Search

In this article, we examine the analytical potentials of the concepts of the dispositive, assemblage, and actor-network developed by Foucault, Deleuze, and Latour, respectively. We do so by engaging with a selected empirical case concerning an intervention in the Danish educational landscape–the Assessment of Educational Readiness (AER). Regarding the dispositive, the ambition of problematizing and destabilizing the status quo is pursued with genealogy as an analytical tool, and by analyzing the heterogeneous constitutive complexities in order to illuminate how that which is regarded as natural comprises specific forms of power/knowledge. This analytical strategy we describe as a reality- and subjectivity-problematizing reconfiguration. With the analytical strategy imbricated in the concept of assemblage, the-taken-for-granted is disrupted by examining processes of becoming and the production of differences associated with these processes, as well as unpacking potentialities in the form of fractures, cracks, or tentative attempts to develop alternative ways of becoming. It allows us to engage with the complex nature of a phenomenon by focusing on virtuality in the form of the not yet realized or that which is yet to come, which is why we term this analytical strategy a virtual reality reconfiguration. Finally, the actor-network as an analytical strategy examines the ways in which the social is constructed through the joining together of heterogeneous actors in networks and by mapping events with the aim of providing insight into how heterogeneous human and non-human actors are networked together and create newrealities. We term this analytical strategy a heterogeneous reality reconfiguration. The article examine the analytical potentials of the concepts of the dispositive,assemblage, and actor-network developed by Foucault, Deleuze, and Latour, respectively. We do so by engaging with a selected empirical case concerning an intervention in the Danish educational landscape–the Assessment of Educational Readiness (AER). Regarding the dispositive, the ambition of problematizing and destabilizing the status quo is pursued with genealogy as an analytical tool, and by analyzing the heterogeneous constitutive complexities in order to illuminate how that which is regarded as natural comprises specific forms of power/knowledge. This analytical strategy we describe as a reality- and subjectivity-problematizing reconfiguration. With the analytical strategy imbricated in the concept of assemblage, the-taken-for-granted is disrupted by examining processes of becoming and the production of differences associated with these processes, as well as unpacking potentialities in the form of fractures, cracks, or tentative attempts to develop alternative ways of becoming. It allows us to engage with the complex nature of a phenomenon by focusing on virtuality in the form of the not yet realized or that which is yet to come, which is why we term this analytical strategy a virtual reality reconfiguration. Finally, the actor-network as an analytical strategy examines the ways in which the social is constructed through the joining together of heterogeneous actors in networks and by mapping events with the aim of providing insight into how heterogeneous human and non-human actors are networked together and create new realities. We term this analytical strategy a heterogeneous reality reconfiguration.

Resumo: A noção de “rede” de Bruno Latour permite abrir uma perspectiva metodológica capaz de ultrapassar os limites da arqueologia de Michel Foucault. Para indicar o quadro conceitual em que a noção de arqueologia se instala, este artigo desenvolve uma discussão sobre a ciência moderna segundo a arqueologia de Foucault e segundo a posição de Gérard Lebrun, exposta em contraposição a Husserl (Krisis). A partir da questão principal que os une, malgrado diferenças importantes, a saber, o diagnóstico da dispersão das ciências positivas no início da modernidade - como início da modernidade -, será possível sugerir o interesse da noção latouriana de rede. E isso, mesmo mostrando que seu interesse implica exatamente o avesso do que insiste em sustentar Latour, o avesso da tese de que jamais fomos modernos. Abstract: Bruno Latour’s notion of “network” allows us to open a methodological perspective, which can go beyond the limits of Michel Foucault’s archeology. To indicate the conceptual framework in which the notion of archeology is installed, this article develops a discussion of modern science according to Foucault’s archeology and the position of Gérard Lebrun, as opposed to Husserl (Krisis). From the main question that unites them in spite of important differences, namely the diagnosis of the dispersion of the positive sciences in the beginning of modernity - as the beginning of modernity -, it will be possible to suggest the interest of the Latourian notion of network. And this, even showing that his interest implies exactly the reverse of what Latour insists on sustaining, the reverse of the thesis that we have never been modern.

