régime climatique?’, research report, Koyré Climate Series (2010) 2, available at www.koyre.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article96.

16 Barry, Andrew, Political Machines: Governing a Political Society, London: The Athlone Press, 2001Google Scholar; Majone, Giandomenico (ed), Regulating Europe, London: Routledge, 1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Salais, Robert, ‘Europe and the deconstruction of the category of “unemployment”’, Archiv für Sozialgeschichte (2007) 47, pp. 371–401Google Scholar; Bonneuil, Christophe and Levidow, Les, ‘How does the WTO know? The mobilization and staging of scientific expertise in the GMO trade dispute’, Social Studies of Science (2012) 42, pp. 75–100CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

17 About round tables see, for example, Schouten, G. and Glasbergen, P., ‘Creating legitimacy in global private governance: the case of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil’, Ecological Economics (2011) 70, pp. 1891–1899CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Emmanuelle Cheyns, ‘Multi-stakeholder initiatives for sustainable agriculture: limits of the “inclusiveness” paradigm’, in S. Ponte et al. (eds.), Governing through Standards: Origins, Drivers and Limits, London: Palgrave, 2011, pp. 318–354. See also the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil organisation at www.rspo.org; and also www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/forests/the-myth-of-sustainable-palm-oil-20071128; on best available technologies see Laforest, V. and Berthéas, R., ‘Ambiguïté entre technologies propres et meilleures techniques disponibles’, VertigO, la revue électronique en sciences de l'environnement (2005) 6(2)Google Scholar, available at http://vertigo.revues.org/9657, accessed 16 April 2011; N. Baya Laffite, ‘La découverte de l'environnement en Argentine: Une étude de la controverse des usines de pâte à papier sur le fleuve Uruguay’, mémoire de master en sciences sociales, EHESS, 2008.

18 Bloor, David, Knowledge and Social Imagery, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976Google Scholar; Collins, H.M., Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice, London: Sage, 1985Google Scholar; Latour, Bruno, La science en action, Paris: La Découverte, 1989Google Scholar; Shapin and Schaffer, op. cit. (4); Woolgar, Steve, ‘Interest and explanation in the social study of science’, Social Studies of Science (1981) 11, pp. 365–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Among many texts, one could contrast Bruno Latour, Irréductions, annex to Les microbes: Guerre et Paix, Paris: Métailié, 1984, against Bloor, David, ‘Anti-Latour’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science (1999) 30, pp. 81–112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and against Haraway, Donna, ‘Situated knowledge: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’, Feminist Studies (1988) 14, pp. 575–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Pinçon-Charlot, Monique and Pinçon, Michel, Les Ghettos du Gotha: Comment la bourgeoisie défend ses espaces, Paris: Payot, 2009Google Scholar.

21 In the French context, many people close to Toni Negri and Michel Foucault also rely on Bruno Latour and Gabriel Tarde. See Citton, Yves, Mythocratie: Storytelling et imaginaire de gauche, Paris: Editions Amsterdam, 2010Google Scholar; and Lazzarato, Maurizio, Puissances de l'invention: La psychologie économique de Gabriel Tarde contre l’économie politique, Paris: Les empêcheurs de penser en rond, 2002Google Scholar; and idem, Expérimentations politiques, Paris: Editions Amsterdam, 2009.

22 Latour, op. cit. (2).

23 Habermas, Jürgen, Théorie de l'agir communicationnel, Paris: Fayard, 1987Google Scholar; Boltanski, Luc, De la critique: Précis de sociologie de l’émancipation, Paris: Gallimard, 2009Google Scholar; Pestre, op. cit. (6).

24 Vanhaute, op. cit. (11), 27.

25 Garfinkel, Harold, Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 68.Google Scholar

26 I would like to thank Bruno Latour for having associated me in a research programme aiming at constructing this kind of numerical model from Tardean monads. For a theoretical presentation of this project, see Bruno Latour, ‘Tarde's idea of quantification’, a chapter prepared for Mattei Candea (ed.), The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments, 2009, available at www.bruno-latour.fr/articles/index.html.

27 Anderson, Philip, ‘More is different’, Science (August 1972) 177(4047), pp. 393–396CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Schweber, S.S. ‘Physics, community and the crisis in physical theory’, Physics Today, November 1993, pp. 34–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Georges, Antoine, De l'atome au matériau: Les phénomènes quantiques collectifs, Paris: Collège de France/Fayard, 2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 That might explain why Bruno's group also tried a simpler solution than a model. For a presentation of the second project see Latour et al., ‘The whole is always smaller than its parts: a digital test of Gabriel Tarde's monads’, accepted by the British Journal of Sociology (November 2011).

30 For example in Latour, op. cit. (2).

31 Tarde, Gabriel, Psychologie économique, Paris: Alcan, 1902Google Scholar. See quotation at p. 2.

32 The notion of cité de justice is taken from Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent, On Justification: Economies of Worth, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006Google Scholar.

33 Central references for this section are Latour, op. cit. (18) and Shapin and Schaffer, op. cit. (4).

34 Pestre, Dominique, ‘Understanding the forms of government in today's liberal societies: An introduction’, Minerva (2009) 47, pp. 243–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 On this essentially agonistic world see Donna Haraway, ‘Modest witness: feminist diffractions in science studies’, in Peter Galison and David Stump (eds.), The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996, pp. 428–441. The problem of agon (versus collaboration, for example) was also well illustrated in the Bêtes et hommes exhibition through a fictive debate between Darwin and Kropotkin. See the catalogue by Despret, Vinciane, Bêtes et hommes, Paris: Gallimard, 2008Google Scholar, and www.telerama.fr/scenes/20359-expo_betes_et_hommes_darwin_et_kropotkine_dialoguent.php, accessed 12 September 2011.

36 Champy, Florent, La sociologie des professions, Paris: PUF, 2009Google Scholar, quotations at pp. 6 and 7.

37 Boltanski, op. cit. (23).

38 Bruno Latour, On the Cult of the Factish Gods, tr. Heather MacLean and Cathy Porter, Duke University Press, in press.

39 This section relies on Claire Lemercier and Paul-André Rosental, ‘Après la micro-histoire?’, communication, Paris, 10 May 2010.

40 Veyne, P., Les Grecs croyaient-ils à leurs mythes?, Paris: Seuil, 1983CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Latour, op. cit. (26), makes similar remarks on the notion of interaction.

42 Latour, op. cit. (2).

43 Haraway, op. cit. (19).

44 Haraway, op. cit. (19), p. 579.

45 Frank, A. Gunder, Reorient: Global Economy in the Asian Age, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998Google Scholar; Pomeranz, Kenneth, The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000Google Scholar.

46 Gruzinski, Serge, La pensée métisse, Paris: Fayard, 1999Google Scholar. See also Bayly, Chris A., The Birth of the Modern World, 1780–1914, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004Google Scholar.