Este artículo explora la crítica de Bruno Latour a la teoría crítica contemporánea. Según Latour, las concepciones posestructuralistas de la investigación crítica son cada vez más obsoletas. En nuestra era “postfactual”, intentar exponer los hechos como el resultado de procesos de construcción social cargados de poder acaba haciendo el juego de los oscurantistas anti-científicos. Sin embargo, esto no quiere decir que uno deba optar por una noción reduccionista de objetividad. En cambio, Latour propone una nueva forma de realismo crítico. Si bien estamos de acuerdo con Latour sobre la necesidad de ampliar nuestro paradigma epistemológico, consideramos que su crítica al posestructuralismo es injusta y exagerada. Además, sostenemos que ella no tiene en cuenta la relación entre epistemología, poder y subjetividad. Dado que Foucault, por otro lado, tiene éxito donde Latour se queda corto e investiga esta relación, la suya es una forma de crítica que sigue siendo crucial para abordar la crisis actual de la verdad. This paper, first published in German in Le Foucaldien 4(1) 2018 and in English in Le Foucaldien 6(1) 2020, explores Bruno Latour’s critique of contemporary critical theory. According to Latour, poststructuralist conceptions of critical inquiry are becoming increasingly outdated. In our “post-factual” era, attempting to expose facts as results of power-laden processes of social construction plays into the hands of anti-scientific obscurantists. This is not to say, however, that one ought to opt for some reductionist notion of objectivity. Instead, Latour proposes a new form of critical realism. While we agree with Latour about the necessity of widening our epistemological paradigm, we deem his critique of poststructuralism unfair and exaggerated. Moreover, we argue that he fails to account for the relationship between epistemology, power, and subjectivity. Since Foucault, on the other hand, succeeds where Latour falls short and probes into this very relationship, his is a form of critique that remains crucial to tackling the current crisis of truth.

This paper scrutinizes Bruno Latour's critique of contemporary critical theory. According to Latour, poststructuralist conceptions of critical inquiry are increasingly behind the times: in our "post-factual" era, attempts to expose facts as results of power-laden processes of social construction play in the hands of obscurantist anti-scientific positions. Arguing at the same time against reductionist notions of objectivity, Latour proposes a new form of critical realism. While Latour plausibly advocates the necessity of widening our epistemological paradigm, we aim to show that his critique of poststructuralism is unjust and hyperbolic. Moreover, his own conception misses out on explicating the relationship between epistemology, power, and subjectivity. Therefore, we argue that a Foucauldian form of critique, as it allows to account for this relationship, is all but outdated. Rather, it remains a necessary critical device in the context of the present truth-crisis.

This chapter aims to show the potential of theory to facilitate a criticalcontribution to decision makers on health care issues. The starting pointis the work of a report on how medium cycle health care educationprograms could deliver future-proof, relevant competences to futurehealth care in Denmark. The authors of this chapter were involvedin this report upon request from the unions of Danish health care professionals. In this chapter the underlying critical sociological andpedagogical theories are made explicit. The authors deconstruct naturalizedconceptions of how health care professionals think about themselves,and argue that it is optional to go beyond naturalized assumptionsof health and care. Rather than reacting to specific competences definedby others, it is shown how critical theories can facilitate a pro-activeview, and give examples on how everyday and political constructionssuppress nursing, physiotherapy etc. Critical theories have the potentialto enhance a critical attitude among health care professionals. Publichealthcare cannot afford to let students work solely with applied sciencesmeant for simple implementation. Health care is a complex anddynamic business requiring skilled professionals at all levels – also whenit comes to contributing to influential decisionmakingprocesses.

Interdisciplinary researchers and educators, as community members, creators of knowledge, and environmental activists and practitioners, have a responsibility to build a bridge between community practice, academic scholarship, and professional contributions aimed at establishing environmental sustainability. In this paper, I focus on an undervalued area of environmental politics, practices, and often unarticulated assumptions which underlie human–environmental relations. This article challenges interdisciplinary studies that are not connected with practice by reconfiguring the meaning of a community-based, interdisciplinary approach. Drawing from works by Foucault, Latour, and Haraway, this paper first shows how to reconfigure the meaning of an interdisciplinary approach. Second, using Bourdieu and Brightman’s ethnographic studies as a framework, the paper situates practice as central to our efforts to deconstruct and replace current interdisciplinary initiatives with a practice-based approach. Through a practice-based interdisciplinary approach (PIA), environmental educators and researchers gain an awareness of and learn to make an investment in sustainable communities. As teams of environmental researchers practising in the local community, they are meaningfully involved with the community, with each other, and with the environment.

У статті проводиться дослідження акторно-мережевої теорії Бруно Латура та соціальної теорії Мішеля Фуко. В основі даного дослідження лежить компаративний аналіз обох соціальних теорій в дискурсі сучасних соціогуманітарних досліджень. Відмічається схожість обох соціальних теорій та конституюється історична спадковість теорії Латура відносно теорії Фуко. Констатується принципова «незавершеність» і відкритість проектів Фуко та Латура щодо змін, а також обґрунтовується їх практична перевага перед іншими сучасними соціальними теоріями. До числа переваг відноситься як сам факт «відкритості» теорій до творчих змін та постійної перебудови, так і принципово відмінний підхід, який включає елімінацію позиції «вченого-метаспостерігача», на противагу якому виноситься ствердження «вченого, який іде за дійовими особами». Автор дотримується точки зору, згідно з якою практичне використання теорій Фуко та Латура є можливим в рамках їх синтезу (де ідеї Латура являють собою концептуальну кристалізацію ідей Фуко, у той час, як останні являють свого роду конкретизуюче розгортання загальних концептуальних схем Латура). Для ілюстрації того, як діють соціальні теорії Латура та Фуко у конкретних дослідженнях, проводиться уявний експеримент, який має відношення як до соціальної теорії, так і до кримінології, на основі чого аналізується підхід до вивчення подібних ситуацій у сучасних соціальних теоріях, які базуються на «жорсткій ієрархії», та «гнучкий» підхід, який пропонує акторно-мережева теорія. The paper is dedicated to the study of actor-network theory of Bruno Latour and social theory of Michel Foucault. The research is based on the comparative analysis of both theories in the discourse of modern socio-humanitarian studies. The resemblance of both social theories, as well as historical succession of Latour’s theory (from Foucault’s) is noted. The author also constitutes principal “incompleteness”, the openness of Foucault’s and Latour’s projects to changes, and tries to demonstrate their advantage in comparison with other social theories. The fact of “openness” is seen as one of the advantages, as well as fundamentally different approach to research that is based on elimination of “metaobserving scientist” position and constitution of “the scientist who goes after the actors”. The author holds the position, according to which the practical use of the both theories may be productive in case of their synthesis (in which Latour’s ideas represent the conceptual crystallization of Foucault’s ideas, meanwhile, the ideas of Foucault can be seen as a sort of concretizing deployment of Latour’s general conceptual schemes). The demonstration of Foucault’s and Latour’s social theories “in action” is based on thought experiment which is related to the social theory, as well as to criminology. On the basis of modeled situation the author analyzes the approach to studying such situations in modern social theories that are based on ‘strict’ hierarchy, comparing this approach to the one, which is proposed by the actor-network theory and presented as ‘flexible’ approach.

Drawing upon the work of Foucault and Latour, this article reflects on 25 years of critique of competence-based education and its continuing strength as a way of framing education and training. Using an example from England, it rehearses the argument from Foucault that, despite its student-centred discourse, competence-based education can be positioned as one of the disciplining techniques in modern societies. However, beyond the research community, such critiques have had little impact. The article seeks to explore this by drawing upon Latour’s argument that conventional forms of critique have run out of steam. This indicates the need for new forms of educational critique as a means of having impact on policy and practice. The article is theoretically driven and exploratory.

A group interview on issues of methodology in the work of Michel Foucault, the discussion focuses less on the 'interpretation' of Foucault's work and more on the critical and transformative redeployment of Foucault's philosophical toolkit. What is most usable in Foucault's genealogical method for today's critical tasks? What is most unusable, or frustrating, in Foucault's library for us today? And who else might we turn to alongside Foucault for our critical, philosophical, and historical energies?

This article seeks to unpack the taken-for-granted notion of low performance, arguing that performance and competency are not a given categories; rather they are “objects-for-thought” that receive their discursive and material contours through a chain of translations. As suggested previously by Gorur, PISA is analyzed through the lens of Latourian Science and Technology Studies. The arguments in this article are based on an analysis of situations constructed to observe how performance is enacted in socio-material practice, as 15-year-old students collaboratively solve PISA scientific-literacy items. As background a text analysis, concerning how scientific literacy and performance are discursively constructed in various PISA materials, is reported. We suggest the notion of ‘competency’ be linked to the historical event of trying to start to detect it and argue that PISA results are products of the situated adjustments that are enacted by students and items created in the very moments of scientific measurement.

Late modern cultural theory has since the 1960s tended to define culture in terms of signifying practice, making meaning and interpretation central concepts. However, a series of structuralist and poststructuralist waves have at the same time marginalised hermeneutics in cultural studies. The influential anti-hermeneutic challenges of Foucault, Kittler and Latour underline the necessity to abandon the romantic conceptions in much of classical hermeneutics. However, these critics tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and cannot ground late modern cultural theory. If taken fully seriously, the demand to abandon interpretation and replace meanings with some kind of materiality would evacuate cultural research or reduce it to plain physics. Instead, Paul Ricoeur’s critical textual hermeneutics offers a more useful polydimensional understanding of culture. This is a presentation of anti-hermeneutic challenges, discussing how they may be overcome by recharging key cultural concepts with energies deriving from taking these challenges seriously and letting them inspire a reconstitution of cultural theory from a post-anti-hermeneutic perspective.

This article explores the complex relationship between law and (scientific) expertise. The author first discusses the difference between scientific knowledge and scientific expertise, tracing the historical roots of the concept of proof in a legal rather than a mathematical context. Second, the historical roots of the fair trial are discussed in terms of the premodern épreuve and the modern preuve, demonstrating the relationship with coordinate and subordinate types of justice. Third, Foucault's analysis of épreuve, enquête, and examèn is extended to clarify how preuve and épreuve have been integrated into the fair trial, which is explained in relation to the formal and the substantive notions of the "Rechtsstaat." This analysis finally allows the author to discuss the difference between two approaches of scientific expertise in court: one claiming that judges should defer to science and another claiming that a court of law is one of the spaces in which such expertise can be contested. The article concludes that the integration of subordinate and coordinate justice exemplified in the fair trial, opens new perspectives for the testing of scientific expertise, taking into account whose interests are at stake.